Barr Will Testify

PUBLISHED: 7:18 PM 13 Feb 2020
UPDATED: 7:23 PM 13 Feb 2020

Be Careful What You Wish For: Barr To Testify Before House Dems

This is almost too good to be true!

Democrats just orchestrated a huge mistake. (Source: The Guardian YouTube Screenshot)

Democrats just made a giant mistake. They were (supposedly) furious when the Department of Justice recalled the outrageously excessive sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone, and immediately started the “favoritism” narrative.

Jerrold Nadler went the full step and wrote a scathing letter to Attorney General William Barr, demanding he answer for his conduct in front of Congress, despite the fact that no explanation is needed for anyone with half a brain.

Nadler is also angry over the fact that the Justice Department is actually doing its job and providing a process to review information about potential Ukraine crimes.

But although Barr has refused these sorts of democrat-led ploys in the past, he surprisingly agreed to appear before the Judiciary Committee on March 31. Why would he do this? There’s a specific reason, and it could spell doom for democrats who want desperately to hide the previous sins of the former administration.

In fact, it appears as if rather than orchestrating the events, democrats have just fallen into a trap set by Barr.

Conservative Treehouse examined Nadler’s letter and explained just why Nadler has made a HUGE mistake… HUGE:

Chairman Nadler says in his letter: “we have repeatedly warned you and your predecessors that the misuse of our criminal justice system for political purposes is both dangerous to our democracy and unacceptable to the House Judiciary Committee.”

The HJC goes on to say: “In your tenure as Attorney General, you have engaged in a pattern of conduct in legal matters relating to the President that raises significant concerns for this Committee. In the past week alone, you have taken steps that raise grave questions about your leadership of the Department of Justice.”…

So what are the three pressing issues that Chairman Nadler says “are enough to require our immediate attention”?


  • The ongoing developments following the removal of U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu, who oversaw the prosecutions of President Trump’s deputy campaign chairman Rick Gates, President Trump’s former national security advisor Michael Flynn, and President Trump’s longtime political adviser Roger Stone.

See?  The HJC and Lawfare staff are clueless.

First, AG Barr previously slobbered all over Jessie Liu; he couldn’t praise her enough.  Barr had zero conversation with President Trump about withdrawing the nomination, and only gained an understanding of the Liu concerns independent from President Trump.

The Lawfare crew has no idea what they are walking into if they start down the path of asking about why Jessie Liu was: (a) removed; and (b) had her nomination withdrawn.

For all intents and purposes AG Barr is an ally of Ms. Liu, and it only highlights the independence of his office that President Trump’s action is independent.

  • The creation of a new “process” by which President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani can feed the Department of Justice information, through you, about the President’s political rivals.

The “process” of receiving information on possible criminal conduct is open to anyone and everyone to report, including all Americans.

Obviously the HJC and Democrats writ large are worried about their financial schemes to exploit wealth and sell influence may be hampered by any corruption investigation of Ukraine…. but more importantly, they are seeking to find out how much their own activity is exposed.

I cannot think of a single bullet-point easier for Barr to have fun with than a committee that is verklempt about the U.S. Department of Justice allowing people to report possible criminal activity.  The entire framework of their argument is silly and fraught with pretzel logic.

That’s the purpose of the justice system, to allow people a process to rectify criminal activity.

Secondly, didn’t the same House Committee just spend months complaining about Giuliani operating independent investigations?… and not following the “established processes and norms”?   Now they don’t want Giuliani to be allowed to contact the DOJ and engage in long established processes and norms?  Their argument is circular.

  • The decision to overrule your career prosecutors and significantly reduce the recommended sentence for Roger Stone, who has been convicted for lying under oath, at the apparent request of the President — a decision that led to all four prosecutors handling the case to withdraw from the proceedings in protest.

This point of oversight concern opens up a world of opportunity for AG Barr to lay out how members of the Mueller team were rogue prosecutors.  Truth is the greatest disinfectant and Bill Barr has actual examples of tiered-justice based on political bias.  Again, the point they are concerned about will backfire; bigly.

“These are not the only issues that our Committee intends to discuss with you when you appear, but they are enough to require our immediate attention”…

This March 31st hearing should be buckets of fun.

Lastly, why March 31st?

All of the points raised by the HJC are transparently easy to knock down now.  Why postpone for two months?  The likely answer is John Durham will be finished…. drops of information therein will take place…. the hearing is pre-scheduled… etc.

The HJC has just boxed themselves in to holding a hearing…. Think about it.

Remember, the HJC never held a hearing about the IG Horowitz FISA report because that type of hearing is adverse to the political interests of Democrats in the House.  They don’t want to hold hearing where former administration DOJ & FBI abuses are discussed.  However, now AG Bill Barr has a hearing scheduled on the books.  Now AG Bill Barr has a date on the congressional calendar the House cannot avoid.

Now AG Bill Barr has a target date and two months to coordinate releasing the information gathered from within John Durham’s investigation.  Release the Durham information a week prior to March 31st and the HJC is trapped into a holding a hearing about topics they don’t want to see public.

This is epic. And the repercussions of Lawfare and Nadler’s schemes could echo for decades.