Look. Another SHINY thing to look at. Don’t look here, look there.
I recently had the opportunity to talk with my good buddy Bill Barr, the president’s lawyer. Er. I mean. The Attorney General of the US. The head of the Department of Justice.
I was curious about the new investigation into the old investigation into the Russian influence in the 2106 election to help Trump get elected.
Me: Hello , Billy boy. How’s it hanging.
Billy Barr: Hanging good. Lookin’ like we are on our way to put some folks in jail. Finally. Lock Her Up!
Me: So, what exactly are you investigating?
Billy: We are going after the fake Russian influence stories. Fake news. We intend to show that the Russians did not influence the election and that those who said so were criminals.
Me: Does that include the 2 year long Mueller probe and report?
Billy: As I said at the time, the Mueller Report completely exonerated the president. It showed there was no Russian collusion. No collusion. No collusion.
Me: So, if the Mueller Report exonerated Mr Trump, why are you investigating Russia again?
Belly: Let me be clear. No collusion. The Mueller Report was very clear . No collusion. So, for that reason we must investigate to find out why some people said there was collusion. Simple. No collusion.
Me: Ok. So, now you are investigating why the Mueller Report found no collusion. I thought the Mueller Report found at least 13 Russian agents involved in using the internet to influence the election in favor of Trump.
Billy: No. No No. You have it all wrong. Mueller found no evidence of any wrongdoing. And anyway, it would have been the DNC and the Ukraine, probably Biden and Obama, who were behind the anti-Hillary dirty tricks. Obvious.
Me: So, if you say Mueller found there was no collusion or wrongdoing (not true, by the way), what are you investigating? If nothing wrong happened, what are you looking at?
Billy: CRIMES. Always looking at crimes. Possible crimes. We are investigating crimes.
Me: Well, specifically, what are the crimes you are investigating. I mean, when you investigate something you must have some idea or evidence that a crime was committed. So, what is the crime?
Billy: Wrong again. We have some information that a crime may have been committed. Who committed the crime? We will see. What was the crime? We don’t know yet. We need to find out if anyone committed a crime and then prosecute it. We have an idea that a crime was committed.
Me: So, you have a whistle blower who has accused someone of a possible crime?
Billy: Exactly. We have a whistle blower. Maybe . Maybe not. Who knows?
Me: Who is the whistle blower? What has he or she charged?
Billy: Oh no you don’t. We do not let anyone know who the whistle blower is. Top secret. Just like the fake Dems in the fake impeachment hearings. They won’t tell us the name of the whistle blower.
Me: OK. But the whistle blower you are talking about presented a written statement of exactly what he thought had happened based on his contacts. So, can we see the charges , in writing , of your whistle blower?
Billy: No. Top secret. Not only will we not divulge the name of the whistleblower, and I am not saying we have one. Maybe we do, maybe we don’t. We will also keep secret any criminal charges. After all, if you charge someone with a crime then they can deny it.
Me: So, you are investigating a crime but you don’t know what the crime was or who committed the crime? And anyone accused of the crime does not have the right to know what they are being accused of?
Billy: Exactly. Now you have finally figured it out. We will find the crime and when we find it we will share it with Fox and Friends. Then we will find out who committed the crime. This will completely exonerate the president from the charges that the Mueller Report already exonerated him from.
Me: Do you have any possible criminals in mind? I mean, anyone who is the focus of this new investigation into the investigation?
Billy: Let me just say this. SHE is in BIG trouble. Oh, yes. Lock Her UP. Also, there is a “person of color” who we are looking at. If I said his name you would recognize it. Lock Him Up. Lots of FBI and CIA agents who are members of the deep state. They will be spending some time in the barrel.
Me: Sounds like you already have your conclusions before you even investigate.
Billy: Well, why investigate a crime if there is no crime. We are investigating criminal activity to find criminal activity. Deep state. Lock Her Up. The president is above the law. Lynching. Lynching. Lynching….
Me: Ok, Billy. Let’s leave it there. Now, what about all the evidence that Trump withheld aid to the Ukraine and you refused to even investigate the whistle blower complaint? And is it a very odd coincidence that your new investigation just happened to be publicized what Mr Trump is going to be impeached?
Billy: Look. Look. Shiny thing. Shiny thing. Don’t look here, look there.
6 responses to “Investigating the Investigation”
I could never understand why anyone with any sense had expectations of Barr being different from how he’s behaving. We know how he got his job after writing a long memo telling trump what he wanted to hear—and his confirmation hearings were highly questionable. Still, some who should have known better professed respect for his professional past. Why did I realize stuff that they didn’t?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Do you understand why about half of us thought that DJT was a good choice for President in spite of what was known about him? I don’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here’s some info on Barr you may or not know.Play Video
Senate confirmation hearings began Tuesday for William Barr, President Trumpâs nominee for attorney general to replace Jeff Sessions. Barr served as attorney general for George H.W. Bush from 1991 to 1993. During that time, he was involved in the pardon of six Reagan officials for the Iran-Contra scandal and oversaw the opening of the GuantÃ¡namo Bay military prison, which was initially used to indefinitely detain Haitian asylum seekers. Barr also openly backed mass incarceration at home and helped develop a secret Drug Enforcement Administration program which became a âblueprintâ for the National Security Agencyâs mass phone surveillance effort. But on Tuesday, senators asked few questions about Barrâs past record while focusing heavily on his views about special counsel Robert Muellerâs probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. DN! looks at Barrâs history with David Cole, national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. His recent article for the ACLU is titled âNo Relief: William Barr Is as Bad as Jeff Sessionsâif Not Worse.â DN! also speaks with Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyersâ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A long history of authoritarianism.
The idea that elected and appointed officials should be judged on their loyalty to the current administration rather than the faithful execution of their duties is extraordinarily dangerous to our democratic government.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And that seems to be the ONLY qualification in Trump world.