Tag Archives: William Barr

national news

If there’s nothing there, release the report . . . now!

If there’s no evidence of “collusion” or “obstruction of justice” in that well-chronicled — but still-unknown — report from special counsel Robert Mueller, then why is Attorney General William Barr dragging his feet in releasing it to the public?

Hey, I have to ask, you know?

Mueller finished his exhaustive probe into whether the Russians colluded with Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016. Barr said Mueller came up empty. No collusion. Got it! Check!

Obstruction is another matter. Barr said Mueller did not “exonerate” Trump, but found nothing on which to file a criminal complaint.

So, there you have it — according to the attorney general.

Democrats in Congress want the full report released. Barr said he intends to block some of it. Maybe much of it. The public won’t see the whole thing, if Barr gets his way.

Donald Trump keeps swaying in the breeze. He says “release it.” Then he waffles. Back and forth.

I am going to presume the president doesn’t know what Mueller found per the obstruction matter. I also am being forced to presume — at least until it’s proven otherwise — that Barr has concluded there may be more than meets the naked eye in that Mueller report.

Trump trumpets “no collusion, total exoneration, witch hunt!” If so, then what in the world is the holdup here?

Gosh, I’m inclined to believe that New York Times report that some of Mueller’s legal eagles are unhappy with the way Barr presented their findings, which likely might explain a whole lot about the delay in getting this report released to the public that deserves to see it in its entirety.

They told the NY Times that Barr soft-pedaled the findings in his four-page summary and that there’s more in there that implicates Donald Trump in something not yet explained.

Can we get it explained? Immediately?

national news

Wishing that AG Barr rises to occasion

You may choose to believe this . . . or you might choose to disbelieve it. I don’t care. I’ll offer this anyway.

I really want to believe that Attorney General William Barr takes seriously the oath to which he swore when he vowed to uphold the rule of law and to defend the U.S. Constitution.

My hope is being strained almost to the point of snapping.

The report from The New York Times from part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s legal team that Barr might have shaded the team’s work is most disturbing.

The Times reports that some of Mueller’s team have complained that Barr’s four-page summary of the 22-month investigation into whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians doesn’t adequately express the team’s view of what it found. They are saying that Barr is soft-pedaling some of the more troubling aspects the conclusions drawn.

This does force me to join others in wondering whether Barr is more loyal to the president than he is to the law. The oath he took was not to pledge loyalty to Donald Trump. He put his hand on a Bible and swore in the name of God Almighty that he would be faithful to the law. Isn’t that what all our federal officials pledge?

My hope when the president nominated Barr to be AG after he fired Jeff Sessions only because Sessions did what was proper — which was to recuse himself from the Russia probe — was that Barr would emerge as a grownup, as a serious public servant.

I still want to believe that’s the case. He served as AG under a previous Republican president, George H.W. Bush. He is a known quantity. Barr possesses a first-rate legal mind.

Did he, though, “audition” for the AG’s job with that memo declaring that the president couldn’t be prosecuted for any crime because he is the president? 

I do not want to believe that.

The NY Times, though, has cast serious doubt on all of that with the report from members of Mueller’s team that the AG has, um, shaded their findings to protect the president.

Say it ain’t so, Bill. More than that, prove it ain’t so. Release the full report to the public.

national news

What? AG Barr hid actual findings from us? Really?

Holy crap!

That’s my initial reaction to  a New York Times report that some members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team are unhappy with the way Attorney General William Barr characterized the team’s findings on The Russia Thing, on “collusion” and on “obstruction of justice.”

Good ever-lovin’ grief, man!

I maintain a flickering semblance of faith in William Barr. It’s in danger of going out.

Mueller and his team concluded 22 months of investigation into whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians. Mueller handed his findings over to Barr, who then issued a four-page summary of what he said was Mueller’s report.

Well, it turns out that the AG might not have given us the straight scoop on what Mueller concluded. The NY Times is reporting that some of Mueller’s investigative team believes the report is more damaging to Trump than Barr has let on.

Oh, my.

Barr is facing deep trouble

We need to see the report. We need to read it for ourselves. William Barr should keep some of it secret, but not much of it. I concede that national security matters are off limits.

But what in the name of juris prudence did Mueller conclude? How did he reach that conclusion? And is the attorney general running interference for the president of the United States? Is he more loyal to Donald Trump than he is to the rule of law?

Is it any wonder that Donald Trump hates the NY Times? Of course not! The Times and other media around the country are doing their job. They are telling us what we need to know.

I’ll add just this caveat: I would feel even better about the veracity of what the investigators have told the NY Times if we would hear from Robert Mueller himself.

However, this bit of information that has smashed through the current news cycle gives me grave concern about the attorney general and his commitment to telling us the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

national news

Mr. POTUS, if there’s nothing to hide, then let us see the report

I cannot understand in the least the president’s resistance to releasing special counsel Robert Mueller’s report to the public.

Donald Trump says there’s “no collusion, no obstruction.” There’s “nothing there,” he says. There’s no there . . . there.

But then in the very next breath he said today that Democrats’ insistence on seeing the full report is a “disgrace.” He doesn’t want the report released, or so it now appears. He is bristling at House Judiciary Committee members’ scheduled vote Wednesday to force the release of the full Mueller report into alleged “collusion” with the Russians.

If there’s nothing in it, Mr. President, then just let Attorney General William Barr release the full report and let Americans — such as me and millions of others of us — determine for ourselves whether what you say is the truth.

national news

No collusion? OK, but let’s probe obstruction

I accept fully Donald Trump’s assertion that special counsel Robert Mueller has found “no collusion” between the president’s campaign and Russian government officials who hacked into our electoral system in 2016.

So let’s put that one away. It’s gone. Done. Finished . . . more than likely.

However,  we do not yet know squat about the other Big One: obstruction of justice.

U.S. Attorney General William Barr is going to release some version of Mueller’s findings to the public, perhaps in just a few days. The AG has told us already that Mueller has found no credible evidence that the president obstructed justice, but did not “exonerate” him.

Barr has Mueller’s full report locked away somewhere in the Robert F. Kennedy Justice Building. He’s gone through it, or is going through it. He said he will release as much of it as allowed by law. I hope it’s much more than he intends to hide from us.

Somewhere in those nearly 400 pages will be information that will tell us how Mueller reached his conclusion. There also might be information that tells us that Donald Trump is an immoral, corrupt, lying individual who is unfit for the presidency . . . but that he didn’t commit any crimes, that he did not conspire to obstruct justice.

We need to see all that we are allowed to see. I am alarmed at the AG’s growing list of topics he intends to redact.

None of us needs to see classified information. Nor do we need to see direct grand jury testimony. The rest of it ought to be fair game.

Americans need to know whether the president is as corrupt and venal as many millions of us already believe him to be.

national news

No, Mr. POTUS: Mueller hasn’t ‘disappeared’

1 Comment

“Robert Mueller was a God-like figure to the Democrats, until he ruled No Collusion in the long awaited $30,000,000 Mueller Report. Now the Dems don’t even acknowledge his name, have become totally unhinged, and would like to through the whole process again. It won’t happen!”

OK, Mr. President. Let’s chill out for a moment.

This Twitter message you fired off this morning is, shall we say, another lie. But that’s not news, given that you lie whenever your lips move.

I lean toward the Democrats. I have been more than willing to mention Robert Mueller’s name whenever possible. I happen to think much more of him than I do of you.

I also have declared my intention to accept whatever findings Mueller would reach as it regarded allegations of collusion. He has ruled that you and your 2016 presidential campaign didn’t conspire to collude with Russians who attacked our election system.

But he surely has recognized that the Russkies did it. He joins your national security team — which you continue to disparage — in saying that Vladimir Putin’s government sought to influence the election outcome. Putin wanted you elected over Hillary Clinton. He got his wish.

As for Mueller, I must remind you that he made no conclusion about obstruction of justice. At least that is what Attorney General William Barr told us.

You also ought to avoid the “unhinged” talk, Mr. President. If anyone has spiraled out of control over the past couple of years, it’s you.

How about shutting your trap until we see the entire report that Mueller plopped on AG Barr’s lap?

I don’t know why I bother mentioning this to you, given that you have zero shame, zero self-awareness, zero character, zero redeeming qualities that commend you for the office you currently occupy.

I just can’t help myself.

national news

Is the AG lengthening the list of redacted items?

U.S. Attorney General William Barr is going to release the Robert Mueller Report in a couple of weeks.

Mueller’s findings into the Russian collusion/conspiracy/obstruction matter are going to be made public. Good deal, yes? I hope so. Although I am feeling a bit of alarm.

Barr is going to redact much of it. He will keep secret national security matters and grand jury testimony and evidence. I get that.

But wait. There’s more. He also intends to withhold informatin that deals with ongoing investigations. Huh?

Also, we now we hear that Barr has decided to keep secret information that might have a negative impact on the reputations of  “peripheral” figures. Eh? What does that mean? Who decides who is “peripheral”? Is that Barr’s call? Should it be Barr’s call?

Congressional Democrats want the nearly 400-page report to be made public. As in all of it. Without redactions.

I can live without knowing the classified information and grand jury testimony evidence. The national security information is sensitive for a damn good reason. Grand jurors are sworn to secrecy and the testimony they hear should be kept secret too, per the oath they take.

However, the attorney general seems to be spreading his net over more of the Mueller report than he initially intended.

I’ll implore the AG once again: Make the report public. We paid for it. We need to see what our money purchased and whether it was worth the public investment.

national news

‘Collusion delusion’ becomes new Trump mantra

Donald Trump has produced what sounds like a 2020 campaign slogan, referring to the “collusion delusion” as he continues his touchdown dance after Robert Mueller concluded his investigation into The Russia Thing.

It’s a knee-slapper! Don’t you think? Well, me neither. The president is reciting it and getting lots of laughs, cheers, whoops and hollers from the adoring crowds.

It is good to put a couple of issues into perspective.

First of all, special counsel Mueller did not say that there was “no collusion.” He said, according to Attorney General William Barr, that he found insufficient evidence to produce a complaint of collusion with the Russians against the president and his 2016 campaign team.

We haven’t yet seen Mueller’s report. William Barr today said he intends to release the report, with redactions, in a couple of weeks. We don’t yet know what precisely Barr is going to black out from public view. He has talked openly about grand jury testimony, issues related to national security and statements that mention individuals who aren’t formally charged with wrongdoing.

My sincere and fervent hope is that the AG releases as much as of the report as possible. He has pledged transparency. I want to believe him.

Absent any knowledge of what Mueller has concluded, it is impossible — even for the president — to say categorically that he has been “exonerated” at any level regarding any allegation that has been leveled against him.

Trump is incapable of being magnanimous in victory. He vows revenge against those who he says have done him wrong. That includes damn near everyone who didn’t vote for him, or so it sounds to me. He continues to label the Mueller probe as a “witch hunt” that failed. He continues to refer to the media as the “enemy of the people.” Trump hurls despicable personal insults at congressional Democrats; House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has become his latest target.

One more point: We haven’t seen anything yet about obstruction of justice. Barr said that Mueller did not “exonerate” the president, even though he did not find sufficient evidence to conclude that he did obstruct justice. Once again, we need to see precisely what evidence Mueller collected and we need to be able to assess how he reached his conclusion.

Yet the president of the United States, as he is prone to do, is getting way out in front of this still-developing story.

Hey, he still has his campaign slogan that he thinks will serve him well. “Collusion delusion” it is. My sense is that Donald Trump is wallowing in his own delusion as well.

national news

Barr pores over a huge report and then summarizes it . . . so quickly?

Special counsel Robert Mueller handed Attorney General William Barr a 300-page report that chronicles a 22-month investigation into whether Donald Trump’s campaign “colluded” with Russian officials who invaded our electoral system.

Two days later, Barr produces a four-page summary of the report.

We know what Barr says about what Mueller reported. We do not yet grasp with our own eyes what Mueller has determined.

Is the AG corrupt? Is he hiding something? I do not subscribe to the first notion. The second one, well . . . is a debatable point.

That is why I want to join others in demanding that we see Robert Mueller’s report in full. A heavily redacted report with pages upon pages of text blacked out won’t suffice.

The attorney general is hearing from a lot of voices these days to release the report (more or less) in its entirety. National security secrets should be kept away from public view.

According to Barr, Mueller has determined that Trump’s campaign did not collude with Russian goons. He said Mueller drew no conclusion about the obstruction of justice matter.

Americans are left to wonder how Mueller reached those conclusions. Aren’t we entitled to see the evidence that Mueller gathered? Aren’t Americans entitled to see how our millions of dollars were spent?

National Public Radio reported Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s reaction to Barr’s summary: “Mr. Attorney General, we do not need your interpretation,” Pelosi said Thursday. “Show us the report and we’ll come to our own conclusions.” She mocked the administration and Republicans as “scaredy-cats.”

I do not want to believe William Barr is doing the president’s bidding. The burden is on the attorney general to keep his promise to operate transparently. He said he would release the report in “weeks, not months.”

Let us see the full report, Mr. Attorney General. Let us decide for ourselves about the veracity of the special counsel’s findings.

Many of us have said we accept Mueller’s conclusion. I am one of them. However, my acceptance is wavering just a bit. The AG’s quick-hit summary isn’t enough to persuade me fully about what Robert Mueller has determined.

national news

Hoping the end of probe would . . . be the end!

2 Comments

Silly me.

I had this naïve thought that Robert Mueller’s report to the attorney general into whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians would be the end of the story.

The special counsel would wrap up his findings, hand them to AG William Barr, who then would tell the public what Mueller had found out. We’d all know — for better or for worse — what went down during the 2016 presidential election.

Then this happened: Mueller essentially cleared Trump and his team of conspiring to collude with Russians who interfered with our election; but then he remained silent on whether Trump obstructed justice by seeking to block any further examination into top aides.

What’s more, Barr issued a four-page “summary” of Mueller’s findings. Not everyone believes Barr’s assessment of what Mueller determined. They contend that Barr is a Trump toadie, handpicked by the president to run interference for him.

Now we’re waiting on the full report from Barr, who promises “transparency.” I am forced to ask: How much of it is he going to show us?

I tend to trust William Barr. I also tend to believe him when he says he will let Americans see as much of Mueller’s findings as he can under the law. I do not need to know the deepest national secrets. All any of us ought to see is the body of evidence that Mueller had collected and from which he drew his conclusions.

Of course, I do have questions now about why Mueller would remain silent on the obstruction of justice matter. Barr said Mueller determined that even though he lacked credible evidence of obstruction, he didn’t “exonerate” the president; Trump, quite expectedly, calls it all a “total exoneration,” which is yet another Trump lie.

I’m going to pose another question: If we presume the worst, that Barr withholds parts of Mueller’s report that might be damaging to the president, would the special counsel be willing to blow the whistle on what the AG is hiding from public view?

Oh, how I want to know the whole truth. My hope of knowing it upon the end of Robert Mueller’s probe has been quashed.