As a longtime Trump skeptic, I have been impressed in general with the caliber of his Cabinet.
I’ve been a little depressed at the turnover in that excellent cabinet.
The WSJ contrasts the quality and integrity of Attorneys General between Bob Barr, Trump’s AG, and Obama’s Loretta Lynch:
Democrats and the media are turning the AG into a villain for doing his duty and making the hard decisions that special counsel Robert Mueller abdicated.
Mr. Barr’s Wednesday testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee was preceded late Tuesday by the leak of a letter Mr. Mueller had sent the AG on March 27. Mr. Mueller griped in the letter that Mr. Barr’s four-page explanation to Congress of the principal conclusions of the Mueller report on March 24 “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of the Mueller team’s “work and conclusions.” Only in Washington could this exercise in posterior covering be puffed into a mini-outrage…Contrast that to the abdication of Loretta Lynch, who failed as Barack Obama’s last Attorney General to make a prosecutorial judgment about Hillary Clinton’s misuse of classified information. Ms. Lynch cowered before the bullying of then FBI director James Comey, who absolved Mrs. Clinton of wrongdoing while publicly scolding her. That egregious break with Justice policy eventually led Mr. Comey to re-open the Clinton probe in late October 2016, which helped to elect Mr. Trump…This trashing of Bill Barr shows how frustrated and angry Democrats continue to be that the special counsel came up empty in his Russia collusion probe. He was supposed to be their fast-track to impeachment. Now they’re left trying to gin up an obstruction tale, but the probe wasn’t obstructed and there was no underlying crime. So they’re shouting and pounding the table against Bill Barr for acting like a real Attorney General
Repeating a Big Lie even after it’s collapsed? I’m not sure Goebbels even went that far…
Those of us who are not Trump haters (as nearly all of the media is) could see this coming back in 2017.
A special prosecutor was appointed when there was no actual violation of law identified, while laws were openly being broken by the anti-Trump forces in the JD, the FBI, and other intelligence agencies.
Lock ’em up.
“Repeating a Big Lie even after it’s collapsed? I’m not sure Goebbels even went that far…”
Maybe not Goebbels, but Baghdad Bob would have no issues with that. Which may be a better comparison in many instances.
When watching Baghdad Bob talk, I was always half-waiting for the Marines to come through the door and say hi. Might be helpful for the Democrats, too.
In this case, the parallel to Goebbels is apt, especially Goebbels without Doenitz to finally throw in the towel on the big lie. It’s been my observation for the past quarter century that the media will not call Democrats on their lies unless those lies are so patently obvious that they will totally lose credibility if they don’t expose them.
How did people with such poor judgment get this high in the JD & the FBI?
Pelosi is emphasizing a crucial point: lies have become altogether too acceptable as a “tool” in the Trump administration. Anyone who does not think this is a serious issue for our country is misguided at best.
The House Judiciary Committee could simply invite Robert Mueller to appear, as I expect they already have. Let Mueller testify as to his version of this. Proceed from there.
… lies have become altogether too acceptable as a “tool” in the Democrat leadership… Fixed it for you Emery. Adam Schiff has had actual evidence of collusion for over a year, according to him. No one else has seen this evidence.
Great point, Loren.
When Bill Maher calls out one of his own, you know you’re in trouble. But then, pathological liars like Schiff, never realize nor acknowledge it.
Emery, if Pelosi had actually come up with some actual evidence that someone was lying about the Barr summary, I would be able to take you semi-seriously. Honestly, can’t you do a little better than parroting talking points? The Democrats have had the full redacted report, and have been offered a look at a less redacted report, for weeks, and they have come up with bupkus. They are now the equivalent of dung-flinging hippos, hoping that some of the stuff they’re slinging will stick.
In Mueller’s letter to Barr, the special counsel said Mr Barr’s March 24 summary of his 448-page report “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of his investigation and conclusions. “There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the special counsel,”
For example: Investigators wrote: “Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
Thats a much more damning conclusion than Barr’s 4 page March letter which only quoted Mueller’s report as follows:
As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
Conclusion: Trump’s appointed attorney general Barr has been white-washing Mueller’s findings in order to protect Trump from the political consequences of public reaction against his conduct using Russian supplied information the Russian hacked and stole from Democrat computer systems during the election. Mueller’s report stated Trump’s actions did not rise to the level of legal criminal conspiracy but that no way exonerates Trump and his campaign from self serving collusion with the Russians during the election as Trump and his apologists falsely claim over and over ad nauseam.
Trump’s appointed attorney general Barr has been white-washing Mueller’s findings in order to protect Trump from the political consequences of public reaction against his conduct using Russian supplied information the Russian hacked and stole from Democrat computer systems during the election. Mueller’s report stated Trump’s actions did not rise to the level of legal criminal conspiracy but that no way exonerates Trump and his campaign from self serving collusion with the Russians during the election as Trump and his apologists falsely claim over and over ad nauseum.
Mueller’s right and Barr is wrong. This is a political case that rightly must be decided by Congress and ultimately the public, not by Trump’s Justice department appointees through their misleading preemptive press releases massaging Mueller’s findings of fact to help Trump conceal his conduct and evade accountability for his own actions.
Apparently someone missed the collapse.
The rest of us will go forward & try to establish how the collusion hoax got started in the first place, especially how Russian misinformation got pipelined into the JD via the Hillary campaign.
Is Emery’s regurgitation of the Democrat’s talking points really where things stand for them? Sheesh, it’s like the Black Knight in MP’s The Holy Grail.
Emery, even if everything you copied and pasted were true, it still says absolutely nothing about whether Barr was lying about the matter. What we know is that the steaming pile of dog waste says that Barr didn’t characterize the pile he left behind to his satisfaction, and that he didn’t participate in the review when invited by Barr. We also know that Mueller violated professional ethics by leaking his letter to Barr to the press when he didn’t get his way.
I don’t know who actually wrote Emery’s 10:05 but it is hackery.
One of the signs of hackery is argument by adverb and adjective. For example, a writer does not refer the “Iraq War,” but to “Bush’s illegal Iraq War.”
I.e. in Emery’s post “Attorney General Barr” becomes “Trump’s appointed attorney general Barr.”
Every US attorney general is appointed. Eric Holder, who referred to himself as Obama’s wingman, was appointed.
Attorney General Eric Holder brushed off a question Thursday about when he might leave the administration. Instead, the top lawman professed his allegiance to President Barack Obama.
“I’m still enjoying what I’m doing, there’s still work to be done. I’m still the President’s wing-man, so I’m there with my boy. So we’ll see,” Holder said in an interview on the Tom Joyner radio show.”
https://www.politico.com/blogs/politico44/2013/04/eric-holder-im-still-the-presidents-wingman-160861
Holder was held in contempt of congress because he failed to give congress documents related to the arm sales to Mexican drug lords scandal.
Oh, wait a second, there were no scandals at all attached to the Obama administration. Joe Biden just said so.
For example: Investigators wrote: “Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
This is no different than me perceiving I would benefit from $1M given to me by an insider at Wells Fargo, and that insider at Wells Fargo expected he would benefit from a 20% cut of the $1M. However an investigation did not establish that I received any money from anyone Wells Fargo.
The first sentence is NOT RELEVANT unless you were looking to cast additional and unnecessary dispersion on me and the Wells Fargo insider. So essentially, Mueller is complaining that Barr didn’t sufficiently tarnish Trump even though Mueller’s report was a NOTHING-BURGER.
Emery’s favorite picture of Swiftee is the only thing Mueller deserves.
Barr did substantively mislead in his summary. He gave a false impression. In the sense that I was surprised by the depth and width of the negative stuff about Trump in the Mueller report when it came out (albeit in a redacted version).
The fact that Republicans, who thought Muller was great 3 weeks ago, and hated him 3 months ago, are scrambling to try to prevent that testimony tells you a lot about what you need to know.
This isn’t partisanship, this is fear. They are afraid of what he will say.
Woolly wrote: “The rest of us will go forward & try to establish how the collusion hoax got started in the first place, especially how Russian misinformation got pipelined into the JD via the Hillary campaign.”
Mueller discussed that in his report. But once Republicans and the Alt-right get a target, they keep after it more for the propaganda effect than for any real belief that the target actually did something criminal. Hence, Benghazi.
Perhaps investigate the investigators investigating the investigators?
Emery, BS on the notion that Barr misled anyone. Mueller’s letter explicitly refutes that notion. What Mueller was angry about was that the media didn’t run with his report the way he’d hoped.
Poor widdle baby. Maybe he should have done his *(&)&)( job and asked serious questions on whether the original warrants were rightly obtained and closed his investigation two years ago when he found out they were not.