,
31 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
Graham has now moved on to the most crucial topic facing the DOJ right now: the Clinton e-mail server.
Graham is claiming the Clinton investigation cannot be trusted, because it was led by people who said intensely critical things of Trump.
If that's the case, I've got some bad news about the Senate Judiciary Committee's work.
If that's the case, I've got some bad news about the Senate Judiciary Committee's work.
Senator Graham is very upset that FBI agents could have questioned whether Trump was an acceptable presidential candidate. 
The Special Counsel regulations, as currently written, preclude any Special Counsel from finding that a president engaged in wrongdoing. Which means a Special Counsel's investigation into POTUS can never accomplish the reason it exists in the first place.
Barr is claiming that, in a private meeting, Mueller told him that it was not because of the OLC opinion that he decided against charging Trump. This claim is contradicted by Mueller's own report.
Barr says Mueller's primary objection to Barr's summary had to do with why Mueller did not reach a conclusion on obstruction.
In other words, Mueller objected to what Lindsey Graham was just claiming at the start of the hearing: that Mueller left the decision to Barr.
In other words, Mueller objected to what Lindsey Graham was just claiming at the start of the hearing: that Mueller left the decision to Barr.
Barr testifies that he was "surprised" Mueller was going to let him decide on obstruction.
This is exactly what Barr just said Mueller called him and told him he'd misled the public about.
This is exactly what Barr just said Mueller called him and told him he'd misled the public about.
Barr is arguing that Trump wasn't "firing" Mueller, because it's possible he was open to a new Special Counsel being appointed after Mueller was removed.
Holy shit.
Barr is straight-up asserting that the president can order White House legal counsel to lie in order to prevent his actions from being negatively portrayed. Even in the context of an ongoing DOJ investigation.
Barr is straight-up asserting that the president can order White House legal counsel to lie in order to prevent his actions from being negatively portrayed. Even in the context of an ongoing DOJ investigation.
As long as Trump can claim his concern was not being badly depicted in the media, Barr does not believe obstruction can ever be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Attorney General believes that President Trump is free to obstruct justice at will.
The Attorney General believes that President Trump is free to obstruct justice at will.
There is no scenario in which Trump couldn't claim he was concerned an investigation would impede his ability to govern, or might make him look bad in the media.
The AG's position would mean that obstruction laws no longer apply politicians.
The AG's position would mean that obstruction laws no longer apply politicians.
Barr: "If Mueller had found [Trump committed obstruction], I think he would have said that."
Mueller's report: 'Under no conditions would I have ever said that.'
Mueller's report: 'Under no conditions would I have ever said that.'
Barr is now claiming he doesn't understand why Mueller didn't reach a conclusion on obstruction. He is either lying, or too dumb to be Attorney General.
Barr's response to a question about his April 9 testimony: it was never specified which members of Mueller's team the question was referring to.
Barr: "My view of events is that there was a lot of criticism of the Special Counsel" after Barr summary was released, so Mueller's concern was not Barr but the criticism of himself.
Barr is claiming that because Mueller didn't write, "If not for OLC opinion, I would indict," Barr was correct in claiming OLC opinion was not the basis of Mueller's decision.
Again, Mueller's report says that *because of* the OLC opinion, he will not say that he would indict.
Again, Mueller's report says that *because of* the OLC opinion, he will not say that he would indict.
On April 9, Barr was asked if he knew why members of SCO were "frustrated with the limited information included in your letter." Barr said, "No."
Barr's testimony today, on why his April 9 testimony wasn't a lie:
Barr's testimony today, on why his April 9 testimony wasn't a lie:
This is insane. Barr is arguing he didn't commit perjury on April 9th, because the only concern he knew that the SCO had was the *exact same concern* that he was asked about on April 9th, and he testified he had no knowledge about.
Barr: "I assumed that there no OLC opinion."
We need Mueller in here to address whether he would indicted Trump if he had been free to assume the same thing.
We need Mueller in here to address whether he would indicted Trump if he had been free to assume the same thing.
Good for Whitehouse getting back to Barr's "spying" comment before House Appropriations.
Barr responds that spying is a great thing, he meant nothing bad by "spying."
Barr responds that spying is a great thing, he meant nothing bad by "spying."
It's not that I want to give any credit to Barr's disingenuous performance today... but I can't help but wonder if he actually hasn't read the Mueller report.
Barr agrees with Tillis that Mueller's report, which details the indictment of 37 people and corporations, does not contain any underlying crimes.
Harris asks if the White House has suggested he open an investigation into anyone.
Barr stalls.
She asks again.
He's still stalling.
Barr stalls.
She asks again.
He's still stalling.
Barr finally says he doesn't know if anyone at the White House has suggested he open an investigation into anyone.
Barr now says that he hasn't looked at anything about Mueller's investigation *beyond* the Mueller report.
Crapo is going on about how damaging and wrong it is for someone to mention the fact Barr lied in the April 9th hearing about what Mueller had told him.
Cruz thinks the FBI/DOJ was "politicized" under Obama to go after opponents.
Which must be why the FBI held press conferences disparaging Clinton and reopened an investigation into her days before the election, but never said anything about the Trump investigation until after.
Which must be why the FBI held press conferences disparaging Clinton and reopened an investigation into her days before the election, but never said anything about the Trump investigation until after.
Barr isn't mincing words now: if a president believes an investigation into him is factually unfounded, he is free to terminate that investigation.
Klobuchar: How can a president be held politically accountable if he refuses to abide by congressional subpoenas and investigations?
Barr: Well, presidents have been held accountable before.
To Barr, there is no check on the president's power beyond his ability to be re-elected.
Barr: Well, presidents have been held accountable before.
To Barr, there is no check on the president's power beyond his ability to be re-elected.
Barr is now dismissing Mueller's letter as "a bit snitty" and probably not actually written by Mueller himself.
Again, I am so wary of falling into the trap of believing anything Barr says... but I also just can't rule out the possibility that Barr doesn't know anything about this case beyond what's been widely reported in the media. And often not even that.
