Attorney General Bill Barr is under fire for wrongly suggesting former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Joe Biden abused their power and had some “level of involvement” in the FBI’s investigation of now-President Donald Trump.
On Monday Barr announced that he does not “expect” the federal prosecutor he appointed to lead that investigation “will lead to a criminal prosecution of either man.”
But Barr also suggested both men had engaged in an abuse of power, without offering any proof, in what some see as a clear attempt to disparage them.
“We have to bear in mind what the Supreme Court recently reminded us of in the ‘Bridgegate’ case. As the court said there, there’s a difference between an abuse of power and a federal crime. Not every abuse of power, no matter how outrageous, is necessarily a federal crime,” Barr declared.
“Now, as to President Obama and Vice President Biden – whatever their level of involvement – based on the information I have today, I don’t expect Mr. Durham’s work will lead to a criminal investigation of either man.”
Barr says he does not “expect” that the ongoing review of the Trump-Russia probe will lead to a criminal investigation of Barack Obama or Joe Biden: “Our concern over potential criminality is focused on others” https://t.co/HcJ4ge7ZNj pic.twitter.com/N7F0WvaeFE
— CBS News (@CBSNews) May 18, 2020
Barr is known to choose his words very carefully, to paint the picture he wants Americans to see. A federal judge has already chastised him for his four-page Mueller investigation letter, calling it “distorted” and “misleading.”
And by declaring there won’t be a “criminal investigation,” he gets the words “criminal” and “investigation” or “prosecution” tied to both Democrats in the press.
His remarks immediately led to headlines like these:
“Barr says he does not expect criminal investigation of Obama or Biden as result of Durham probe”
“Barr Says Probe Won’t Likely Lead to Prosecution of Obama, Biden”
“Barr Says He Doesn’t Expect Criminal Probe Into Obama or Biden”
On social media many saw through Barr’s tactics:
OMG Barr is the most corrupt and biased politician ever to hold the office of AG. Obama and Biden did nothing wrong, but Barr is attempting to imply that they did. Putin would be proud (and I’m sure he is). #GOPCorruptionOverCountry
— Andrea Nikischer (@AndreaNikischer) May 18, 2020
Goalposts: it should be laughable to suggest a criminal investigation.
They did NOTHING to even warrant the discussion.
This is how Barr/Trump work w the media accomplices.
Now it’s out there that Obama/Biden won’t be investigated, not that there is nothing to investigate
— Henry (@Fdr1942) May 18, 2020
And the whatever their involvement mentioned line is complete underhanded bullshit. Joe Biden is running g for President and the AG is insinuating he’s some kind of criminal Biden’s record over 40 years speaks for itself. Barr is a scumbag, his record speaks for itself https://t.co/k9sYQZAHZw
— Joe Lockhart (@joelockhart) May 18, 2020
Barr leaves miles of room to do one or more of the following:
(a) accuse Biden/Obama of “abuse of power”
(b) suggest that Biden/Obama would have been charged with crimes had they not been VP/POTUS;
(c) uncover new “evidence” that leads to criminally charging one or both men.
— Bill Barr Baggins (@LogicHobbit) May 18, 2020
Yes…just leaving that “whatever their level of involvement” nugget floating out there.
What a scummy corrupt SOB!
— Ava Hunch 🤞🏻🙏🏻🤞🏻 (@Annie1But) May 18, 2020
Barr implying that Obama and Biden’s actions were outrageous but not rising to the level of a crime, after the exact same people said DOJ shouldn’t make derogatory statements about people’s actions, and in particular, candidates during an election, without charging them like 🤔
— Pwn All The Things (@pwnallthethings) May 18, 2020
Bill Barr says he won’t investigate Obama or Biden or Trump (Ha!), but let’s get something clear. What he should have said was, “there is nothing there to investigate because Trump is making stuff up.”
— Karen 🇺🇸🧶❤🐑🐄🍒🚜🌽🌊 (@karenknitssocks) May 18, 2020
What an odd statement from an AG, making statements about investigations that don’t exist https://t.co/mpfeOUV8TH
— Carrie Cordero (@carriecordero) May 18, 2020
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
McCarthy’s Threat Over Jan. 6 Records ‘Meets the Elements’ of Obstruction of Justice: Legal Expert
House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy violated ethics rules — and may have broken the law by obstructing justice — on Tuesday when he threatened telecommunications companies that comply with a Select Committee’s request to preserve records relevant to the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection, according to CNN legal analyst Norman Eisen.
McCarthy warned the companies — including Apple, AT&T and Verizon — that if the GOP takes back the House in 2022, “a Republican majority will not forget.” He also claimed that complying with the Select Committee’s request would somehow violate federal law. But Eisen, who served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during former president Donald Trump’s first impeachment trial, said bluntly Wednesday that “there is no law.”
“This is the equivalent of the proverbial gangster, walking in to a business and saying, ‘Gee, nice telecomm company you have here. It would be a shame if anything happened to it,'” Eisen said of McCarthy’s threat. “It’s the exact opposite, it’s Orwellian. If these telecomm companies fail to comply with the requirement to preserve these records, if they did what Kevin McCarthy wants and refused to turn over the records, that would be a violation of law. So this is absolutely unjustified by law, and it raises serious questions under the House ethics rules and other laws for Kevin McCarthy himself.”
Asked whether McCarthy’s threat constitutes obstruction of justice, Eisen responded: “It meets the elements of obstruction. It’s a threat. It’s an attempt to stop them through that threat, from turning over documents. It’s self-motivated, it’s corrupt, and McCarthy is worried about what may be in those records on him, and on members of his caucus. It’s always a challenge when you have legislative activity — and note that he did this on his official Twitter account — you have protection under the Constitution for legislators, the speech and debate clause, there will be a debate about that.
“The House Ethics Rules .. prohibit any behavior that brings discredit on the House,” Eisen added. “What could be more discreditable than threatening companies that if they comply with the law, they’ll be punished, when McCarthy has the ability to do that? So I think there’s a serious ethics issue, and then legal issues potentially that need to be explored as well.”
Eisen added there is “no question” that McCarthy had a “personal motivation” in issuing the threat.
“We know that his behavior is going to be called into question, and the committee is going to probe his exchanges with the president,” Eisen said. “We know that members of his caucus, like Matt Gaetz, Mo Brooks, Marjorie Taylor Greene, are also in the crosshairs here, and possibly many others. And it’s not just Jan. 6. The committee correctly understands that President Trump’s pattern of incitement and that of his enablers went back for months in illegitimately attacking an unquestioned electoral result and whipping people into a frenzy. So there could be some very embarrassing revelations. Remember that many members of the Republican caucus, with no basis at all, voted against certifying the election results.”
Former US Attorney Reveals He Resigned Rather Than Be Fired for Not Supporting Trump Voter Fraud Lies
The former U.S. Attorney in Atlanta revealed Wednesday he resigned just two weeks before President Donald Trump would leave office, because top DOJ officials told him Trump would fire him for refusing to say he had found widespread voter fraud in Georgia.
Byung Pak had been the U.S. Attorney since mid 2017, and his surprising resignation on January 4 raised eyebrows, and has since initiated a DOJ inspector general investigation into the cause of his sudden departure.
“Mr. Pak, who provided more than three hours of closed-door testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee,” The New York Times reported Wednesday afternoon, “testified that top department officials had made clear that Mr. Trump intended to fire him over his refusal to say that the results in Georgia had been undermined by voter fraud, the person said. Resigning would pre-empt a public dismissal.”
The Times adds that Pak “also described work done by state officials and the F.B.I. to vet Mr. Trump’s claims of voter fraud, and said they had not found evidence to support those allegations.”
This is a breaking news and developing story.
Leaked Kremlin Documents Reveal Putin Holds Blackmail Leverage Over Trump – and That’s Why Russia Backed Him
A leaked document appears to confirm rumors that the Kremlin holds blackmail leverage over former president Donald Trump.
Russian president Vladimir Putin personally authorized a secret spy agency back “mentally unstable” Trump for U.S. president during a Jan. 22, 2016, closed session of that country’s national security council, according to what appears to be leaked Kremlin documents obtained by The Guardian.
“It is acutely necessary to use all possible force to facilitate his [Trump’s] election to the post of U.S. president,” the paper says.
The documents include a brief psychological assessment of Trump as “impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex,” and also refer to “certain events” that happened during his previous trips to Moscow.
More details about those events are listed in an appendix to that document, but that portion of the papers remains undisclosed.
Those present agreed that Trump in the White House would help Russia create “social turmoil” in the U.S. and weaken the American presidency, two of Moscow’s top strategic objectives.
A decree appearing to bear Putin’s signature authorized Russia’s three spy agencies to work toward getting Trump elected, as the former reality TV star and celebrity businessman was emerging as the Republican Party’s presidential frontrunner.
- NOT EVEN CLOSE2 days ago
Sean Spicer Bitterly Complains the Press Is Treating Jen Psaki Better Than They Did Him
- TOO BAD SO SAD1 day ago
Eric Trump Melts Down on Fox News Because He’s Getting ‘Subpoena After Subpoena After Subpoena’
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days ago
Trump Supporter Wearing Dead Animal Refuses to Believe Jan. 6 Was Violent — Even After CNN Showed Him Video
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM10 hours ago
‘Brutal’: Far Right Commentator Who Threatened ‘Lead Injection’ for Anyone Trying to Vaccinate Him Contracts COVID
- WHITE PRIVILEGE12 hours ago
Watch: Texas ‘Christian Woman of God’ Derails School Board Hearing in Attempt to Ban Book That Mentions Anal Sex
- CRIME13 hours ago
NY Prosecutors ‘Aggressively’ Pursuing Trump Tax-Fraud Probe as Weisselberg Returns to Court: Report
- BREAKING NEWS11 hours ago
‘Strong Reason to Believe’ More Indictments Could Be Coming Trump Org CFO Weisselberg’s Attorney Tells Judge
- AMERICAN IDIOT7 hours ago
‘Let Me Explain to You Again Peter How Our Process Works’: Psaki, Growing Tired, Forced to School Doocy Again