,
9 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
1. Some comments on Mueller's letter. First, I was unaware earlier that it was sent March 27 three days after Barr's Sunday March 24th letter. The 24th was the morning Mueller was seen by crime scene tape at the White House. Don't think that was random. 
2. The letter released today that Barr clumsily said the Office of the AG had released looks more likely a copy leaked by the AG's office.
First, the copy has written in handwriting that the Office of the AG's received it on March 28. The upper left corner shows a blurry area
First, the copy has written in handwriting that the Office of the AG's received it on March 28. The upper left corner shows a blurry area
3. that to me evidences it was stapled and re-stapled several times. The corner was lifted when it was scanned causing it to blur. The line says funky flat office scanner but it might have been taken on a phone or tablet So why would Barr release copy that looks like it
4. was obtained surreptitiously? I go back to Barr's clumsy comment on the source of this copy released today. I think this may be the one leaked to the Senate GOP. @RepJerryNadler needs to find out who had access. I'd start by identifying whose handwriting is on it.
5. Likely a member of the career office staff. Should be easy to identify who it was.
I've been in the AG's 4th floor office at @TheJusticeDept around the staff. Had an @FBIWFO agent draw their pistol on me in the AG's galley and had to leave the room while
I've been in the AG's 4th floor office at @TheJusticeDept around the staff. Had an @FBIWFO agent draw their pistol on me in the AG's galley and had to leave the room while
6. the document safe was opened. Good fun. 😎
7. And one more fact about the document. It was not level. It was skewed in a way that makes it unlikely to have been on a normal scanner.
8. Finally, it is important to always analyze possible alternative explanations. We have no evidence Barr has attempted to shut down any part of the referred cases or the counterintelligence investigation. I'd give it less than 10% that he's taking one for the team.
9. We should know soon if that is so. But the condition of the document released looks like something Barr could have created. He had access to it and could have done it on his desk without staff help. So forensics support the 10% alternative. Barr's outrageous conduct does not.
