BARR

[wahoomurf]

Barr is going to investigate those FBI scoundrels.I get the feeling he's going to become an important figure in what's left of Miller's reign.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04 ... ubscribers

[OCanada]

This has been looked at with nothing found. It has not been investigated by someone with an enemies list before. Conservatives with principles are kind of appalled. Faux conservatives not so much. Barr has already said the report exonerated Trump. Barr now wants to investigate the people who prepared the report that didn’t find anything that rises to a probable crime. Remembering justice and truth can be very different things. So far Barr is doing a pretty good job of burying his third scandal and destroying his reputation in legal circles in the process

[6ftstick]

This has been looked at with nothing found. It has not been investigated by someone with an enemies list before. Conservatives with principles are kind of appalled. Faux conservatives not so much. Barr has already said the report exonerated Trump. Barr now wants to investigate the people who prepared the report that didn’t find anything that rises to a probable crime. Remembering justice and truth can be very different things. So far Barr is doing a pretty good job of burying his third scandal and destroying his reputation in legal circles in the process

Didn't take long for the character assassination to start.

Better firm up your slime stories on the IG at the FBI and justice department.

[6ftstick]

This has been looked at with nothing found.

PROVE THAT

[RedFromMI]

Best response to Barr's statements I have seen comes from an email from a reader of talkingpointsmemo.com to the editor, Josh Marshall. Basic point was that Barr is offering Trump a different option - rather than criminally go after people in the FBI/intelligence communities for what happened (which to me appears quite legal and allowed), the attempt will be to characterize the whole investigation as fatally flawed because the policies of the Justice Department are incorrectly formulated to allow such a thing to happen. So as Barr gains control of the mechanisms of Justice he will find just that, and begin to rewrite those policies to, essentially, protect the President by outlawing such investigations. Of course at the price of subverting actual justice involving the President's behavior...

[seacoaster]

Best response to Barr's statements I have seen comes from an email from a reader of talkingpointsmemo.com to the editor, Josh Marshall. Basic point was that Barr is offering Trump a different option - rather than criminally go after people in the FBI/intelligence communities for what happened (which to me appears quite legal and allowed), the attempt will be to characterize the whole investigation as fatally flawed because the policies of the Justice Department are incorrectly formulated to allow such a thing to happen. So as Barr gains control of the mechanisms of Justice he will find just that, and begin to rewrite those policies to, essentially, protect the President by outlawing such investigations. Of course at the price of subverting actual justice involving the President's behavior...

Yes, good post (and presumably email responding to Josh Marshall). This is consistent with the unsolicited memo about the Mueller investigation that brought Barr to the attention of Trump and his Protectors, and turned Barr into a latter day, credentialed, Roy Cohn.

[6ftstick]

Oh please

Barr is an experienced and talented lawyer

An Adult

Do you think he would have carelessly dropped his statement if he didn't already know the evidence and facts regarding the counter intelligence ops at the FBI and justice department

[RedFromMI]

Oh please

Barr is an experienced and talented lawyer

An Adult

Do you think he would have carelessly dropped his statement if he didn't already know the evidence and facts regarding the counter intelligence ops at the FBI and justice department

Actually yes - except I don't think it was quite as careless as you imply. There was enough ambiguity in his wording to let everyone read into the statement what they want to - and that especially includes the President. Not just the thumb on the scale...

[jhu72]

Barr has never held a prosecutorial position - ever. His entire career has been defending rich white guys and sucking on the public teat as a politically appointed manager. His entire career reads as a republican party apparatchik (much like Kavanaugh). Say what you will about Jeff Sessions, but he was a real lawyer. Barr, not so much.

I would love to hear Mueller's characterization of their acquaintance.

[Brooklyn]

That says it all.

[CU88]

Have you noticed that at no time in the past two days did William Barr communicate any concern about Russia attackin' our election or Trump's campaign not once reportin' a single one of over 100 meetings with Russia?

His only worry was about a Trump conspiracy theory; and it appears that he has not launched an investigation into this charge...

[jhu72]

Oh please

Barr is an experienced and talented lawyer

An Adult

Do you think he would have carelessly dropped his statement if he didn't already know the evidence and facts regarding the counter intelligence ops at the FBI and justice department

Actually yes - except I don't think it was quite as careless as you imply. There was enough ambiguity in his wording to let everyone read into the statement what they want to - and that especially includes the President. Not just the thumb on the scale...

It was so obvious Barr was playing to an audience of one. He needs to take acting classes.

[old salt]

Have you noticed that at no time in the past two days did William Barr communicate any concern about Russia attackin' our election or Trump's campaign not once reportin' a single one of over 100 meetings with Russia?

His only worry was about a Trump conspiracy theory; and it appears that he has not launched an investigation into this charge...

Barr was simply responding to the specific questions he was asked, ...at what were supposed to be Congressional budget hearings.

Barr did not set the agenda for those hearings. Expect him to answer questions about Russian activity if & when he's asked about it before Judiciary or Intell Comms.

Like everything else, see what Barr has to say (& does) after the Mueller report is released.

The only thing Barr has offered unprompted (so far) was in his letter to Congress which included :

The Special Counsel's investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

The second element involved the Russian government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

[cradleandshoot]

Have you noticed that at no time in the past two days did William Barr communicate any concern about Russia attackin' our election or Trump's campaign not once reportin' a single one of over 100 meetings with Russia?

His only worry was about a Trump conspiracy theory; and it appears that he has not launched an investigation into this charge...

Barr was simply responding to the specific questions he was asked, ...at what were supposed to be Congressional budget hearings.

Barr did not set the agenda for those hearings. Expect him to answer questions about Russian activity if & when he's asked about it before Judiciary or Intell Comms.

Like everything else, see what Barr has to say (& does) after the Mueller report is released.

The only thing Barr has offered unprompted (so far) was in his letter to Congress which included :

The Special Counsel's investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

The second element involved the Russian government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

Well that same troublesome question bubbles up to the surface again... why did the Democrats refuse to let the feds look at their computer system to find out who hacked it?

[youthathletics]

This is their response...

[6ftstick]

Oh please

Barr is an experienced and talented lawyer

An Adult

Do you think he would have carelessly dropped his statement if he didn't already know the evidence and facts regarding the counter intelligence ops at the FBI and justice department

Actually yes - except I don't think it was quite as careless as you imply. There was enough ambiguity in his wording to let everyone read into the statement what they want to - and that especially includes the President. Not just the thumb on the scale...

It was so obvious Barr was playing to an audience of one. He needs to take acting classes.

What was obvious was that he was alerting the clowns across from him that now that the Mueller report was delivered the focus of the FBI had shifted from Trump to them.

[OCanada]

Old Salt. Barr did not answer questions in a forthright manner at all. He bobbed and wove.

Lol 6. Prove it. Google is your friend. Well not yours really. This is the third Republican crisis he ha been involved with. Iran Contra was one. He buried the first two. By that I mean he found ways to end investigations. That is why he was brought in this time,

But as long as you are so about proof make th case turn didn’t lie when said windmills cause cancer. Or as an alternative he didn’t lie when he said he barely knows about Assange who he talked glowingly about more than 160 times.

Factoid: One of the LaxPower posters had him as a client back in the day

[old salt]

Old Salt. Barr did not answer questions in a forthright manner at all. He bobbed and wove.

I pointed out in my post that he equivocated & walked it back.

I point out again, the question was off topic. It was a DoJ Budget Hearing.

He was much less emphatic than then CIA Director Brennan was in alleging treasonous activity.
Both men were in a position to know of what they spoke.

As I said. Stay tuned. Maybe there will be commendations for all involved.

[old salt]

Here are Barr's words when he introduced "spying" into the debate.

Barr : One of the things I want to do is pull together all the information from the various investigations which have gone on, including on the hill & in the department, & see if there are any remaining questions to be addressed. ...We want to make that during an election, uh... I think spying on a political campaign is a big deal. ....I'm not talking about the FBI necessarily, but intelligence agencies more broadly.

Sen Shaheen : You're not suggesting spying occurred ?

Barr : I don't, well, ah ...I guess you could, ...I think spying did occur. Yes. I think spying did occur.

Barr's detractors are focusing on the FISA warrants on Carter Page. They are not questioning the actions of Stefan Halper. Was he acting on anyone elses direction ? Did anyone pay him ? Who fronted Halper the $3k to fly Papadop to the UK to meet with him ? What did the Brit's GCHQ give Brennan & how was that handled ?

As Eli Lake asked in his Bloomberg piece I linked :
Barr is correct on both counts — that there was snooping on the Trump campaign, and that the question of whether it was justified deserves further scrutiny. What also deserves scrutiny is how an ongoing intelligence investigation into that campaign became public.

As far as the spying is concerned, none of this should be a surprise. It has already been reported, for example, that in the summer and fall of 2016 the FBI sent an informant to meet with three Trump advisers and report back. The bureau also received a warrant in October 2016 to eavesdrop on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser (notably, the warrant allowed the FBI to read Page’s past texts, emails and phone logs). The head of the U.K.’s signal intelligence agency briefed former CIA director John Brennan that fall on intercepts that showed communications between Trump’s campaign and Russian officials.

[a fan]

Dude, come on. Investigating. The word is investigating. Notice the phrase "...The bureau also received a warrant". You know, like a government agent would do when they're doing their freaking jobs.

This word was intentionally used to fan the flames, and give Fox their headline.....all while not allowing anyone to dispute the assertion, because he alone controls who gets to see it.

It was a *hitty, hyper-partisan thing to do.