Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Mind The Gap
In The Atlantic, I react to Attorney General Barr’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee today:
“Criticism of Barr’s summary makes much ado about nothing. Barr released the Mueller report just a few weeks later, with the crucial second volume on obstruction of justice virtually unredacted. Members of Congress and the public can reach their own judgments now on the Mueller report’s findings on obstruction. How Barr characterized Mueller’s findings makes no difference.
But fixating on who wrote and said what about someone’s characterization of someone else’s report deflects attention from the most important thing about Barr’s letter: The attorney general did not just summarize Mueller’s conclusions; he also filled the gap left by Mueller’s refusal to decide on obstruction.”
Read the whole thing, as they say.
Published in General
You could have stated the Democrats position more succinctly:
The Mueller report said (1) there were no crimes but (2) nevertheless, the Orange Man is still icky and bad. Barr reported/summarized (1) but declined to repeat (2) and so he is also icky and bad, therefore we Democrats have a right to be ever so cross. Barr had no right to not restate immaterial insinuations, innuendo or anything that could be construed as badness. Releasing the entire report instead of an early release of only the parts that indicate that Trump is a mean, nasty guy was unfair.
You could then conclude that
In this nation’s long proud history of partisan stunts, posturing and empty gestures, the Democrats’ current attacks on Barr will someday be enshrined as one one the dumbest, emptiests, most self-beclowning moments. Ever.
But it was still a pretty good article even with all the extra words.
I love the “Hand Picked Attorney General ” slur.
Duh. Exactly how every single Attorney General has been picked in the past….
If you read the entire article, Prof. Yoo seems to welcome impeachment.
We know what real obstruction looks like: destroying 30,000 emails, smashing a dozen blackberries with a sledgehammer, erasing backup tapes, etc.
I like to ask them a trick question: who was JFK‘s Attorney General?
Which recent AG said, “I am the president’s wingman” ?
I disagree. I read it as impeachment being a better method of prosecuting a president than special prosecutors, special councils, or regular DOJ methods. Since prosecution is effectively political, then a political process (impeachment) is best.
Someone should make a post about this.
I kind of did by comparing this article against the post by the NR Editors
http://ricochet.com/619111/barr-nr-and-the-bulwark/
Thank you
Noooooooooooooo. Please no more ads for this ridiculous BS deranged hate Trump publication.
My point is, it seems pretty outlandish, but this isn’t my bag. It looks too stupid to be in fiction, but what do I know?
I am deeply ashamed of Ricochet anytime that publication is referenced. I have begged Gary to keep his posts on this publication on the “Members Only” page.
P.S. You probably know more than I do. But I know a Trump Derangement Syndrome publication when I get tricked into clicking a link. And my eyes start to bleed.
I am not tricking anyone.
I’m trying to understand how these guys think, or how deranged they actually are.
But there was no “intent” there.
Tom Nichols, Bill Kristol, Rick Wilson et. al. are so pissed off at Barr.
I wonder what Mona and Jay are going to say. Etc.
Mona just posted.
http://ricochet.com/619172/a-tale-of-two-obstructions/?utm_source=onesignal
I’m moving to Honduras.
ETTD. Barr had an enviable reputation until he decided to cap off his career as spinner in chief to Trump. If there is anything important it is a man attaching his life’s reputation to distorting the plain meaning of another man’s words. Trump is a reprobate that should not be President. He tried time and time again to thwart the completion of this investigation by obstructing justice corruptly using the powers of his office to dangle pardons, to suborn perjury, to get honest men fired for unjust reasons, to fabricate phony memos, etc. and Barr claims it’s all the act of a petulant frustrated man that anyone can understand being angry.
I have consistently said there should be an investigation of team Hillary and team Obama’s misuse of the Justice Department and agencies, led by someone respected by conservatives and Trumpkins, but to say that there was no smoke worth checking out is ridiculous
What are you referencing?
Calling people who testify “rats” telling guys like Flynn to hang in there we’re watching out for you…
I get that this isn’t your point but IMO, Flynn should be pardoned.