Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Greg Sargent: A judge just brutally rebuked William Barr. Democrats must act.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/06/judge-just-brutally-rebuked-william-barr-democrats-must-act/
By Greg Sargent
Opinion writer
March 6, 2020 at 10:06 a.m. EST
<snip>
The new rebuke of Barr, courtesy of federal district judge Reggie Walton, bluntly suggests Barr misled the U.S. public for the express purpose of aiding Trump politically. The judge accuses Barr of a “lack of candor” in his representations of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report, citing Barr’s highly dishonest summary that appeared designed to pre-spin its findings to protect Trump politically.
“This validated what we’ve been saying from the beginning -- that Barr deliberately distorted the contents of the Mueller report to pull the wool over America’s eyes,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, told me.
<snip>
Barr’s Justice Department worked to keep the whistleblower complaint detailing Trump’s corrupt Ukraine scheme from Congress. Barr has undertaken a review of the Russia investigation that’s plainly designed to discredit its conclusions that Russia did interfere to help Trump. Barr has opened up a special channel to receive information about Joe Biden and his son Hunter directly from Rudolph Giuliani, who is Trump’s private lawyer and who is still apparently seeking such information.
Those last two undertakings have direct relevance to the coming election: Trump likely wants Barr’s help in undermining the idea that Russia helped him last time, in the apparent willingness to benefit from foreign interference again. And now that Biden is Trump’s likely opponent, the pipeline of “information” from Ukraine may suddenly become more important to Trump.
Let’s face it: Given what we’ve seen, we can’t rule out the possibility that Barr might use the tools of law enforcement to cast public doubt on the Democratic nominee and/or members of his family in some way.
</snip>
By Greg Sargent
Opinion writer
March 6, 2020 at 10:06 a.m. EST
<snip>
The new rebuke of Barr, courtesy of federal district judge Reggie Walton, bluntly suggests Barr misled the U.S. public for the express purpose of aiding Trump politically. The judge accuses Barr of a “lack of candor” in his representations of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report, citing Barr’s highly dishonest summary that appeared designed to pre-spin its findings to protect Trump politically.
“This validated what we’ve been saying from the beginning -- that Barr deliberately distorted the contents of the Mueller report to pull the wool over America’s eyes,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, told me.
<snip>
Barr’s Justice Department worked to keep the whistleblower complaint detailing Trump’s corrupt Ukraine scheme from Congress. Barr has undertaken a review of the Russia investigation that’s plainly designed to discredit its conclusions that Russia did interfere to help Trump. Barr has opened up a special channel to receive information about Joe Biden and his son Hunter directly from Rudolph Giuliani, who is Trump’s private lawyer and who is still apparently seeking such information.
Those last two undertakings have direct relevance to the coming election: Trump likely wants Barr’s help in undermining the idea that Russia helped him last time, in the apparent willingness to benefit from foreign interference again. And now that Biden is Trump’s likely opponent, the pipeline of “information” from Ukraine may suddenly become more important to Trump.
Let’s face it: Given what we’ve seen, we can’t rule out the possibility that Barr might use the tools of law enforcement to cast public doubt on the Democratic nominee and/or members of his family in some way.
</snip>
Something *has* to be done at this point. He's destroying what's left of the Rule Of Law.
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
