Barr attempts to fire US Attorney for SDNY, who refuses to step down (1 Viewer)

[GrandAdmiral]

Well it will be interesting what develops from this over the next few weeks...

Powerful US attorney who investigated Trump associates refuses to step down after Barr tries to push him out | CNN Politics

In a fast-escalating crisis Friday night, Attorney General William Barr tried to oust Geoffrey Berman, the powerful US attorney for the Southern District of New York who has investigated a number of associates of President Donald Trump, but Berman defied him by refusing to step down.

www.cnn.com

Moral of the story: don't piss off the fair leader.

 

[Ayo]

I try to be measured in my opinions and not invest too much into the hyperbolics or extremes. And I'm not really an expert on judicial history at all. So I want to circumscribe what I'm about to say with all of these caveats.

The impression that I get is that this could be a pretty unbelievable scandal for an AG or a DOJ.

Two questions.

One, does anyone suppose that Barr's allegiance is to Trump, the person, or the position of President and executive power? Or a mix of both?

Secondly, where would or could this scandal rank historically?

I'd have a third, but I don't think Barr has any chance of being impeached or otherwise held accountable, right?

 

[SaintForLife]

It also was reported yesterday that Barr tried to meddle in the Michael Cohen case in SDNY after his guilty plea. So in short, Barr’s to-do list as AG has consisted of exonerating and protecting Trump and his allies and targeting anyone standing in the way of that.

When I have time later today, I’m going to start a thread that catalogues all of Barr’s destruction. Just so we can keep track as he and Trump get more brazen in their corruption in the weeks to come.

Do you really think that Trump considers Cohen to still be one of his allies after everything that Cohen said about Trump?

Trump urges court to throw the book at Michael Cohen

"He lied for this outcome and should, in my opinion, serve a full and complete sentence," the president wrote on Twitter of his former lawyer.

www.politico.com

 

[TaylorB]

Do you really think that Trump considers Cohen to still be one of his allies after everything that Cohen said about Trump?

Trump urges court to throw the book at Michael Cohen

"He lied for this outcome and should, in my opinion, serve a full and complete sentence," the president wrote on Twitter of his former lawyer.

www.politico.com

Do you really think there was no benefit to Trump in Barr undermining the Cohen case in which Trump was an unindicted co-conspirator at the time Barr became AG?

 

[SaintForLife]

Do you really think there was no benefit to Trump in Barr undermining the Cohen case in which Trump was an unindicted co-conspirator at the time Barr became AG?

The New York Times article claimed that Barr tried to undermine the case against Cohen correct? So Barr didn't actually undermine the case correct? The constant things that we are supposed to be outraged that Trump or Barr thought about, tried doing, but never ending up doing is getting hard to keep up with. That sounds similar to removing the SDNY US Attorney. Let me know when Barr actually interferes with the SDNY investigation and then there will be something to get upset about. Otherise, I'll just be waiting for the next manufacturered outrage of the week.

 

[Dragon]

The New York Times article claimed that Barr tried to undermine the case against Cohen correct? So Barr didn't actually undermine the case correct? The constant things that we are supposed to be outraged that Trump or Barr thought about, tried doing, but never ending up doing is getting hard to keep up with. That sounds similar to removing the SDNY US Attorney. Let me know when Barr actually interferes with the SDNY investigation and then there will be something to get upset about. Otherise, I'll just be waiting for the next manufacturered outrage of the week.

By using your logic a bankrobber who tries to rob a bank but fails, should not be convicted because he actually never managed to rob the bank?

AFAIK it is just as much against the law to attemp to commit a crime as it is to actually do it

 

[Ayo]

AFAIK it is just as much against the law to attemp to commit a crime as it is to actually do it

I’ve seen Tiger King

 

[SaintForLife]

By using your logic a bankrobber who tries to rob a bank but fails, should not be convicted because he actually never managed to rob the bank?

AFAIK it is just as much against the law to attemp to commit a crime as it is to actually do it

If there's no proof that he tried to rob a bank other than some unnamed sources in a news article, then that person shouldn't be convicted.

 

[FullMonte]

The New York Times article claimed that Barr tried to undermine the case against Cohen correct? So Barr didn't actually undermine the case correct? The constant things that we are supposed to be outraged that Trump or Barr thought about, tried doing, but never ending up doing is getting hard to keep up with. That sounds similar to removing the SDNY US Attorney. Let me know when Barr actually interferes with the SDNY investigation and then there will be something to get upset about. Otherise, I'll just be waiting for the next manufacturered outrage of the week.

It's interesting that you appear to more concerned with trying to keep up with the number of things that Trump and Barr have tried to do....instead of being concerned that they are trying to do so many undheranded, improper, or suspect things.

 

[MT15]

The New York Times article claimed that Barr tried to undermine the case against Cohen correct? So Barr didn't actually undermine the case correct? The constant things that we are supposed to be outraged that Trump or Barr thought about, tried doing, but never ending up doing is getting hard to keep up with. That sounds similar to removing the SDNY US Attorney. Let me know when Barr actually interferes with the SDNY investigation and then there will be something to get upset about. Otherise, I'll just be waiting for the next manufacturered outrage of the week.

you really revealed yourself here; I don’t think you meant to. So as long as Barr just tries to interfere with DOJ cases to protect Trump from legal jeopardy, or to get special treatment for Trump’s buddies, it’s fine as long as he doesn’t get away with it? And speaking out and condemning those attempts are “manufactured outrage”?

 

[SaintForLife]

you really revealed yourself here; I don’t think you meant to. So as long as Barr just tries to interfere with DOJ cases to protect Trump from legal jeopardy, or to get special treatment for Trump’s buddies, it’s fine as long as he doesn’t get away with it? And speaking out and condemning those attempts are “manufactured outrage”?

Can you cite anything besides an article that shows Barr tried to interfere with DOJ cases?

 

[FullMonte]

Can you cite anything besides an article that shows Barr tried to interfere with DOJ cases?

For clarification: Would you consider a transcript of a Congressional witness' testimony where he stated directly that the head of the Justice Department's Corruption Unit was being pressured to go easy on Roger Stone "an article"? I mean, there can't be many people other than Barr who can pressure the head of that department.

 

[MT15]

I didn’t want to start a new thread about this, so it sort of fits here. As it happens, the Senate Intelligence Committee referred several members of the Trump campaign and the Trump family to the DOJ in 2019 because they had uncovered lies told to Congress during sworn testimony. And, no surprise from me, nothing seems to have happened. I guess Bill Barr’s DOJ doesn’t care about lying when done to cover up misdeeds if the President is involved?

Someone was apparently upset about the cronyism and corruption enough to show the letter to the LA Times.

Senate committee sought investigation of Bannon, raised concerns about Trump family testimony

The Senate Intelligence Committee believed former Trump confidant Stephen K. Bannon may have lied to Congress, according to a letter obtained by The Times.

www.latimes.com

“It also raised concerns about testimony provided by family members and confidants of President Trump that appeared to contradict information provided by a former deputy campaign chairman to Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III. Those it identified as providing such conflicting testimony were the president’s son Donald Trump Jr., his son-in-law Jared Kushner, former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks.

The letter, which has not before been made public, was sent July 19, 2019, to Deborah Curtis, a top prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington. It is not clear what action the Justice Department has taken on the referral. Kerri Kupec, a Justice Department spokeswoman, declined to comment.”

 

[Saintamaniac]

I didn’t want to start a new thread about this, so it sort of fits here. As it happens, the Senate Intelligence Committee referred several members of the Trump campaign and the Trump family to the DOJ in 2019 because they had uncovered lies told to Congress during sworn testimony. And, no surprise from me, nothing seems to have happened. I guess Bill Barr’s DOJ doesn’t care about lying when done to cover up misdeeds if the President is involved?

Someone was apparently upset about the cronyism and corruption enough to show the letter to the LA Times.

Senate committee sought investigation of Bannon, raised concerns about Trump family testimony

The Senate Intelligence Committee believed former Trump confidant Stephen K. Bannon may have lied to Congress, according to a letter obtained by The Times.

www.latimes.com

“It also raised concerns about testimony provided by family members and confidants of President Trump that appeared to contradict information provided by a former deputy campaign chairman to Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III. Those it identified as providing such conflicting testimony were the president’s son Donald Trump Jr., his son-in-law Jared Kushner, former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks.

The letter, which has not before been made public, was sent July 19, 2019, to Deborah Curtis, a top prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington. It is not clear what action the Justice Department has taken on the referral. Kerri Kupec, a Justice Department spokeswoman, declined to comment.”

Oh, don't worry. Those people won't be off the hook when trump loses. There's a 5 year statute of limitation on perjury. The new senate and the new AG can certainly bring charges against them. There will be no looking the other way for the good of the country. For the good of the country, every single trump administration official including trump family members will need to stand trial.