- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
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
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.
