AG William Barr Refuses Ticket to House Political Theater

But if Sen. Harris thinks Barr should look at Mueller Report's underlying documentation, we say "Let's look at it all."

Attorney General William Barr testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, May 1, 2019.

By Al Perrotta Published on May 2, 2019

Attorney General William Barr said “No, thanks” to the House Democrats’ offer to testify today. If he’d wanted to sit and watch theater, Shear Madness is playing at the Kennedy Center. Though even that show doesn’t compare to the farce the Democrats had planned. 

Barr Before The Senate

We saw a preview at Barr’s Senate Judicial Committee appearance Wednesday. Take Hawaii Senator Mazie Himono (please.) She spent five minutes berating and insulting Barr, accusing him of being a liar and Trump stooge. Yeah. William Barr. Mr. Legal Establishment. A guy who was George H. W. Bush’s Attorney General when AOC was in diapers. A man whose been a part of the Washington legal scene since Joe Biden had his own hair. 

“Slander!” Sen. Lindsey Graham called Himono’s diatribe. 

“How did we get to this point?” Barr wondered. 

Hirono was mean. Hirono was pathetic. Her script was brimming with falsehood, innuendo and downright hate. A shrill performance by a dim hack, full of sound and fury signifying her side’s got nothing.  Sorry, but no one who gets to call Hawaii home should be that bitter about anything.

Then there were the three Democratic Presidential candidates on the Judicial Committee: Sen. Amy “Eat My Salad With a Comb” Klobuchar, Sen. Cory “Spartacus” Booker and Sen. Kamala Harris. Each trying to outdo each other with their feigned self-righteous contempt for Barr’s handling of the Mueller Report. 

Here’s their Big Secret: Not one of them thinks they’re going to beat Trump. If you’re convinced you’re the next president, you already see yourself behind the big desk. And thus, you have only two real questions for Barr: First, How do we stop all foreign interference in American politics? And second, what exactly did the DOJ/FBI/CIA do to Trump — because I don’t want Swamp Creatures doing the same thing to me.

Sen. Harris and Her Gotcha Moment

Still, the media is giving Harris high-fives for what Democrats are proclaiming as a Hallelujah moment. Harris “got” Barr to admit he didn’t read the underlying evidence before deciding there was no case for obstruction of justice. Let’s put aside the obvious: Harris was a prosecutor. She knows better. If she had given a 500-page case report to a District Attorney rejecting prosecution and he suddenly wanted to see every scrap of paper her team used, it’d be a slap in the face. 

Let’s put aside the more obvious: Why did Mueller issue a 448-page report if Barr was supposed to go through all the underlying evidence himself anyway? We paid him big bucks to investigate and come back “Yay” or “Nay.” (That he abdicated his duty on obstruction is another story.)

And let’s put aside the still more obvious: If there was no crime … aka conspiring with the Russians … and Trump gave Mueller access to everything in the White House but the Lincoln Bedroom, who needs millions of pages of raw material to tell you “There Ain’t No Obstruction!”? After all, Mueller’s squad of desperate Democratic pitbulls couldn’t make a legal case for obstruction, even when contorting the law and DOJ standards. So why would Barr have to dig into the source material?

But let’s grant Harris her point. Barr did not look at the underlying evidence. Lucky for Democrats. (For now.)

If Barr Looked Closely

A couple quick examples:

Mueller’s squad points to the firing of Comey as potential obstruction. Why? Russia, Russia, Russia. What exactly? Trump was ticked that while Comey was telling him he wasn’t under investigation, he refused to say so publicly. In other words, Comey refused to lift the heavy cloud that was hampering the President of the United States from doing his job. 

Underlying question: Why would Comey refuse? Who ordered Comey to reject the President’s request? How much of Comey’s actions and interactions with Trump were part of a strategy planned out by the Obama White House? Give Barr the underlying notes from the January 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting on the Russian investigation where the strategy was devised to only tell Trump the salacious details of the Steele dossier. 

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

Another sign of potential obstruction: Trump wanted Comey to go easy on Gen. Michael Flynn. 

Underlying question: Why did Comey, as he now boasts, break standard practice of notifying White House counsel when his agents wanted to speak to a White House staffer — a conversation that was a perjury trap set up by Andrew McCabe?


In an article for The Hill last December, Kevin R. Block lays out “Three oddities in FBI handling of the Flynn interview.” So show Barr the underlying evidence: the conversations, texts, emails of all involved about how Flynn was to be approached. Because Trump’s request to “go easy” on Flynn contains an unspoken clause: “because I already know what stunts you pulled to put him in this position.” 

Meanwhile, The Mueller Report speaks very vaguely of McCabe’s comments about Flynn and Trump. 

Underlying question: What were those specific comments? The underlying evidence will show that McCabe telling colleagues, “First we f*** Flynn and then we f*** Trump.” Why didn’t Mueller specify that in the report? Isn’t it significant that McCabe’s goal wasn’t truth or justice, but vengeance on political (and in the case of Flynn personal) enemies? 

While we’re at it, give Barr every bit of evidence pertaining to the unmasking of Flynn, including all Obama personnel who knew about it, disseminated it and leaked it. 

Trump Tower’s “Extraordinary Circumstance” 

The Mueller Report also cites, as evidence of obstruction, Trump not wanting to release emails related to the infamous June 9, 2016 “Trump Tower” meeting. Please, I pray all the evidence about that meeting will be splattered all over CNN. 

Take Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. She was working with Fusion GPS. She met the day before, the day of, and the day after with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson. In fact, everyone in the room not associated with Trump was associated with Fusion GPS, the company paid by the Clinton campaign to arrange the Russia Collusion narrative. 

Oh, and as others have noted, Natalia’s Facebook page was loaded with anti-Trump posts.

Give Attorney General Barr all the info on Natalia. Don’t you want to know exactly who let her into the country after her visa had been rejected? As The Hill reported, “A federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s office in Manhattan told the court in a hearing in January 2016 that the ‘extraordinary circumstances’ parole request needed to be approved by Attorney General Loretta Lynch.”

Lynch tried to distance herself from Natalia. She said in a statement she “does not have any personal knowledge of Ms. Veselnitskaya’s travel.” (Curious tossing the word ‘travel’ in there.)

An anti-Trump Russian lawyer in business with Fusion GPS is let into the country under “extraordinary circumstances” by Obama’s Attorney General. Before long, thanks to another Fusion GPS-connected character Ron Johnson she’s meeting with Donald Trump’s son. Directly before and after the meeting she’s hooking up with Glenn Simpson, founder of the firm behind the Steele Dossier. And we’re supposed to believe it is all coincidence?


Enough with the willing suspension of disbelief. Kamala Harris is right. Let’s let all the information come out to determine who obstructed justice, who abused power, and who betrayed this nation. 

We deserve to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So help us God. 

Otherwise, we continue this political theater … a play that can only have a tragic ending for our country.


Al Perrotta is the Managing Editor of The Stream, and co-author with @JZmirak of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration. You can follow him at @StreamingAl. And if you aren’t already, please follow The Stream at @Streamdotorg

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
If the Foundations are Destroyed, What Can the Righteous Do?
David Kyle Foster
More from The Stream
Connect with Us