WTF Community

The Impeachment of President Donald J. Trump

Bill Barr attacks FBI for ‘bad faith’ probe of Trump campaign in bonkers interview -

AG Bill Barr tries to rescue Trump from Justice Dept findings

I listened to it. He confuses “Wikipedia” with “Wikileaks” and keeps pushing conspiracy theories and lies in DIRECT opposition to what actually happened.

And yes, he’s pushing the “the Durham report will be the REAL report” line.
image

Expect more Barr interviews. Apparently the latest WH strategy is to send Bill Barr on a series of interviews and press conferences to tear down and lie about the IG report, insist the Durham report will get it right, and generally run damage control for Trump.

This is NOT what a real Attorney General does.

The Pete Williams interview of Barr is getting lambasted for effectively allowing him to spew propaganda with no pushback whatsoever.




2 Likes

WATCH: House Democrats Announce Articles of Impeachment

House Democrats held a news conference to announce specific articles of impeachment against President Trump.

4 Likes

Inspector General’s Report Shows Trump’s “Spygate” Conspiracy Theory Was the Real Hoax

But this won’t stop the Deep State-truthers from denying Trump’s complicity.

4 Likes

Just have to mark this one with a semi BOOM

I think because the Impeachment articles were so few and sparse compared to what could have occurred. All of it strategically planned.

3 Likes

CNow that the House hearings are history, it might be nice to update the list of GOP stunts. The obstructive tactics and kabuki of the last day was really the cherry on top. I almost sprayed my coffee out at Sensenbrenner’s “badgering the witness” comment. I’m sure there will be plenty more going forward but there is something about being the minority that makes them crank the weird meter right into the red zone. I wish I had the time and talent to turn Jordan’s rants into a carefully edited piece of absurdist theater. So much gold there. Ala “ Bad Lipreading”

3 Likes

I’ll update Thursday, I want to include the vote so I can take a break for the weekend.

Cross-posting :boom:

4 Likes

And WaPo is all in.

Then House of Representatives is moving toward a momentous decision about whether to impeach a president for only the third time in U.S. history. The charges brought against President Trump by the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday are clear: that he abused his office in an attempt to induce Ukraine’s new president to launch politicized investigations that would benefit Mr. Trump’s reelection campaign, and that he willfully obstructed the subsequent congressional investigation.

Because of that unprecedented stonewalling, and because House Democrats have chosen to rush the impeachment process, the inquiry has failed to collect important testimony and documentary evidence that might strengthen the case against the president. Nevertheless, it is our view that more than enough proof exists for the House to impeach Mr. Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, based on his own actions and the testimony of the 17 present and former administration officials who courageously appeared before the House Intelligence Committee.

We believe Mr. Trump should receive a full trial in the Senate, and it is our hope that more senior officials will decide or be required to testify during that proceeding, so that senators, and the country, can make a fair and considered judgment about whether Mr. Trump should be removed from office. We have reserved judgment on that question. What is important, for now, is that the House determine whether Mr. Trump’s actions constituted an abuse of power meriting his impeachment and trial.

4 Likes





image

3 Likes

WATCH: Justice Department IG Testifies on FISA Abuse Allegations, Part 1

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Ranking Member Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) opening statements on report on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) abuse allegations related to the 2016 presidential election.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?466593-1/justice-department-ig-testifies-fisa-abuse-allegations


WATCH: Justice Department IG Testifies on FISA Abuse Allegations, Part 2

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz discusses his report on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) abuse allegations related to the 2016 presidential election.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?466593-3/justice-department-ig-testifies-fisa-abuse-allegations

3 Likes

I’ve watched a bit of this. It’s rife with GOP propaganda and lies. I am happy to see Sen. Durbin pushed back on this.

2 Likes

DiFi had some good questions and answers too. I’ll find some highlights later.

2 Likes

Here’s some recapping on the difference between what Bill Barr wants to come out of the two IG reports and what actually has been said. There is a lot grandstanding on Barr’s part to get his two IGers to agree with him…but looks like Durham is the more malleable one.

3 Likes

This is a deeply detailed review of IG’s report…

Here’s an easy recap.

Coverage of hearings - update (I have 3 already in this Impeachment list)

Update: Kamala Harris going after Barr and Trump via Giuliani/Firtash connection

update - From the start Sen Graham has been terrible with his short sighted and biased vision, or a T loyalist.

3 Likes

President Trump is openly telegraphing that he fully expects his attorney general to validate one of his biggest lies: that the real crime in 2016 wasn’t Russia’s sabotaging of our election but rather the decision by law enforcement to investigate it.

New public comments from William P. Barr provide Trump with ample grounds for being confident that Barr will deliver for him.

But Barr’s latest claims about the Russia investigation rest on a serious misrepresentation that has not gotten the focus it deserves — and is more pernicious than it first appears.

In a much-discussed interview with NBC News, Barr criticized the Department of Justice’s inspector general for concluding that the FBI’s launch of an investigation into Russian interference — and potential Trump campaign coordination with it — had a legitimate basis.

Barr’s full interview is now online, and it’s worse than you thought. It whitewashes away a crucial aspect of the I.G.’s conclusions in a way that’s easy to overlook but serves Trump’s political needs in deeply disingenuous fashion.

One key argument Barr makes is that the FBI’s decision to launch that investigation had a “very flimsy” basis that lacked “sufficient predication.”

Barr casts this as rooted in deeply held pro-democracy principles. He claims “the incumbent government used the apparatus of the state” to “spy on political opponents,” in a way that could have affected “the outcome of the election” and thus posed a “danger to our free system.”

Barr claims there was never any serious evidence of “collusion” and excoriates the FBI for having an inadequate basis for launching the investigation, given the “very potent powers” the FBI has at its disposal. “At the end of the day,” he asks, “is what you’re relying on sufficiently powerful to justify the techniques you’re using?”

And Barr insists the inspector general’s analysis of this was “very limited,” vowing that his own forthcoming review would take a much more thorough look at the investigation’s genesis.

Barr’s deceptive whitewash

In saying those things, Barr is rewriting the story of 2016 in a subtle but consequential way. He’s implying that the FBI’s initial investigation was only motivated by what it had learned about the Trump campaign’s intentions with regard to coordinating with Russia’s electoral subversion effort.

But Barr is leaving out crucial facts and context. In fact, when the FBI launched this investigation, it had already developed an awareness that Russia was undertaking this attack on U.S. democracy — separate and apart from any Trump campaign involvement with it. This was a critical reason the FBI launched its investigation.

4 Likes

:eyes:

4 Likes

WATCH: House Judiciary Committee Debates Articles of Impeachment

The House Judiciary Committee debates two articles of impeachment against President Trump: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Live stream

https://www.c-span.org/video/?467306-1/house-judiciary-committee-debates-articles-impeachment&live


Markup:

markup - The process by which congressional committees and subcommittees debate, amend, and rewrite proposed legislation. glossary

H. Res. 755, Articles of Impeachment Against President Donald J. Trump

Wed, 12/11/2019 - 7:00pm

1100 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515

1 Like

The Fighters Rep Jim Jordan

From D-CA Karen Bass

4 Likes

T goes for names and loyalists.Dershowitz is both.

3 Likes
2 Likes

In new legal memo, White House budget office defends withholding aid to Ukraine

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-new-legal-memo-white-house-budget-office-defends-withholding-aid-to-ukraine/2019/12/11/0caa030e-1b95-11ea-826b-14ef38a0f45f_story.html

Several OMB divisions wrote a joint memo in August recommending the military aid go to Ukraine as soon as possible, according to Sandy’s testimony, noting the assistance “is consistent with the national security strategy . . . in terms of supporting a stable, peaceful Europe.”

Paoletta’s new memo states that the Ukrainian assistance was put on hold in response to an administration directive “pending a policy decision,” with internal discussions on the aid beginning June 19.

That was the same day the president read an article in the Washington Examiner about the Pentagon’s plans to send $250 million in weapons to Ukraine, according to the administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The president’s questions set off a scramble to answer his questions about the aid, this person said.

The memo says that “at no point during the pause” did Defense Department attorneys tell OMB the Ukrainian funding would be prevented from being spent before the end of the year.

OMB’s memo also stresses that the Defense Department indicated to its staff that it didn’t intend to release most of the security funds to Ukraine until September, so the damage of withholding the funds was minuscule.

Some experts have questioned OMB’s argument that it was following the president’s direction, given the evidence that Trump had political motivations for withholding the money.

“It’s probably true that it’s within the power of the executive branch, and OMB, to put constraints on funds to make sure they are going out appropriately. We have seen in the past that money has been held out or put aside,” said Mark Mazur, former assistant secretary for tax policy at the Treasury Department. “But it’s a little weird to have an ‘I’m only following orders’ defense here.”

5 Likes