Admittedly, I hate the guy, a pugnacious, self-righteous, lying partisan bully. But this less than three minute clip gives ten or eleven pretty vivid examples of what a lying fraud Donald Trump’s top law enforcement officer, Bill Barr, is. Based on his stellar work on behalf of George H. W. Bush, permanently covering up the remnants of the Iran-Contra scandal, it appears he’s been a duplicitous partisan for decades.
The Washington Post, currently owned by the world’s greediest man, notorious pandemic profiteer and anti-labor hardliner Jeff Bezos, still refuses to use the common and obvious word “lie” to describe false statements made by powerful men with a deliberate intent to deceive, but, of course, the rest of us can.
A man who lies as much as Bill Barr, (or Donald John Trump, for that matter,) may appropriately be described as a liar, or, if one were determined to be scrupulously polite, said to “lack candor” as federal Judge Reggie Walton wrote of Barr in March when he ordered production of the un-redacted Mueller Report because he did not believe Barr’s representations about its contents or the proffered reasons for the many redactions .
The short clip above presents one demonstrable and destructive lie after another by the Attorney General, the two minute tour of his characteristic mendacity. The lies are presented in the video with an almost New York Times-like delicacy, tactful, nuance-qualified understatement bordering on muteness. (Particularly in this age of conclusory five second sound bytes.)
The NYT’s circumspect, always scrupulously balanced reporting style brings to mind this great headline from the coffee table history edition of The Onion (America’s Finest News Source). The Grey Lady could not have written it better:
That said, The New York Times does some excellent, crucial reporting. It detailed specific examples of Barr’s seemingly subtle lies about the Mueller Report during the month Barr held it back. The Times analyzed Barr’s untruthfulness in detail that few others provided. I can’t knock their investigative reporting, which is often vital and important (though best taken in conjunction with other news sources). Wikipedia summarizes:
The New York Times reported instances in which the Barr letter omitted information and quoted sentence fragments out of context in ways that significantly altered the findings in the report, including:
- Omission of language that indicated Trump could be subject to indictment after leaving office, inaccurately suggesting that Trump was “totally exonerated”.
- A sentence fragment described only one possible motive for Trump to obstruct justice, while the Mueller Report listed multiple possible motives.
- Omission of words and a full sentence that twice suggested there was knowing and complicit behavior between the Trump campaign and Russians that stopped short of direct coordination, which may constitute conspiracy.
And, not for nothing, speaking of liars — Mr. Trump once again had the Center for Disease Control take down its guidance on controlling the spread of the pandemic, this time removing the known fact that the disease is spread by airborne particles (something Trump has known since at least February– as he told Bob Woodward on 2/7). The CDC took the guidance off its website yesterday, stating that it had been posted “in error”.
So 200,000 dead Americans, by far the most of any nation, 20% of the world’s dead from COVID-19, a death rate 500% higher than our proportion of the world’s population (4%) and NOTHING TO SEE HERE.
After all, voter fraud may DOUBLE in 2020– to 0.000008%. YOW!!!
Eight hundred-thousandths of one percent!!!
And the race is tighter than expected in every swing state!
 The New York Times, in an article entitled Judge Calls Barr’s Handling of Mueller Report ‘Distorted’ and ‘Misleading’
WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Thursday sharply criticized Attorney General William P. Barr’s handling of the report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, saying that Mr. Barr put forward a “distorted” and “misleading” account of its findings and lacked credibility on the topic.
Mr. Barr could not be trusted, Judge Reggie B. Walton said, citing “inconsistencies” between the attorney general’s statements about the report when it was secret and its actual contents that turned out to be more damaging to President Trump. Mr. Barr’s “lack of candor” called into question his “credibility and, in turn, the department’s” assurances to the court, Judge Walton said.
Naturally, like every other story involving the president or his myrmidons, there has been virtually no media follow-up on the story. The DOJ produced the un-redacted report and Judge Walton apparently read it and had questions for the DOJ about redactions seemingly made to cover up findings damaging to the president. Walton was to hold a hearing, as of a few weeks back, if the DOJ did not give him sufficient written explanation for the redactions that troubled him.
We have no attention span here in the 24/7 shit-storm we are living in, with hundred-armed media savvy shit-gibbons constantly flinging the nasty stuff to profit-driven “news” entities Perhaps Senior District Court Judge Walton, a George W. Bush appointee, was satisfied with Barr’s answers; maybe not.
It seems that, beyond citing Barr’s lack of credibility, Judge Walton will not press the DOJ any further on Barr’s calculatedly misleading spin of Mueller’s conclusions, since there appears to have been a legal rationale offered for at least some of it.
Oh, well, at least we have the internet, that fountain of immediate information: