Democrats Bully Barr


Democrats have lashed Attorney General William Pelham Barr to the horns of a dilemma: He must choose either to violate or to obey federal law, and then await the consequences.

House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerrold Nadler of New York and other Democrats subpoenaed Barr for a pristine copy of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russiagate report, complete with grand-jury testimony. Barr did not budge. The committee then voted 24–16Wednesday to hold Barr in contempt of Congress.

Alas for Barr, he is bound by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rule 6(e)(2)(b)(vi)states: “Unless these rules provide otherwise, the following persons must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury . . . an attorney for the government.” Even more ominous, under Rule 6(e)(7), “A knowing violation of Rule 6 . . . may be punished as a contempt of court.”

So, if Barr fails to deliver Mueller’s untouched findings, the full House will vote him in contempt of Congress, “when we’re ready,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) threatened Thursday. But if he caves under Democratic pressure, a federal judge could rule him in contempt of court.

Contempt of Congress or contempt of court? Barr is like a restaurant patron staring at a menu with just two choices: arsenic salad or cream of cyanide.

Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Stephen E. Boyd reminded Nadler about this. “As we have repeatedly explained, the Attorney General could not comply with your subpoena in its current form without violating the law, court rules, and court orders, and without threatening the independence of the Department of Justice’s prosecutorial functions,” Boyd wrote Wednesday. “Rule 6(e) contains no exception that would permit the Department to provide grand-jury information to the Committee in connection with its oversight role.”

DOJ spokesperson Kerri Kupec was less diplomatic: “No one, including Chairman Nadler and his Committee, will force the Department of Justice to break the law.”

Democrats ignored this and approved their contempt motion along party lines.

Democrats cannot claim that Barr is hiding the Mueller Report. In fact, Boyd wrote Nadler, “the Attorney General offered you and other congressional leaders the chance to review the report with redactions only for grand-jury information (because disclosure of that information is prohibited by law). That would permit you to review 98.5 percent of the report, including 99.9 percent of Volume II, which discusses the investigation of the President’s actions.”

Volume II should make Democrats salivate. It features inconclusive evidence of President Trump’s possible (but uncharged) obstruction of justice. (Now that the Democrats’ Collusion coupe rusts atop cinderblocks like a Soviet-era Lada, they have sped off in their jazzy new Obstruction sedan.) Regardless, DOJ stated: “To date, not a single Democrat, including Chairman Nadler, has reviewed the minimally-redacted report,” available at Justice headquarters. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders reiterated Wednesday, “Not a single Democrat has even taken the time to go and look at it.”

Democrats are steering America into a constitutional crisis over a document, nearly all of which they already have at their fingertips — but refuse to touch. Nadler is like an infant screaming his lungs out for a brimming bottle of baby formula, even as the 98.5 percent–full bottle right beside him cools from neglect.

Ear-splitting Democrat tantrums are the only thanks that Barr gets for his transparency, which exceeds his obligations by light years. “Under federal regulations, the Special Counsel’s Report to the Attorney General is a ‘confidential report,’” DOJ explains, so “the Attorney General is under no legal requirement to disclose the report.”

Barr needed merely to inform Congress that Mueller found neither collusion nor obstruction. Barr could have scribbled this in 10 words, mailed his note, and then spent the day playing bagpipes(something Barr once did competitively). He then could have sliced the Mueller report into kindling for his summer Barrbecues.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

James Comey faced that same dilemma. He decided to go with violating the law. That decision will not work out for him.

Barr needs to uphold the law.

Ear-splitting Democrat tantrums are the only thanks that Barr gets for his transparency, which exceeds his obligations by light years.

Well, what was General Flynn’s reward for openly and willingly answering the FBI’s informal questions? How did Cohen benefit from fully complying with all requests? How about Manafort? Stone? So, are others expected to think honesty is the best policy when dealing with Democrats? Based on what, exactly?

Why do Democrats act this way? What makes them think they can get away with being SO wrong and SO extreme? Well, we can thank the liberal media; they enable it all. They are the parents of these spoiled rotten children.

the Democrats are showing their true side their ugly side the evil liberal democrats are showing their dirty lying faces

Democrats said that they only asked for the Justice Department’s assistance in court to get that material revealed.

The AG will not abet criminal behavior, whoa this is new…..

I don’t understand why charges of incitement of a crime (inchoate offense?) aren’t leveled against Mr. Nadler. Isn’t that a crime?