Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-01-2019, 11:10 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,298

The Bill Barr Thread


I followed today's events as best I could while at work and just now found this video from the Washington Post where a whole bunch of Democrats call for Bill Barr to resign or face impeachment.

I agree with them.

I noticed that we didn't have a thread just for Bill Barr yet, but given the news and events of the last two days, I figured we needed on to vent about this lying pushead and to keep track of news about him: there's gonna be a lot of those things from here on out.

Let me first say I was aghast this mendacious shitbag was confirmed. In fact, I was more surprised by how easy his confirmation was than by his actions since then.

Fuck you, Bill Barr, you lying sack of awful. You deceitful coward. You craven fucking boot-licking, ass-kissing goddammned fucking lying delusional anti-American bastard: fuck you.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 05-01-2019 at 11:11 PM. Reason: fixed coding
  #2  
Old 05-01-2019, 11:33 PM
The Other Jeffrey Lebowski's Avatar
The Other Jeffrey Lebowski is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Near the Regal Beagle
Posts: 2,496
"I'm trying to grapple with the word 'suggest'."
  #3  
Old 05-01-2019, 11:35 PM
snfaulkner's Avatar
snfaulkner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 7,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Jeffrey Lebowski View Post
"I'm trying to grapple with the word 'suggest'."
He lost that grappling. "Suggest" suplexed him from the top ropes and made him cry uncle.
__________________
It may be because I'm a drooling simpleton with the attention span of a demented gnat, but would you mind explaining everything in words of one syllable. 140 chars max.

Last edited by snfaulkner; 05-01-2019 at 11:36 PM.
  #4  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:15 AM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,353
This guy is quite the practitioner of the legal rope-a-dope. I half expected him to challenge one of his questioners on the definition of "is".

He must drive his wife nuts.

"What would you like for dinner?"

"Well, as it's only 11 AM, I'm trying to grapple with the word "dinner". Also, I might "like" dinner, but then again I may thoroughly dislike it, depending on what's being served.
  #5  
Old 05-02-2019, 01:45 AM
OttoDaFe's Avatar
OttoDaFe is offline
Sluice Gate Tender, FCD #3
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Soviet of Washington
Posts: 2,668
I misremember who Lawrence O'Donnell was quoting — possibly Adam Schiff — but the person described a couple of "tells" that indicate Barr's trying to evade a question (even more than usual). The first is that he asks to have the question repeated; the second is that his response will devolve into an ever-deeper parsing of one or two salient words.

These are both glaringly evident in his (non)response to Kamala Harris's question about the White House suggesting targets for investigation. I half-expected him to start debating the meaning of "is."
  #6  
Old 05-02-2019, 03:14 AM
Chisquirrel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by OttoDaFe View Post
I misremember who Lawrence O'Donnell was quoting — possibly Adam Schiff — but the person described a couple of "tells" that indicate Barr's trying to evade a question (even more than usual). The first is that he asks to have the question repeated; the second is that his response will devolve into an ever-deeper parsing of one or two salient words.

These are both glaringly evident in his (non)response to Kamala Harris's question about the White House suggesting targets for investigation. I half-expected him to start debating the meaning of "is."
Ya know, there used to be a Virginia lawyer around here that tended to "debate" like that. He's been conspicuously missing for a few months now...
  #7  
Old 05-02-2019, 03:42 AM
Grrr!'s Avatar
Grrr! is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 16,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by El_Kabong View Post
T
He must drive his wife nuts.

"What would you like for dinner?"

"Well, as it's only 11 AM, I'm trying to grapple with the word "dinner". Also, I might "like" dinner, but then again I may thoroughly dislike it, depending on what's being served.

Lol. That's an awesome analogy.
  #8  
Old 05-02-2019, 06:07 AM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
...
Fuck you, Bill Barr, you lying sack of awful. You deceitful coward. You craven fucking boot-licking, ass-kissing goddammned fucking lying delusional anti-American bastard: fuck you.
That's pretty much what I wanted to say, so I will add a big "fuck you" to all the Republicans who think this administration's behavior and practices are acceptable. They are not, Fuck You.
  #9  
Old 05-02-2019, 06:36 AM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,920
You cannot simply ask "did Trump suggest this" or "did Trump" order this. Everything he said is considered to be simply "thinking out loud" or "talking with his mouth" - until someone acts on those words, and Trump decides to own the outcome.

This is what I call the "Trump Uncertainty Principle". No particle of an idea can be disentangled from Trump's quantum bullshit universe until he perturbs it by the act of seeking credit for it.

I hope every future interrogator will consider these quantum bullshit mechanics when formulating their questioning strategy. Kamala Harris made a decent showing.

Last edited by HMS Irruncible; 05-02-2019 at 06:37 AM.
  #10  
Old 05-02-2019, 06:45 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,530
A dishonest, dishonorable coward. Which is true of pretty much everyone who has remained in Trumpland. The only thing Barr might have above most of the rest is a shred of competence (in the service of evil, of course), and until recently, a shred of respect outside of the Trump bubble (the Trubble?).
  #11  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:17 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
I followed today's events as best I could while at work and just now found this video from the Washington Post where a whole bunch of Democrats call for Bill Barr to resign or face impeachment.

I agree with them.

I noticed that we didn't have a thread just for Bill Barr yet, but given the news and events of the last two days, I figured we needed on to vent about this lying pushead and to keep track of news about him: there's gonna be a lot of those things from here on out.

Let me first say I was aghast this mendacious shitbag was confirmed. In fact, I was more surprised by how easy his confirmation was than by his actions since then.

Fuck you, Bill Barr, you lying sack of awful. You deceitful coward. You craven fucking boot-licking, ass-kissing goddammned fucking lying delusional anti-American bastard: fuck you.
Impeaching Bill Barr successfully is probably almost as unlikely as impeaching Trump. In Trump Land, Barr is a *real* attorney general:

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4...ng-like-a-real

Barr is doing Trump's work, doing the white man's work, doing the Lord's work. Trump's supporters know that, even if the rest of us don't.
  #12  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:28 AM
Crotalus's Avatar
Crotalus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio
Posts: 6,017
I am ashamed to admit how naive and credulous I was when Barr was first appointed, but I'm going to do it anyway. . I read articles and heard commentary by people I at least semi-respected that said Barr is an institutionalist, he respects the norms of DOJ, he cares about his reputation, he's close personal friends with Bob Mueller, blah blah blah. I even harbored a wishful fantasy that he had deliberately bamboozled Trump into nominating him so he could come in and reveal himself to be a crusader for truth, justice and the American way.

Boy, was I wrong.
__________________
Ad hominem is a logical fallacy when it's used to argue against a concept. But it's perfectly appropriate when your point is that someone is an asshole. TonySinclair
  #13  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:34 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus View Post
I am ashamed to admit how naive and credulous I was when Barr was first appointed, but I'm going to do it anyway. . I read articles and heard commentary by people I at least semi-respected that said Barr is an institutionalist, he respects the norms of DOJ, he cares about his reputation, he's close personal friends with Bob Mueller, blah blah blah. I even harbored a wishful fantasy that he had deliberately bamboozled Trump into nominating him so he could come in and reveal himself to be a crusader for truth, justice and the American way.

Boy, was I wrong.
Anyone who at this point is willing to accept a major post from Donald Trump has an extreme dearth of either intelligence or personal character, at a very minimum.
  #14  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:35 AM
Shoeless's Avatar
Shoeless is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Sunflower State
Posts: 6,552
I hope he doesn't show up for his House hearing today and the Sgt At Arms frog-marches him to fucking jail for Contempt of Congress. Of course then he will be a hero and a martyr to the Trumpians and all we'll hear about is how it's an attempted coup by the Democrats.

Who was the poster who said Bill Barr was the love child of Elton John and John Chancellor? That was hilarious, I can't get that image out of my mind now.
  #15  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:51 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus View Post
I am ashamed to admit how naive and credulous I was when Barr was first appointed, but I'm going to do it anyway. . I read articles and heard commentary by people I at least semi-respected that said Barr is an institutionalist, he respects the norms of DOJ, he cares about his reputation, he's close personal friends with Bob Mueller, blah blah blah. I even harbored a wishful fantasy that he had deliberately bamboozled Trump into nominating him so he could come in and reveal himself to be a crusader for truth, justice and the American way.

Boy, was I wrong.
Yeah, aside from his views on executive power, nothing indicated to me that he was an off-the-charts oligarch fanboy loyalist. Something I overlooked in retrospect was his connection to Alfa Bank, which is based on Moscow. That should have been more of a warning sign that it was at the time.
  #16  
Old 05-02-2019, 08:00 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Anyone who at this point is willing to accept a major post from Donald Trump has an extreme dearth of either intelligence or personal character, at a very minimum.
Pretty much.

Initially, Trump did what most incoming presidents do, inheriting some staff and hiring the rest from among his immediate political circles, not really knowing whether or not they would work out for him. Trump is an authoritarian. Trump insists on loyalty over ethics, loyalty over the law, over everything. Initially, I suppose that those who agreed to work for Trump did so with the assumption that there would be disagreements but that they could influence him and shape him: Kelly, Mattis, McMaster, Tillerson, Sessions, Priebus, Cohn, and others. But people now know who Trump is. It's understood that if you agree to work for Trump, you work for Trump, not the American people. Anyone who works with him now and who truly doesn't believe that is just dangerously naive, which may not be much better.
  #17  
Old 05-02-2019, 08:01 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Jeffrey Lebowski View Post
"I'm trying to grapple with the word 'suggest'."
I wish Harris had said "Suggest. S-U-G-G-E-S-T. Suggest. For cryin' out loud, someone toss this halfwit a fucking dictionary!"

At first I thought Barr was a surprisingly decent choice, a guy who had the job before who would have some respect for the rule of law. How wrong I was.
  #18  
Old 05-02-2019, 08:04 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoeless View Post
I hope he doesn't show up for his House hearing today and the Sgt At Arms frog-marches him to fucking jail for Contempt of Congress. Of course then he will be a hero and a martyr to the Trumpians and all we'll hear about is how it's an attempted coup by the Democrats.

Who was the poster who said Bill Barr was the love child of Elton John and John Chancellor? That was hilarious, I can't get that image out of my mind now.
I don't believe a contempt of congress charge would necessarily be a ticket to jail - at least not right away. It would immediately be litigated in court, which would probably take us past the end of Trump's first term. For all practical purposes, until further notice, the attorney general and the justice department is a legal arm of the Republican party. Given enough time, they'll do the same to the courts.
  #19  
Old 05-02-2019, 08:13 AM
mcgato is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Hoboken
Posts: 1,332
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Anyone who at this point is willing to accept a major post from Donald Trump has an extreme dearth of either intelligence or personal character, at a very minimum.
Why not both? A dearth of intelligence and personal character.
  #20  
Old 05-02-2019, 08:21 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,298
You bake a dozen cookies (to raise funds for an orphanage). You leave them to cool and go and do other things, while Bill Barr sits in the kitchen reading the Mueller report (don't ask why).

Returning a while later, you notice that there are less cookies than before.

"Have you eaten one of my cookies?", you ask Barr.

"No, I haven't eaten one of your cookies", Bill Barr replies.

You count the cookies and there are only ten. So you check the camera you have set up in your kitchen to capture evidence of paranormal activity, and it shows Bill Barr eating two cookies.

You confront him with the video evidence."You lied, Bill Barr! You said you didn't eat my cookies!"

Bar replies: "You asked me whether I'd eaten one of your cookies, but I ate two of your cookies."

This is how Barr misleads and avoids the spirit of a question.
  #21  
Old 05-02-2019, 09:40 AM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
You cannot simply ask "did Trump suggest this" or "did Trump" order this. Everything he said is considered to be simply "thinking out loud" or "talking with his mouth" - until someone acts on those words, and Trump decides to own the outcome.

This is what I call the "Trump Uncertainty Principle". No particle of an idea can be disentangled from Trump's quantum bullshit universe until he perturbs it by the act of seeking credit for it.

I hope every future interrogator will consider these quantum bullshit mechanics when formulating their questioning strategy. Kamala Harris made a decent showing.
Yes, and a tip o' the hat to Barr for doing so much to (apparently) advance the novel argument that Trump is absolved of any potential Obstruction charges because he was upset. I can certainly get behind that. "Yes officer, sure I shot that guy on the freeway, but I was upset because he cut me off. Am I free to go?"

Last edited by El_Kabong; 05-02-2019 at 09:42 AM.
  #22  
Old 05-02-2019, 09:52 AM
Loach's Avatar
Loach is offline
The Central Scrutinizer
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Pork Roll/Taylor Ham
Posts: 25,225
I’m a fan. F is for Family is a great show.
  #23  
Old 05-02-2019, 11:03 AM
Steve MB is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 13,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
You bake a dozen cookies (to raise funds for an orphanage). You leave them to cool and go and do other things, while Bill Barr sits in the kitchen reading the Mueller report (don't ask why).

Returning a while later, you notice that there are less cookies than before.

"Have you eaten one of my cookies?", you ask Barr.

"No, I haven't eaten one of your cookies", Bill Barr replies.

You count the cookies and there are only ten. So you check the camera you have set up in your kitchen to capture evidence of paranormal activity, and it shows Bill Barr eating two cookies.

You confront him with the video evidence."You lied, Bill Barr! You said you didn't eat my cookies!"

Bar replies: "You asked me whether I'd eaten one of your cookies, but I ate two of your cookies."

This is how Barr misleads and avoids the spirit of a question.
I am reminded of one of Asimov's Black Widowers stories where the guest has a psychological compulsion to tell the truth and repeatedly declares, with regard to a crime of which he is suspected, "I did not take the cash or the bonds."
__________________
The Internet: Nobody knows if you're a dog. Everybody knows if you're a jackass.
  #24  
Old 05-02-2019, 11:10 AM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,188
I’m conflicted when I hear Barr say things like “we are not exonerating the president” or “we didn’t find enough evidence for conviction”. I mean, I know that he’s just doing CYA (and being lawyery in general) but the part of me that tries to look for the good in people wants to think that even he can’t unequivocally defend The Trump.

Yeah, I know, naive.
  #25  
Old 05-02-2019, 11:23 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve MB View Post
I am reminded of one of Asimov's Black Widowers stories where the guest has a psychological compulsion to tell the truth and repeatedly declares, with regard to a crime of which he is suspected, "I did not take the cash or the bonds."
It's why Barr didn't testify before the House judiciary committee today, as he would have been facing expert committee staff lawyers framing questions in such a way that he would not be able to find a way of wriggling out of.
  #26  
Old 05-02-2019, 11:23 AM
drad dog's Avatar
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 5,901
If you really think about it, parsing the word "suggest" is an admission. It's a loud "Yes"
  #27  
Old 05-02-2019, 11:37 AM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,811
Well this is just fucking stupid:

Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tennessee, started eating a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken at 9 a.m. while lawmakers and the press waited to see if Barr would show up on the Hill. Cohen then left the bucket — along with a ceramic chicken — on the table where Barr would have sat.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/congres...ring-he-didnt/
(A few must see pictures at the link.)
Way to get the whole mess taken seriously, idiot!
  #28  
Old 05-02-2019, 11:57 AM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
You cannot simply ask "did Trump suggest this" or "did Trump" order this. Everything he said is considered to be simply "thinking out loud" or "talking with his mouth" - until someone acts on those words, and Trump decides to own the outcome.

This is what I call the "Trump Uncertainty Principle". No particle of an idea can be disentangled from Trump's quantum bullshit universe until he perturbs it by the act of seeking credit for it.
This deserves to be enshrined in . . . whatever the enshrining institution is that enshrines Murphy's, Godwin's, and Sturgeon's Laws.
  #29  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:15 PM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 15,603
I approve this pitting and stand in awe and admiration at the restraint shown in the OP. I have trouble not thinking about this guy and his boss and a handful of their cohorts in terms of torches, pitchforks, ropes, and augers.

Last edited by Inigo Montoya; 05-02-2019 at 12:16 PM.
  #30  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:18 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,786
I take it the auger is for installing a auxiliary asshole, or expanding the capacity of the original?
  #31  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:18 PM
CalMeacham's Avatar
CalMeacham is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 43,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
You cannot simply ask "did Trump suggest this" or "did Trump" order this. Everything he said is considered to be simply "thinking out loud" or "talking with his mouth" - until someone acts on those words, and Trump decides to own the outcome.

This is what I call the "Trump Uncertainty Principle". No particle of an idea can be disentangled from Trump's quantum bullshit universe until he perturbs it by the act of seeking credit for it.

I hope every future interrogator will consider these quantum bullshit mechanics when formulating their questioning strategy. Kamala Harris made a decent showing.
"Look, I'm not saying that someone should rid me of this Troublesome Priest, I'm just saying it would be a great thing, you know? We're just tossing ideas around here!"
__________________
Who is the Calypso Singer that rides Pegasus?
Harry Bellerophonte
  #32  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:22 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
You cannot simply ask "did Trump suggest this" or "did Trump" order this. Everything he said is considered to be simply "thinking out loud" or "talking with his mouth" - until someone acts on those words, and Trump decides to own the outcome.

This is what I call the "Trump Uncertainty Principle". No particle of an idea can be disentangled from Trump's quantum bullshit universe until he perturbs it by the act of seeking credit for it.

I hope every future interrogator will consider these quantum bullshit mechanics when formulating their questioning strategy. Kamala Harris made a decent showing.

I think this is really the problem. If Barr sits down with Trump and Trump mentions casually.

"I don't know why there is all this Russia investigation still going on. Clinton did a bunch of worse stuff, you should go after her."

Is he actually "suggesting" that Barr open an investigation, or is he just spouting off?

Also, should his tweets be counted as suggestions?
  #33  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:22 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus View Post
I am ashamed to admit how naive and credulous I was when Barr was first appointed, but I'm going to do it anyway. . I read articles and heard commentary by people I at least semi-respected that said Barr is an institutionalist, he respects the norms of DOJ, he cares about his reputation, he's close personal friends with Bob Mueller, blah blah blah. I even harbored a wishful fantasy that he had deliberately bamboozled Trump into nominating him so he could come in and reveal himself to be a crusader for truth, justice and the American way.

Boy, was I wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Yeah, aside from his views on executive power, nothing indicated to me that he was an off-the-charts oligarch fanboy loyalist. Something I overlooked in retrospect was his connection to Alfa Bank, which is based on Moscow. That should have been more of a warning sign that it was at the time.
I'm not going to condemn anyone who admits to having had a lapse of judgement about this administration. But going forward, it would be nice if we could all acknowledge the irrefutable, not-debatable, objective FACT that if an appointee is nominated by the America-hating fuckstick, it is axiomatic that the candidate is both unqualified and disinclined to pursue the interests of the American people.

It IS clear that Stephen Goebbels Himmler Miller vets these people, isn't it?
  #34  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:29 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve MB View Post
I am reminded of one of Asimov's Black Widowers stories where the guest has a psychological compulsion to tell the truth and repeatedly declares, with regard to a crime of which he is suspected, "I did not take the cash or the bonds."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
It's why Barr didn't testify before the House judiciary committee today, as he would have been facing expert committee staff lawyers framing questions in such a way that he would not be able to find a way of wriggling out of.
Well he is on record as saying he had a problem with the HoR's format.
  #35  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:31 PM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 15,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
I take it the auger is for installing a auxiliary asshole, or expanding the capacity of the original?
Mebbee. Or for drilling a well to chuck them into.
  #36  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:34 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 31,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inigo Montoya View Post
I approve this pitting and stand in awe and admiration at the restraint shown in the OP. I have trouble not thinking about this guy and his boss and a handful of their cohorts in terms of torches, pitchforks, ropes, and augers.
...tumbrels...
  #37  
Old 05-02-2019, 12:57 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,530
Benjamin Wittes, editor of Lawfare, who had previously (cautiously) defended Barr and counseled giving him the benefit of the doubt, savagely criticizes him and calls his performance "catastrophic":

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...rophic/588574/

Quote:
I was willing to give Bill Barr a chance. Consider me burned.
Quote:
Barr has now acted, and we can now evaluate his actual, rather than his hypothesized, performance.

It has been catastrophic. Not in my memory has a sitting attorney general more diminished the credibility of his department on any subject. It is a kind of trope of political opposition in every administration that the attorney general—whoever he or she is—is politicizing the Justice Department and acting as a defense lawyer for the president. In this case it is true.
  #38  
Old 05-02-2019, 01:22 PM
KidCharlemagne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,070
The irony about Barr's attempt to parse meaning into elementary particles by claiming that he didn't lie because he thought the congressman was asking about Mueller's team's concerns rather than Mueller himself is that in the letter to Barr, Mueller consistently uses the word "we." He can't even use his already farcical defense. Why is no one in the press pointing this out?
  #39  
Old 05-02-2019, 01:44 PM
UnwittingAmericans is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 267
He reminds me of every thread in Elections.
  #40  
Old 05-02-2019, 01:47 PM
UnwittingAmericans is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidCharlemagne View Post
The irony about Barr's attempt to parse meaning into elementary particles by claiming that he didn't lie because he thought the congressman was asking about Mueller's team's concerns rather than Mueller himself is that in the letter to Barr, Mueller consistently uses the word "we." He can't even use his already farcical defense. Why is no one in the press pointing this out?
Not to mention he said the "snitty" letter was probably written by staff even though Mueller's signature is on it, and nobody bothered to ask him, "Have you ever signed a letter where you didn't agree with what was in it?"
  #41  
Old 05-02-2019, 01:56 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,188
This seems like a very objective and balanced summary of yesterday’s testimony:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...mony-takeaways

Not calling for Barr’s head, nor defending what he did. But overall there were serious concerns about his testimony and actions he should have taken but didn’t.
  #42  
Old 05-02-2019, 02:30 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus View Post
I am ashamed to admit how naive and credulous I was when Barr was first appointed, but I'm going to do it anyway. . I read articles and heard commentary by people I at least semi-respected that said Barr is an institutionalist, he respects the norms of DOJ, he cares about his reputation, he's close personal friends with Bob Mueller, blah blah blah. I even harbored a wishful fantasy that he had deliberately bamboozled Trump into nominating him so he could come in and reveal himself to be a crusader for truth, justice and the American way.

Boy, was I wrong.
You were far from alone. Hell, I argued strenuously for this exact same scenario in the Mueller thread. Relied on the same representations by US attorneys who had worked with him re him basically adhering to norms and being an institutionalist. What a load of bollocks.

Barr is a piece of shit, same as virtually every nominee Trump has made to his administration.

I used to have some faith in Christopher Wray, too, but now he's been praised by Barr, no more.

Watching the rule of law be savaged as it has been by this cabal is so painful. I struggle to get my head around the depth of the depravity.
  #43  
Old 05-02-2019, 02:44 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post

Watching the rule of law be savaged as it has been by this cabal is so painful. I struggle to get my head around the depth of the depravity.
I'm afraid (as the saying goes), you ain't seen nothin' yet.


The bar (barr?!) still has a long way to go down. For example, wait until the DOJ starts going after Trump's enemy list. Wait until political opponents are jailed on spurious charges.

Just wait. More to come.
  #44  
Old 05-02-2019, 03:24 PM
Great Antibob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidCharlemagne View Post
Mueller consistently uses the word "we." He can't even use his already farcical defense. Why is no one in the press pointing this out?
I can just hear Barr or Fox News claim Mueller likes to use the royal 'we'.

But seriously, while I agree there's not a lot of wriggle room in this case, the use of the singular 'we' is not totally unheard of, though would be quite odd indeed in this particular instance.
  #45  
Old 05-02-2019, 06:43 PM
drad dog's Avatar
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 5,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Great Antibob View Post
I can just hear Barr or Fox News claim Mueller likes to use the royal 'we'.

But seriously, while I agree there's not a lot of wriggle room in this case, the use of the singular 'we' is not totally unheard of, though would be quite odd indeed in this particular instance.
I don't know about that one but Barr referred to the decision to reserve executive privelege for McGahn by using the collective first person: "We haven't waived privelege"
  #46  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:06 PM
simster is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
You bake a dozen cookies (to raise funds for an orphanage). You leave them to cool and go and do other things, while Bill Barr sits in the kitchen reading the Mueller report (don't ask why).

Returning a while later, you notice that there are less cookies than before.

"Have you eaten one of my cookies?", you ask Barr.

"No, I haven't eaten one of your cookies", Bill Barr replies.

You count the cookies and there are only ten. So you check the camera you have set up in your kitchen to capture evidence of paranormal activity, and it shows Bill Barr eating two cookies.

You confront him with the video evidence."You lied, Bill Barr! You said you didn't eat my cookies!"

Bar replies: "You asked me whether I'd eaten one of your cookies, but I ate two of your cookies."

This is how Barr misleads and avoids the spirit of a question.
More like

"I didn't eat any of your cookies, once I took them - they ceased to be yours and became mine"

(followed with a "I didn't see your name on the cookies" or "once you left them, you abandoned any ownership priveleges", etc"
  #47  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:21 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,665
Bill Barr. Sounds like cheap cash only dive in a strip mall near an airport.

I miss Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III. He was a bigoted elf, but his name was fun to say.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #48  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:44 PM
blondebear is offline
Shouting Grasshopper
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Meridian/280
Posts: 13,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Bill Barr. Sounds like cheap cash only dive in a strip mall near an airport.
If only we could trade him in for Bill Burr.
  #49  
Old 05-02-2019, 07:56 PM
Fair Rarity's Avatar
Fair Rarity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,115
I don't know if the Dems are going to fight back or just furrow their brows and talk about grave concerns. I do like The Hoarse Whisperer's advice

Quote:
Congressional Democrats:

Subpoena every member of William Barr’s staff.

When the first refuses to show up, cite them for contempt and have them arrested.

This is Barr’s last career stop. Target the people who have futures to consider.

Cut off his legs and work your way up.
  #50  
Old 05-02-2019, 08:03 PM
Kamino Neko's Avatar
Kamino Neko is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Alternate 230
Posts: 15,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobot View Post
Well this is just fucking stupid:

Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tennessee, started eating a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken at 9 a.m. while lawmakers and the press waited to see if Barr would show up on the Hill. Cohen then left the bucket — along with a ceramic chicken — on the table where Barr would have sat.
OK, I'm not familiar with him...Does Cohen always look like he's trying and failing to hold back a laugh? He seems extremely pleased with his gag, here.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017