Ah well, that settles it. He’d have no reason to lie about something like that.
He has good reason not to lie, namely perjury.
~Max
It is almost as if the Democrats remember the total lying shitshow Barr gave them the last time he was before them, the way they treated him.
Which would be pursued by, hmmm…his own office?
I’m not ready to go this far. I wouldn’t by a long shot put it by Barr to do what Trump asks him, so that if Trump gets re-elected he will keep Barr on as AG. But I don’t know about any Barr crimes as of now.
The expectation is that Attorney General Barr would recuse himself from any investigation into his own actions. If you would please recall the Mueller investigation, may I direct you to the special counsel’s investigation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions for perjury?
~Max
If there’s anything we’ve learned in the past 3 1/2 years, it’s that the current administration really doesn’t give a flying f*ck about following norms and expectations (or, often, laws, for that matter).
The only other option would be to impeach the Attorney General.
~Max
House hearings like this are always grandstanding.
Nadler runs things horribly, that’s why they give the heavy lifting on impeachment to Schiff.
The real option is to vote the con man out in November, and appoint a worthy attorney general.
Speaking of recalling the Mueller investigation…
Perhaps someone who actually watched today’s testimony might have a better handle on this than I, but I heard on the radio that Barr denied having a familiarity with a certain Trump tweet. The tweet in question was included in the Mueller report.
Did anyone catch that part?
(ETA: I believe it involved Roger Stone.)
Was this when they asked him specific questions, and instead of answering those questions he started telling “his story”, followed by them trying to interrupt him to try to get him to answer the question asked, followed by him insisting he was there for the purpose of telling his story?
When people reclaim their time it’s because they know they have a few minutes only to ask questions, and they’re not interested in listening to a gaslighting filibuster in place of the answer to the question.
As for the actual “when” in my examples, it was in the morning. But he was asked specific questions all day. As far telling his story, he did try to do that on occasion, but for the most part the Democrats didn’t even give him the courtesy of getting a few words in. Barr mentioned at least once that he thought that since this was a hearing, he was there to be heard. Quite clearly, this was not the case.
But check out this link, because it gives a better picture of the hearing than I can.
A quote from that article:
“I know your story,” Representative Hank Johnson of Georgia told Barr at another point, interrupting the witness before he could complete a thought. “I’m telling my story. That’s what I’m here to do,” Barr replied.
I have no doubt that this happens. But sometimes, they reclaim their time because the question they asked actually starts to get a coherent, meaningful response, the questioner realizes this, and reclaims time because they don’t want that answer to be heard.
Do you have like a for instance from today?
When the introductions are done, is the meeting over?
Bill Barr is an ass who misleads, prevaricates and tells lies without a second thought; he’s the kind of person who always thinks he’s the smartest person in the room.
In the same vein as when I said I have no doubt that your example happens, but you provide nothing specific, I won’t try to guess as to this type of motivation today, because I am not a mind reader. But if one is able to cut someone else off at will, and the former doesn’t like what the latter is saying, wouldn’t you say this likely happens?
It’s not difficult to tell when a witness is gurgling talking points rather than answering a question. I am not surprised that you were tuned in to the proceedings, and don’t have an example. Certainly, a question can be framed such that a simple yes or no will not suffice.
No, but I’m not sure what if anything you are implying here.
I don’t the extent to which all of this is true or false, but it seems at least to be a pretty fair guess as to his nature.