Let’s unpack this.
1) why should we believe Barr (or his lackeys) when we know that Barr lied to the public that Berman “stepped down”?
2) Berman was Trump’s pick for the job. Yet Berman has not been compliant with the Trump/Barr political playbook.
1) why should we believe Barr (or his lackeys) when we know that Barr lied to the public that Berman “stepped down”?
2) Berman was Trump’s pick for the job. Yet Berman has not been compliant with the Trump/Barr political playbook.
3) US Attorneys chosen by the President are NEVER fired 5 months before a presidential election. It’s laughable to assert that it was simply to make room for someone who was never a prosecutor or even a litigator.
4) Since impeachment, Trump has been on a disloyalty purge.
4) Since impeachment, Trump has been on a disloyalty purge.
5) Trump/Barr originally wanted to place an interim US Attorney from outside SDNY, which also never happens when US Attorneys do step down. That indicates they did not want someone within the SDNY to be leading the office — who would likely continue the ongoing investigations.
6) Berman made a point to add in his statement Friday night that the investigations would continue without fear or favor, as the oath requires. That addition was unnecessary to respond to Barr’s lie about Berman stepping down. It was clearly a message.
So what does it all add up to? Something unusual and fishy for sure. But the circumstantial evidence supports the conclusion that Trump/Barr were acting in bad faith.
Now we need hearings to learn more. If they were acting in good faith, it should be easy to show.
Now we need hearings to learn more. If they were acting in good faith, it should be easy to show.
