# The Bill Barr Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 2, 2019, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354 "2019-05-02T04:10:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2019, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/61 "2019-05-03T18:51:30Z")
Yeeessss…Here’s your parade, Mr. Trump. Your place of honor is right up there on the cart. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2019, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/62 "2019-05-05T17:59:19Z")
Okay…I just need to get it off my chest and record it for posterity, so when the truth is told, you can say you heard it here first: Barr claims that he has asked Mueller (3 times?) that if not for DOJ policy of not indicting a sitting President, would he have charged Trump with obstruction and Mueller has said NO. But, here’s the thing: If you read the introduction to Volume II of the Mueller report (as I assume Barr has, although he has played dumb on comprehending it), you would know that Mueller can’t possibly answer YES to that question without violating the principles he laid out there. He basically said that he can’t indict the President and that it would be unfair to accuse someone of a crime and not give them their day in court, ergo he can’t accuse the President of a crime. So, now Barr goes and asks Mueller in essence, “Well, okay, but if you could accuse the President of a crime, would you have?” How could Mueller answer YES to such a question without then having, in essence, accused the President of a crime? So, my conjecture is that Barr, being a smart lawyer, knows never to ask a question that he doesn’t know how the witness will answer…i.e., that won’t give him the answer that he wants (or close enough so that he can spin it as being that answer without technically perjuring himself). At best, Mueller would presumably give an answer such as “No, not necessarily, …” and proceed to explain that he can’t answer this or maybe that they decided not even to determine the answer to a question that is irrelevant because they wouldn’t be able to reveal the answer to anyone. And, then, Barr has the answer that he wants - Mueller said NO. So, that’s my hypothesis of how it all went down and I am frustrated as hell that I haven’t seen others come to this rather obvious conclusion. * * * And, in a not unrelated note, a lot has been said about Barr playing dumb when he had been asked by the Congressman weeks ago if he knew why it might be that the Mueller team was reportedly unhappy with the summary he put out. However, less seems to be said about how Barr (and admittedly most of the Republican Party) continues to play dumb about why Mueller did not reach a prosecutorial judgement on obstruction of justice. I mean, I have another day job but still on the very day the Mueller report came out I managed to find and read the introduction to Volume II where Mueller lays all this out in about a page and a half in very clear prose (Okay, as a disclaimer, I’ll admit that I had no classes to teach on Thursday, but still…). I mean…What the fuck!?! He’s entitled to disagree with the reasoning but not to pretend he’s ignorant of it. On the other hand, I understand why he has to play dumb: If he admits to understanding it, then it undermines the fiction that his decision on obstruction was just filling in the vacuum left by Mueller’s non-decision. I.e., he can continue to present the fiction that he did not contradict Mueller’s conclusion but merely made a decision where Mueller had punted. Still, it is utterly disgusting to see this level of deception being promulgated by the Attorney General. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2019, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/63 "2019-05-05T20:35:53Z")
[Lawfare’s Jack Goldsmith thinks that nothing Barr did is odd and very little was even a misstep.](https://www.lawfareblog.com/thoughts-barr-and-mueller-report) ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2019, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/64 "2019-05-05T22:13:21Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > [Lawfare’s Jack Goldsmith thinks that nothing Barr did is odd and very little was even a misstep.](https://www.lawfareblog.com/thoughts-barr-and-mueller-report) Assuming my understanding of his position (toward the end of the article) is correct, it’s interesting that the same Jack Goldsmith who apparently believes that there needs to be some investigation into the FISA process and how it was implemented by the FBI in 2016 appears to be the same Goldsmith who helped implement and defend warrantless wiretaps on American civilians in 2004. Didn’t seem to have a problem with FISA and “spying” then. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2019, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/65 "2019-05-05T23:53:49Z")
Whoever this Jack Goldsmith is, he is completely out-to-lunch on the whole obstruction thing. He is another person who seems incapable of understanding why Mueller chose the path that he did. If you are going to criticize that path, you have to explain what Mueller’s other option is. I.e., you have to engage Mueller’s argument for doing what he did. He hasn’t engaged it; like, Barr he is just pretending it isn’t there (although I am willing to entertain more innocuous motives in his case, whereas in Barr’s case it is pretty clear why he is pretending it isn’t there). ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2019, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/66 "2019-05-05T23:58:18Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > Whoever this Jack Goldsmith is, he is completely out-to-lunch on the whole obstruction thing. He is another person who seems incapable of understanding why Mueller chose the path that he did. If you are going to criticize that path, you have to explain what Mueller’s other option is. I.e., you have to engage Mueller’s argument for doing what he did. He hasn’t engaged it; like, Barr he is just pretending it isn’t there (although I am willing to entertain more innocuous motives in his case, whereas in Barr’s case it is pretty clear why he is pretending it isn’t there). I think Goldsmith, like Barr, is also playing dumb ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2019, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/67 "2019-05-06T00:03:36Z")
I don’t think this could or would happen, but I’d really like to see Mueller call Barr’s bluff on this whole thing. “You want me to make a prosecutorial judgement in spite of the DOJ opinion, then hey, you are the attorney general so issue a new opinion overturning that one and we’ll go back and render my prosecutorial judgement.” Fucking twit (Barr that is)! ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2019, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/68 "2019-05-06T00:47:03Z")
By the way, [here](http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/why-didnt-mueller-charge-president-trump-with-obstruction.html) is a short interview with someone (Renato Mariotti) who can read and intelligently discuss Mueller’s decision in regards to obstruction and how Bill Barr distorted it. Restores my faith in humanity at least a little bit. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2019, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/69 "2019-05-06T01:35:13Z")
I just discovered that Ben Wittes also has a [very nice analysis](https://www.lawfareblog.com/notes-mueller-report-reading-diary#Introduction%20to%20Volume%20II) of the Introduction to Volume II and Barr’s distortion of what is said there. His statement that > [@](#): > > The two-page introduction to Volume II of the Mueller report is perhaps the part of the entire document that packs the most important material into the smallest space. is no overstatement. I’ve seen people say that Mueller wanted the executive summaries released in that letter after Barr released his “summary” but Mueller’s letter actual says “the introduction and executive summary of each volume”. The key to Barr’s deception on obstruction is not having Mueller’s conclusion presented in the context of the Intro to Volume II. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2019, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/70 "2019-05-06T03:25:25Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > I don’t think this could or would happen, but I’d really like to see Mueller call Barr’s bluff on this whole thing. “You want me to make a prosecutorial judgement in spite of the DOJ opinion, then hey, you are the attorney general so issue a new opinion overturning that one and we’ll go back and render my prosecutorial judgement.” > > Fucking twit (Barr that is)! “Twit”? You misspelled “lying sack of shit”. > [@jshore](#): > > By the way, [here](http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/why-didnt-mueller-charge-president-trump-with-obstruction.html) is a short interview with someone (Renato Mariotti) who can read and intelligently discuss Mueller’s decision in regards to obstruction and how Bill Barr distorted it. Restores my faith in humanity at least a little bit. My faith in humanity has been permanently undermined by the fact that the distortions of the above-mentioned lying sack of shit, aided and abetted by Fox News and the rest of the right-wing spin machine, have become the _de facto_ reality for perhaps as many as half of American voters. And the reason it might only be half is that a significant percentage probably don’t even understand the issues and don’t give a shit, as long as a lunatic with an “R” after his name is president. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2019, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/71 "2019-05-07T21:52:52Z")
[https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/06/politics/mueller-report-house-contempt-barr/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/06/politics/mueller-report-house-contempt-barr/index.html) > [@](#): > > House panel sets Wednesday vote to hold Barr in contempt after DOJ doesn’t turn over Mueller report ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/72 "2019-05-08T01:04:23Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > [Lawfare’s Jack Goldsmith thinks that nothing Barr did is odd and very little was even a misstep.](https://www.lawfareblog.com/thoughts-barr-and-mueller-report) [Robert Litt slams Jack Goldsmith’s POV!](https://www.lawfareblog.com/bill-barrs-actions-mueller-report-response-jack-goldsmith) ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/73 "2019-05-08T01:45:00Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > [Robert Litt slams Jack Goldsmith’s POV!](https://www.lawfareblog.com/bill-barrs-actions-mueller-report-response-jack-goldsmith) Glad to see Litt basically make a point similar to what I did above when he says (rather understatedly), “It is not clear what Barr and Goldsmith believe Mueller should have done given these circumstances…” ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/74 "2019-05-08T13:42:31Z")
Barr threatens to get Trump to exert Executive Privilege; House set to vote on citing Barr for contempt > **[House Democrats Move Forward On William Barr Contempt Vote After Negotiations...](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/william-barr-contempt_n_5cd1bfe0e4b0e4d7573933d6)** > > A last-minute negotiation session between the Justice Department and the House Judiciary Committee over the full Mueller report didn't work out. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/75 "2019-05-08T14:08:01Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > Barr threatens to get Trump to exert Executive Privilege; House set to vote on citing Barr for contempt > > [House Democrats Move Forward On William Barr Contempt Vote After Negotiations Fail | HuffPost Latest News](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/william-barr-contempt_n_5cd1bfe0e4b0e4d7573933d6) Not sure what he’s threatening. “We’re stonewalling you, and if you cite me for contempt, we’ll…we’ll…we’ll…stonewall you!” ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/76 "2019-05-08T14:13:12Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Not sure what he’s threatening. “We’re stonewalling you, and if you cite me for contempt, we’ll…we’ll…we’ll…stonewall you!” Neither is anyone else. Trump seems to already be threatening to do those things. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/77 "2019-05-08T14:21:41Z")
Barr contempt vote is live right now on MSNBC, CNN, FOX News, and maybe others. Also streaming online: [Barr contempt of congress vote: Watch LIVE as House Judiciary debates holding AG in contempt - YouTube](https://youtu.be/8hWmHcwNfxU) ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/78 "2019-05-08T14:27:41Z")
If I understood what I was watching, the Republicans tried unsuccessfully to block it with some sort of procedural vote. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/79 "2019-05-08T14:34:49Z")
> [@OttoDaFe](#): > > 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. Barr is just a terrible liar. I mean, this is How To Spot A Liar 101. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [May 8, 2019, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354/80 "2019-05-08T14:41:45Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > Barr contempt vote is live right now on MSNBC, CNN, FOX News, and maybe others. > Also streaming online: [https://youtu.be/8hWmHcwNfxU](https://youtu.be/8hWmHcwNfxU) Some Republican reps seem to be confused about the nature of this vote. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-bill-barr-thread/833354.md?page=5)