Attorney General Bill Barr has been vocal about the investigation of President Trump.
He often calls the sham into question when addressing the media. In fact, Barr’s position vexed Democrats and then-Special Persecutor Bob Mueller.
Special counsel Robert Mueller expressed frustration to Attorney General William Barr last month about how the findings of his Russia investigation were being portrayed, saying he worried that a letter summarizing the main conclusions of the probe lacked the necessary context and was creating public confusion about his team’s work
Barr’s comments absolutely created “public confusion”, because Barr exposed the truth about the sham investigation.
Barr was previously criticized for his summary of Mueller’s investigation, which he said concludes that neither the Trump campaign nor any of its associates conspired with Russia to influence the 2016 election. Mueller wrote a letter to the Justice Department in May expressing his concerns that Barr’s four-page summary did not fully capture the “context, nature, and substance” of his findings.
Democrats pushed back, claiming that Barr is in the bag for President Trump. And they often referenced Mueller’s feeble indictments.
Congressman Ted Lieu tweeted:
“Special counselor Mueller indicted 34 individuals and companies, at least eight have been convicted or pled guilty. He found that Russia systematically and sweepingly interfered in our U.S. elections. What Bill Barr is now trying to do is essentially tell the American people none of that should have happened. It is deeply troubling what Bill Barr is doing.”
Recently, Democrats united their media minions in an effort to discredit Barr. Barr actually laughed at the attempt. That’s when Democrats knew that big troubles lie ahead.
Indeed. Big Troubles for Democrats.
Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?
Only a day or so before the breaking news regarding Clinesmith, the AG declared that the coming announcement about Durham’s investigation was “not earth-shattering”.
Really. A LEGIT guilty plea from the FBI attorney is “not earth-shattering”. How is that even possible?
Even the smallest bit of information regarding Durham’s report is earth-shattering to a public starving for information on this case. Americans have been waiting on any modicum of an update, so much so that simply announcing a date for information would be considered “earth-shattering”.
But we got more than that. Much more.
After years of waiting for something, anything that resembled justice, America got an Obama-era Department of Injustice crook to admit he lied. He altered documents! That’s huge by any standards.
So how could Barr possibly suggest that an actual guilty plea from the FBI’s crooked attorney, the man who falsified the documents to the FISA court was not earth-shattering?Barr had to know in advance that Clinesmith agreed to plead guilty. And while Clinesmith was certainly no Comey as far as perpetrators go, he’s far enough up the food chain for Barr to know that the new was indeed earth-shattering.
Where does Clinesmith rank?
As Fox News adds:
Durham’s office on Wednesday said that Clinesmith’s guilty plea was to “one count of making a false statement within both the jurisdiction of the executive branch and judicial branch of the U.S. government, an offense that carries a maximum term of imprisonment of five years and a fine of up to $250,000.”
Clinesmith was referred for potential prosecution by the Justice Department’s inspector general’s office, which conducted its own review of the Russia investigation.
The inspector general accused Clinesmith, though not by name, of altering an email about former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page to say that he was “not a source” for another government agency.
Page has said he was a source for the CIA.
The Justice Department relied on Clinesmith’s assertion as it submitted a third and final renewal application in 2017 to eavesdrop on Page under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
During the plea hearing, Boasberg asked Clinesmith to affirm that he “intentionally altered an email, and added language” that “individual number one” was “not a source…and you knew that statement was in fact not true.”
Clinesmith replied, “At the time I thought the information I was providing was accurate, but I am agreeing the information I inserted was not originally there, and I inserted the information.”
Boasberg went on to ask: “You intentionally altered the email to insert information that was not originally in the email?”
“Yes, your honor,” replied Clinesmith.
Talk about eating humble pie. So the plea by Clinesmith wasn’t unexpected by me. And as I predicted last year, “the buck won’t stop with Clinesmith.”
Which brings me back to AG Barr.
The reason Barr said the news about Clinesmith was “not earth-shattering” is simple. Barr knows what other news is yet to come.
I suggest Democrats buckle up. Because it’s going to be a ride that will make Freddie Gray’s van ride look like smooth sailing.