306
Bill Barr, who ran interference for and covered up for Trump during his tenure as Attorney General? That Bill Barr?
The same Bill Barr who told the country that the Mueller report completely exonerated Trump, giving the Republicans an excuse to not even read it? That Bill Barr?
Ugh.... I hadn't thought about this specific asset of Barr's tenure as AG for a while. If you read the Mueller report, it was scathingly bad for Trump, and the parts that were redacted were almost categorically things that would appear to have been bad for Trump, based on contextual clues. Mueller should've been more forward with the findings of his report so the Republicans didn't get their chance to sweep it under the rug like they did.
He specifically said that he didn’t have the power to charge a sitting president but that if it were anyone else he would have been indicted already. All he could do was give congress the report and trust they’d do the right thing. Not only did those useless fucks not even read it, they lied and said it found no wrong doing.
Self-preservation is a strong instinct.
The same bill bar that said the Iran Contra investigation was illegitimate and people involved were being treated unfairly/ Reagan's attorney general? That Bill Barr? Of course In fairness he never did turn stoolie on that crook Reagan. So I guess this is progress? That or it's just exponentially that much worse.
Let me fix that headline for you: " Bill Barr, traitor who supported Trump, has a book to sell and now pretends he never liked him."
Fuck Bill Barr
That's a hard pass right there.
I’m the baby.
Username checks out!
Let him give up all the details.
Then charge him with obstruction and treason for sitting on the facts for the last few years.
Usually witnesses get immunity so they don't censor themselves or refuse to cooperate
This is true but usually treason isn't the (potential) charge either
It’s very funny to me that all these people took notes, and are willing to testify against Trump after the fact, but weren’t willing to do anything to stop it as it was going on, or before it happened. Every one of these people deserve to be punished. And I really hope they are.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former Attorney General Bill Barr said he is willing to testify against former President Trump at his Jan. 6 trial.
Barr has been a staunch critic of the former president since he resigned from his post shortly after the 2020 election.
He noted that the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith was a “challenging” one, but that he does not think it “runs afoul of the First Amendment.”
“Well, I go through that in my book in painstaking detail, but on three occasions at least, I told him in no uncertain terms, that there was no evidence of fraud that would have changed the outcome,” he said.
Trump was indicted last week over his attempts to stay in power after losing the 2020 presidential election to President Biden.
In a 45-page indictment, the Justice Department alleges Trump engaged in a campaign of “dishonesty, fraud and conceit” to obstruct a “bedrock function” of a democracy.
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
"willing".…
It's almost like the power of the subpoena doesn't compel them.
Oh now it serves him better… or better yet he cut a deal because they figured out he was in on it. That mueller report should be null and void.
He wants immunity. He knows which way the wind is blowing.
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
306 points (98.4% liked)
politics
18074 readers
3169 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS