Democrats amplify pressure on Trump as Pelosi accuses Barr of 'crime'

By Amanda Becker and David Morgan

 

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) speaks at her weekly news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., May 2, 2019. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats intensified their pressure on President Donald Trump's administration on Thursday as U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi accused Attorney General William Barr of committing a crime by lying to lawmakers and a key committee chairman threatened to hold Barr in contempt of Congress.

 

Even as Democratic lawmakers accused the Trump administration of launching a growing attack on American democracy and the authority of Congress, the White House showed no sign of backing down. White House legal counsel Emmet Flood said in a defiant letter that Trump has the right to tell advisers not to testify to congressional panels on the findings of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia inquiry.

 

The duelling statements marked a sharp escalation in the conflict between Trump's administration and Democrats who control the House of Representatives. With Trump seeking re-election next year, Democrats are weighing whether to try to remove the Republican president from office using the impeachment process while pressing forward with demands for information on his taxes, his businesses and other topics.

 

Shortly after Barr refused to appear before House Judiciary Committee, Pelosi accused him of lying to lawmakers about interactions with Mueller after the special counsel ended a 22-month investigation into Russia's efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. election to boost Trump's candidacy.

 

"That's a crime," Pelosi, the top Democrat in Congress, told reporters, referring to Barr's congressional testimony.

 

Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec called Pelosi's allegation "reckless, irresponsible and false."

 

Democrats have accused Barr of misleading Congress by testifying in April he was unaware of any concern by the special counsel's team about Barr's initial March 24 characterization of the report, an account that led Trump to claim full exoneration. Barr failed to mention a March 27 letter he got from Mueller complaining that Barr's March 24 account did not "fully capture the context, nature and substance of this Office's work."

 

Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler threatened to hold Barr in contempt of Congress if he does not provide a full, unredacted copy of Mueller's report and the underlying evidence, as the panel has requested by a subpoena that had a Wednesday deadline. That could potentially lead to fines or imprisonment for the top U.S. law enforcement official.

 

Barr released Mueller's report on April 18, with some parts blacked out to protect sensitive information.

 

Several Democrats have called on Barr, who Trump appointed after firing Jeff Sessions as attorney general, to resign.

 

Pelosi and other House Democrats previously had cautioned against launching the impeachment process, which would begin in the House but would face long odds of success in the Republican-controlled Senate and could alienate voters ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

 

But Pelosi said the Trump administration was continuing to ignore congressional subpoenas and noted that Congress launched impeachment proceedings against President Richard Nixon after he resisted similar demands. Nixon resigned in 1974.

 

'OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE'

Pelosi said Trump's "blanket statement that he's not going to honour any subpoenas is obstruction of justice."

 

The White House signalled little appetite to cooperate. Flood, in a letter obtained by Reuters, said Trump's decision to let advisers cooperate when Mueller was conducting his investigation does not extend to congressional oversight investigations now that the inquiry has been completed.

 

Flood also said Mueller's 448-page report suffered from "an extraordinary legal defect" by failing to determine whether Trump had committed the crime of obstruction of justice.

 

Mueller "instead produced a prosecutorial curiosity - part 'truth commission' report and part law school exam paper," Flood wrote to Barr in a letter dated a day after the report was released.

 

Democrats have argued Trump waived the right to assert executive privilege - which allows a president to withhold information about internal executive branch deliberations from other branches of government - by allowing advisers to cooperate extensively with Mueller.

 

Barr cancelled his House testimony after clashing with Nadler over the hearing's format, particularly having staff lawyers question him in addition to committee members. Nadler said he will move forward with a contempt citation as soon as Monday.

 

"The very system of government of the United States - the system of limited power, the system of not having a president as a dictator - is very much at stake," Nadler told reporters after a 15-minute committee session held in place of Barr's appearance.

 

Democrats have said they may issue a subpoena to try to force Barr to testify.

 

Barr spent four hours before a Republican-led Senate committee on Wednesday defending his handling of Mueller's report and justifying Trump's actions.

 

The report detailed extensive contacts between Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and Moscow and the campaign's expectation that it would benefit from Russia's actions, which included hacking and propaganda to boost Trump and harm Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The report also detailed a series of actions Trump took to try to impede the investigation.

 

Mueller, a former FBI director, concluded there was insufficient evidence to show a criminal conspiracy and opted not to make a conclusion on whether Trump committed obstruction of justice, but pointedly did not exonerate him. Barr has said he and Rod Rosenstein, the Justice Department's No. 2 official, then determined there was not enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction.

 

(Additional reporting by Sarah N. Lynch, Makini Brice and Steve Holland; Writing by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Will Dunham)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-05-03

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

Give it up Dems you are looking beyond silly now....

Don’t think so mr Barr isent the ag of the USA he is Donald’s creature 

14 minutes ago, Tug said:

Don’t think so mr Barr isent the ag of the USA he is Donald’s creature

And how does it change whats in Muellars report? did you read it?

Did Barr?

As shown by this report (and as we will see from the posts that follow) US politics has sunk to an awful low level of trust and cooperation between what has become two sides that refuse to agree on anything. The law apparently means nothing to these people and both sides use different interpretations to back their claims and assertions. Its an appalling show that the world is watching with fascination and no doubt some fear as a country that used to be respected for its political system spirals down the drain and out of sight. Nothing is more obvious than the fact that the two party system and what passes for 'democracy' but is in fact a plutocracy, is nothing more than laughable theatre. Poor old US of A.

Beyond a reasonable doubt Barr was lying to Congress under oath.

38 minutes ago, Tug said:

Did Barr?

well evidently he did since he accurately told us what was in there. So do you dispute whats in the report?

It's hard to remain relevant when you only work for your self-interests 

I find it ironic, they use Pelosi to comment on honesty or crimes.

2 minutes ago, beechguy said:

I find it ironic, they use Pelosi to comment on honesty or crimes.

Yeah another one all of a sudden became very wealthy after "serving the public" lol.  Bernie Sanders and all the other hypocrites on both sides of the house.  People really need to wake up and see this left right game for what it really  is.

17 minutes ago, beechguy said:

I find it ironic, they use Pelosi to comment on honesty or crimes.

 

12 minutes ago, tlandtday said:

Yeah another one all of a sudden became very wealthy after "serving the public" lol.  Bernie Sanders and all the other hypocrites on both sides of the house.  People really need to wake up and see this left right game for what it really  is.

Please share with us the privileged information you have on how she criminally (according to you) became wealthy.

20 minutes ago, beechguy said:

I find it ironic, they use Pelosi to comment on honesty or crimes.

Didn't know she is a criminal, please explain.

Troll post removed.  

 

17 minutes ago, candide said:

 

Please share with us the privileged information you have on how she criminally (according to you) became wealthy.

 

15 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Didn't know she is a criminal, please explain.

I would contend that the taint comes from her decades of not only leading, but positively revelling in, one of the most corrupt institutions in democratic politics.

Time for Fancy Nancy to be put in an orange suit (or, at the very least, given a million hours of community service where she helps to clean up San Francisco's $hit problem every morning.)  

 

2 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

well evidently he did since he accurately told us what was in there. So do you dispute whats in the report?

So I gather you don't dispute what's in Mueller's report. Do you dispute Mueller's characterization of Barr's "summary"? 

“The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions,” 

Mueller's letter to Barr

2 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

well evidently he did since he accurately told us what was in there. So do you dispute whats in the report?

That remains to be seen mr Barr is obviously a trump lackey the powers that be must see the unredacted version and mr Barr needs to explain himsielf

4 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Give it up Dems you are looking beyond silly now....

Holding the executive in check is ‘looking silly’.

3 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

And how does it change whats in Muellars report? did you read it?

Yes I read it, cover to cover.

 

Barr has completely misrepresented the report.

 

Apparently Mueller agrees.

And how does it change whats in Muellars report? did you read it?

Yes I did but unfortunately Mr Barr did not as per his testimony yesterday

Sent from my SM-J250F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Please share with us the privileged information you have on how she criminally (according to you) became wealthy.

Bernie made a lot of money since running. That is indeed true, however his wealth came from earnings off his best selling book. Last I checked that's not criminal

Sent from my SM-J250F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

This Barr defamation is a coordinated attempt by the Dems to brand Barr an untrustworthy person so that any evidence his office turns up of a covert US government operation to first remove Trump the candidate and secondly remove him from office once the American people voted Republican...is a Trump orchestrated LIE...because the Dems say so...????  

 

Many previous Dem government heads are going to roll...

So I gather you don't dispute what's in Mueller's report. Do you dispute Mueller's characterization of Barr's "summary"? 
“The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions,” 
Mueller's letter to Barr

If it did fully capture context, nature and substance of the report, it would not be a summary would it?

Mueller also stated Barr’s summary was accurate, yes?

11 minutes ago, Puchaiyank said:

This Barr defamation is a coordinated attempt by the Dems to brand Barr an untrustworthy person so that any evidence his office turns up of a covert US government operation to first remove Trump the candidate and secondly remove him from office once the American people voted Republican...is a Trump orchestrated LIE...because the Dems say so...????  

 

Many previous Dem government heads are going to roll...

Democrat Senators ask Barr questions, he responds with lies, half truths and prevarication.

 

Republicans stick to their customary practice of not asking awkward questions of Trump’s man.

 

Barr is no fool (well he’s not entirely stupid) he could easily scupper your claimed coordinated Democrat ‘defamation’ by simply telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

American politics are now looking as stupid as the UK thanks to the Democrat's in their time of controlling congress they have done nothing for the American people why vote for them all they do is go after Trump he won the election 2 years ago get over it 

3 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

well evidently he did since he accurately told us what was in there. So do you dispute whats in the report?

Accurate? What are you smoking????? Also, for what it is worth....Mueller not determining obstruction of justice is because it is not his remit to do so concerning a president. It is also not the job of the AG, it is the duty of Congeress to determine such and, if found, impeachment is the vehicle with which to prosecute such a finding.

7 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

If it did fully capture context, nature and substance of the report, it would not be a summary would it?

Mueller also stated Barr’s summary was accurate, yes?

 

“Mueller also stated Barr’s summary was accurate, yes?”

 

Absolutely not.

Nowhere does Mueller state that Barr’s summary was accurate.

 

Back to comprehension class you go.

4 minutes ago, norfolkc said:

American politics are now looking as stupid as the UK thanks to the Democrat's in their time of controlling congress they have done nothing for the American people why vote for them all they do is go after Trump he won the election 2 years ago get over it 

Perhaps British politics could be improved by the elected representatives holding the executive in check.

 

As it is, that task was left the the familiar sounding ‘enemies of the people’.

13 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

If it did fully capture context, nature and substance of the report, it would not be a summary would it?

Mueller also stated Barr’s summary was accurate, yes?

 

Actually, capturing the context, nature, and substance, without the detail, is exactly what a summary is.

 

Re point 2, please refer to Meuller’s letter to Barr.