Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
mr6666

Impeaching Bill Barr?

Recommended Posts

Think it's time ....THIS Bozo deserves his own thread!  -_-
==================================
 
Ignoring subpoenas.
Attacking "secularists" in an official speech.
Participating in a Ukraine extortion scheme.
 
William Barr is the worst attorney general in history serving the worst president in history.
 
Both should be impeached and removed from office.
==============================================

William Barr's chilling vision of unchecked presidential power

"......It is highly unusual for the senior federal law enforcement official in the country to adopt the strident language of political pundits. Yet there Barr was, denouncing "the Left" for engaging "in the systematic shredding of norms and undermining of the rule of law," suggesting that "so-called progressives treat politics as their religion" and "holy mission," and accusing the political opposition to the administration in which he serves of using "any means necessary to gain momentary advantage in achieving their end, regardless of collateral consequences and … systematic implications."

But this tirade was part of a larger argument....

 

https://theweek.com/articles/879112/william-barrs-chilling-vision-unchecked-presidential-power

:huh:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"When Barr argues for a maximalist, unaccountable unitary executive,
 
he is not simply articulating a matter of theory or principle
 
-he is defending himself from an investigation into his own .. direct involvement in the Ukraine bribery-and-extortion plot."
 

The Barr Presidency

The attorney general calls for unchecked executive power as congressional oversight closes in on him.

"Attorney General William Barr spoke Friday night at the Federalist Society’s National Lawyers Convention, delivering a provocative attack on “the Left,” “progressives,” and “the opposition party,” paired with an aggressive and ahistorical argument for extreme executive power.
The notion that the American Revolution was against the tyranny of a monarch, Barr said, was a “grammar school civics class version” and “misguided.”

Instead, he argued, the founders, having been both oppressed by British Parliament and hampered by their first, ineffectual government, built the Constitution around “the creation of a strong executive.”

But in the present day, Barr warned, a “wrong-headed and atavistic” focus on legislative and judicial oversight has “smothered” the president’s traditional and proper authority.

It is telling—and perhaps most significant—that Barr was particularly worried about subpoenas and oversight........

When Barr argues for a maximalist, unaccountable unitary executive, he is not simply articulating a matter of theory or principle—he is defending himself from an investigation into his own work, especially his direct involvement in the Ukraine bribery-and-extortion plot. ........

The original whistleblower complaint stated its introductory paragraph, “Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.”

 

In addition to the July 25 phone call, the whistleblower also cited a series of public comments and reports from April, May, July, and August by Ukrainian officials and by Giuliani himself indicating Giuliani was working with Barr or with Barr’s designated investigator, ......

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/11/barr-speech-federalist-society-impeachment.html

<_<

 

  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Billy Barr will not be impeached. The best one can hope for is that someone will

take the old dirtbag out behind a barn and beat the holy **** out of him. :o

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Barr’s conduct has been so egregious that in normal admin he would have been fired.
Since neither that nor impeachment and removal will happen with the Trump crew,
 
state bar authorities should examine Barr’s conduct.
 
Read ethical standards for prosecutors:
" The prosecutor should seek to protect the innocent and convict the guilty, consider the interests of victims and witnesses, and respect the constitutional and legal rights of all persons, including suspects and defendants. ... The prosecutor should avoid an appearance of impropriety in performing the prosecution function. ....
 
A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. .......
 
(a) The prosecutor should know and abide by the ethical rules regarding conflicts of interest that apply in the jurisdiction, and be sensitive to facts that may raise conflict issues. When a conflict requiring recusal exists and is non-waivable, or informed consent has not been obtained, the prosecutor should recuse from further participation in the matter. The office should not go forward until a non-conflicted prosecutor, or an adequate waiver, is in place. .....
 
 
:unsure:
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr6666 said:
 
Barr’s conduct has been so egregious that in normal admin he would have been fired.
Since neither that nor impeachment and removal will happen with the Trump crew,
 
state bar authorities should examine Barr’s conduct.
 
Read ethical standards for prosecutors:
" The prosecutor should seek to protect the innocent and convict the guilty, consider the interests of victims and witnesses, and respect the constitutional and legal rights of all persons, including suspects and defendants. ... The prosecutor should avoid an appearance of impropriety in performing the prosecution function. ....
 
A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. .......
 
(a) The prosecutor should know and abide by the ethical rules regarding conflicts of interest that apply in the jurisdiction, and be sensitive to facts that may raise conflict issues. When a conflict requiring recusal exists and is non-waivable, or informed consent has not been obtained, the prosecutor should recuse from further participation in the matter. The office should not go forward until a non-conflicted prosecutor, or an adequate waiver, is in place. .....
 
 
:unsure:

What does the ethics standards for a prosecutor have to do with Bill Barr?  He is the Attorney General of the United States and does not prosecute cases.  Some of the attorneys who work for him do, but there are also attorneys that have other duties.

Regardless, he is not going to be impeached.  The Dems have enough problems with impeaching Trump.  Another impeachment would really result in losing in 2020 - still a possibility with just the Trump impeachment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, TheCid said:

What does the ethics standards for a prosecutor have to do with Bill Barr?  He is the Attorney General of the United States and does not prosecute cases.  Some of the attorneys who work for him do, but there are also attorneys that have other duties.

Regardless, he is not going to be impeached.  The Dems have enough problems with impeaching Trump.  Another impeachment would really result in losing in 2020 - still a possibility with just the Trump impeachment.

I don't know which State Bill Barr is part of the bar-association.   That state could strip Barr of his credentials (like AK did to Bill Clinton after the failed impeachment attempt),  BUT,  it would only be a symbolic move.       I.e. Barr doesn't have to have a licence to practice law in a state to be AG of the USA.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I don't know which State Bill Barr is part of the bar-association.   That state could strip Barr of his credentials (like AK did to Bill Clinton after the failed impeachment attempt),  BUT,  it would only be a symbolic move.       I.e. Barr doesn't have to have a licence to practice law in a state to be AG of the USA.

 

But stripping him of his license to practice law would look bad if he runs for Senate as is rumored.

Probably just a typing  mistake, but Clinton was impeached, just not convicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheCid said:

But stripping him of his license to practice law would look bad if he runs for Senate as is rumored.

Probably just a typing  mistake, but Clinton was impeached, just not convicted.

Barr may also run for the Senate?  I know that Mike Pompeo of Kansas was planning that.

PS:  To me when someone is impeached but NOT convicted that is a failed impeachment attempt.    (but yea,  technically I know what you're saying,  but it is nick picking to an insane degree).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Barr may also run for the Senate?  I know that Mike Pompeo of Kansas was planning that.

PS:  To me when someone is impeached but NOT convicted that is a failed impeachment attempt.    (but yea,  technically I know what you're saying,  but it is nick picking to an insane degree).

 

 

My mistake.  I was thinking about Pompeo.

Not nit picking as the impeachment attempt will be successful if the Dems succeed in voting on it.  The conviction and removal from office will be a failed attempt.  Accuracy is never nit picking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, TheCid said:

Accuracy is never nit picking.

That is the funnies thing I have seen in weeks.      Irrelevant "accuracy" is annoying.

(because you knew I knew the difference since we have covered this 100 times before!!!).

But hey,  I enjoy you post so I get over it (ha ha).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

That is the funnies thing I have seen in weeks.      Irrelevant "accuracy" is annoying.

(because you knew I knew the difference since we have covered this 100 times before!!!).

 

Actually my post was primarily for the benefit of those who still get impeachment and removal (conviction) confused.  I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt when I first noted your error.

There is no such thing as "irrelevant" accuracy.   There are people who get "annoyed" at being corrected though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Rep. Val Demings, who served 27 years in law enforcement, hits Barr:
 
"The attorney general showed that he simply does not understand the foundational values of modern American policing
 
... Law enforcement is not a protection racket. It is a sacred charge."
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
The DoJ inspector general has found that the FBI's Russia investigation was justified and untainted by political bias,
 
debunking Trump's "deep state conspiracy" nonsense. ......
 
=======================================
 
This AG Barr statement:
 
“The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that,
in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.”
 
:blink:
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, mr6666 said:
 
The DoJ inspector general has found that the FBI's Russia investigation was justified and untainted by political bias,
 
debunking Trump's "deep state conspiracy" nonsense. ......
 
=======================================
 
This AG Barr statement:
 
“The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that,
in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.”
 
:blink:

The DOJ IG also reported that the FBI investigation did at least 17 things inappropriately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, TheCid said:

The DOJ IG also reported that the FBI investigation did at least 17 things inappropriately.

which has nothing to do with the justified launch of the investigation to which Barr disagrees.  That was the point of that post. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:

which has nothing to do with the justified launch of the investigation to which Barr disagrees.  That was the point of that post. 

What I found funny was the use of "intrusive investigation";    As Cuomo pointed out on CNN;  what investigation isn't intrusive?

What will Barr say next:  they asked questions,,,    how dare they!

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

What I found funny was the use of "intrusive investigation";    As Cuomo pointed out on CNN;  what investigation isn't intrusive?

What will Barr say next:  they asked questions,,,    how dare they!

 

 

And it was unannounced and therefore did not effect the election negatively for Trump.  Unlike the ongoing efforts to derail and taint the Biden campaign in the public's perception.  And that is being done by the entire Republican party I might add.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:

And it was unannounced and therefore did not effect the election negatively for Trump.  Unlike the ongoing efforts to derail and taint the Biden campaign in the public's perception.  And that is being done by the entire Republican party I might add.

Also I could add unlike that Comey BS investigation on Hillary Clinton's emails  during the 2016 presidential campaign.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Princess of Tap said:

Also I could add unlike that Comey BS investigation on Hillary Clinton's emails  during the 2016 presidential campaign.

You sadly play right into the hands of many independent voters that view most,  if not all, such "political" investigations as BS.

The Clinton e-mail investigation was warranted.      Clinton and her staff were clumpy at best and that needed to be exposed. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

You sadly play right into the hands of many independent voters that view most,  if not all, such "political" investigations as BS.

The Clinton e-mail investigation was warranted.      Clinton and her staff were clumpy at best and that needed to be exposed. 

 

True but the announcement of said investigation with two weeks left in the election was an abomination.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Sen. Harris tells Horowitz he has a duty to investigate Barr for misconduct
in acting as Trump's personal attorney instead of AG.
 
Horowitz insists he lacks authority because he reads his authorizing legislation to take all DOJ attorneys, including the AG
out of his jurisdiction.
 
:huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
1) The full William Barr interview with NBC is now online, and it's much worse than we thought.
There's a very serious deception at the core of Barr's effort to validate Trump's lies that is more dangerous than it first appears.....
 
4) Barr is burying the fact that intel officials were reacting to an *attack on our political system.*
 
Barr is helping Trump rewrite 2016, and helping him escape accountability for corrupting our democracy from 2016 through the present..........
=======================================
 
Replying to
 
Pete Williams did a lousy interview of Barr; he tacitly accepted Barr's ground rules to talk only about the IG report,
 
and never mentioned the six members of Trump's campaign found guilty,
or the 152 contacts the Trump campaign had with Russians,
and 50 plus lies Mueller found
 
<_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

William Barr is unfit to be attorney general

Opinion    By Eric Holder    Read more »

if you can't read WaPo articles........

William Barr's Conduct for Trump 'Will Wreak Lasting Damage' Says Ex-Attorney General: 'He Is Unfit to Lead'

 

".......Eric Holder, who served as attorney general in the Obama administration from 2009 to 2015, wrote in an op-ed for The Washington Post that Barr was "until recently a widely respected lawyer" and that he hoped his successor would "serve as a responsible steward of the department."

"Virtually since the moment he took office, though, Barr's words and actions have been fundamentally inconsistent with his duty to the Constitution," Holder wrote in the Post. "Which is why I now fear that his conduct—running political interference for an increasingly lawless president—will wreak lasting damage."...........

"The American people deserve an attorney general who serves their interests, leads the Justice Department with integrity and can be entrusted to pursue the facts and the law, even—and especially—when they are politically inconvenient and inconsistent with the personal interests of the president who appointed him," Holder wrote in the Post.

"William Barr has proved he is incapable of serving as such an attorney general. He is unfit to lead the Justice Department.".....

https://www.newsweek.com/william-barr-attorney-general-eric-holder-post-trump-1476865?utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=NewsweekTwitter&utm_medium=Social

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

© 2019 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...