Impeaching AG Barr a 'waste of time' says top Democrat probing political meddling

[webfact]

Impeaching AG Barr a 'waste of time' says top Democrat probing political meddling

By Doina Chiacu and Lawrence Delevingne

 

U.S. Attorney General William Barr speaks during a roundtable discussion on "America's seniors" hosted by U.S. President Donald Trump in the Cabinet Room at the White House in Washington, U.S., June 15, 2020. REUTERS/Leah Millis

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General William Barr deserves to be impeached over the firing of a federal prosecutor whose office had been investigating President Donald Trump's personal lawyer but the effort would be a "waste of time," a leading Democratic lawmaker said on Sunday.

 

Jerrold Nadler, the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee chairman who helped lead the Trump impeachment hearings last year, told CNN's "State of the Union" that the Republican-led Senate would block any effort to sanction Barr.

 

"He certainly deserves impeachment. But again, that's a waste of time because the Republicans in the Senate won't look at that," Nadler said.

A Justice Department spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

 

The firing of Geoffrey Berman, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, was the latest in a series of moves by Barr that critics say aim to benefit Trump politically and undermine the independence of the Justice Department.

 

Nadler's Sunday comments underscore the challenges Democrats face in trying to rein in Barr with a Senate dominated by Republicans who are wary of criticizing Trump before the Nov. 3 presidential election.

 

Nadler said his panel would nonetheless investigate Trump's firing of Berman on Saturday after an extraordinary standoff over the independence of one of the country's most important federal prosecutor's office.

 

Berman has not shied from taking on figures in Trump's orbit and had been investigating his private lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.

 

U.S. Representative Adam Schiff, the lead prosecutor in Trump's impeachment, told NBC's "Meet the Press" the motivation for firing Berman was suspect, "given the pattern and practice of both the president in seeking to use the justice system to reward friends, punish enemies, protect people he likes, and Bill Barr's willingness to carry that water for the president."

 

Nadler said he was "sure" Berman would at some point testify in his committee's investigation of political interference at the Justice Department launched earlier this year.

 

The dispute began late Friday when Barr announced Berman was stepping down and would be replaced by U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Jay Clayton, prompting Berman to issue a statement saying he refused to resign.

 

Only after Barr backtracked from his plan to hand pick the acting U.S. attorney, allowing Berman's deputy Audrey Strauss to take the reins, did Berman agree to step down on Saturday.

 

Some Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, have called for Barr's impeachment. The Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of 100 seats, would never vote for that so the Democrat-led House would have to pursue alternative measures, Nadler said, citing his proposal to cut $50 million in funding from Barr's personal budget.

 

PUBLIC SERVICE

In an email to SEC staff on Sunday seen by Reuters, Clayton said he had pursued the role at the Southern District of New York because he had a "strong desire to continue in public service" while returning to New York where his family is based.

 

He also indicated that he had no intention of crossing the Trump administration by voluntarily removing himself from the process, as several Democrats including Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer had urged him to, telling staff he would update them when he had more information about his confirmation.

 

Clayton, though, may not have to do anything to extricate himself from the political storm after Senator Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee, said on Saturday that he planned to seek approval for Clayton's nomination from New York Senators Schumer and his fellow Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand. Graham's pledge to follow the usual nomination practice puts Clayton's nomination in serious doubt.

 

"To be clear, this is not goodbye," Clayton told staff in the email. "We will be together for at least some meaningful period of time."

 

(Reporting by Doina Chiacu; Additional reporting by Karen Freifeld and Nathan Layne; Editing by Lisa Shumaker, Michelle Price and Diane Craft)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-06-22

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[Tug]

I agree it’s a needless distraction he’s out on his fanny in 5 months at the very least billey Barr will go down in history as the most corrupt ag in history totally sulleyed by his association with trump 

[thaibeachlovers]

Have the Dems finally woken up to the fact that frivolous legal action that is doomed to failure only loses them votes?

[Phoenix Rising]

54 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Have the Dems finally woken up to the fact that frivolous legal action that is doomed to failure only loses them votes?

As usual you've got it wrong. Don't you even read the articles you reply to? Let me help you with a quote:

 

"Jerrold Nadler, the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee chairman who helped lead the Trump impeachment hearings last year, told CNN's "State of the Union" that the Republican-led Senate would block any effort to sanction Barr.

"He certainly deserves impeachment. But again, that's a waste of time because the Republicans in the Senate won't look at that," Nadler said."

 

There you have it. Anything else I can help you with?

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

As usual you've got it wrong. Don't you even read the articles you reply to? Let me help you with a quote:

 

"Jerrold Nadler, the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee chairman who helped lead the Trump impeachment hearings last year, told CNN's "State of the Union" that the Republican-led Senate would block any effort to sanction Barr.

"He certainly deserves impeachment. But again, that's a waste of time because the Republicans in the Senate won't look at that," Nadler said."

 

There you have it. Anything else I can help you with?

55555555555555555

Most knew the impeachment against Trump would fail in the Senate yet they still went ahead with it.

Anything else I can help you with?

[rabas]

16 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

As usual you've got it wrong. Don't you even read the articles you reply to? Let me help you with a quote:

 

"Jerrold Nadler, the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee chairman who helped lead the Trump impeachment hearings last year, told CNN's "State of the Union" that the Republican-led Senate would block any effort to sanction Barr.

"He certainly deserves impeachment. But again, that's a waste of time because the Republicans in the Senate won't look at that," Nadler said."

 

There you have it. Anything else I can help you with?

Same Jerroid Nadler and team who wasted 3 years impeaching Trump knowing full well the Senate would block their political shenanigans? Why is it different now? No political hay to be made.

 

[Phoenix Rising]

21 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

55555555555555555

Most knew the impeachment against Trump would fail in the Senate yet they still went ahead with it.

Yes, they still went ahead with it as it's the right thing to do when you have clear evidence the president is a traitor and a criminal. Unfortunately and unsurprisingly the spineless GOP maggots in the senate voted against what they knew to be right.

But not to worry, the GOP will get their just due for the whole Trump s**t show in the end. How do I know this? If nothing else (and there's a LOT else) changing demographics will make it happen.

[Phoenix Rising]

4 minutes ago, rabas said:

Same Jerroid Nadler and team who wasted 3 years impeaching Trump knowing full well the Senate would block their political shenanigans? Why is it different now? No political hay to be made.

 

See post # 7.

[simple1]

57 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

55555555555555555

Most knew the impeachment against Trump would fail in the Senate yet they still went ahead with it.

Anything else I can help you with?

Why do you find the corruption of Republican senators amusing?

[Morch]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Have the Dems finally woken up to the fact that frivolous legal action that is doomed to failure only loses them votes?

 

What votes did the Democrats lose? Can you even demonstrate loss of support directly related to this?

[johnpetersen]

1 hour ago, rabas said:

Same Jerroid Nadler and team who wasted 3 years impeaching Trump knowing full well the Senate would block their political shenanigans? Why is it different now? No political hay to be made.

 

I didn't know the Democrats controlled the House for the first 2 years of President Trump's term.

[Eric Loh]

I think Nadler is not bother with going after Barr because Barr didn’t get what he and Trump want. Barr wanted a resignation from Berman immediately and replaced temporarily with his goon from New Jersey. Berman stood his ground and only relented after Trump stepped in but he got what he wanted I.e. no goon from New Jersey but his deputy Andrey Strauss who is an independent, principled and highly respected. Then Lindsay as Senate Judiciary Head blew the sail off course by saying he has not got any report on Jay Clayton and will only act when he got the ‘blue slip’ from the relevant senators. This looking to be an anti climax for Barr. 

[rabas]

2 hours ago, johnpetersen said:

I didn't know the Democrats controlled the House for the first 2 years of President Trump's term.

Probably because they didn't. 

 

But you may also not remember May 17, 2017 when Mueller began his investigation, in part based on potentially illegal but surely politically motivated activities of the Obama administration prior to leaving office. 

[oobar]

4 hours ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Yes, they still went ahead with it as it's the right thing to do when you have clear evidence the president is a traitor and a criminal. Unfortunately and unsurprisingly the spineless GOP maggots in the senate voted against what they knew to be right.

But not to worry, the GOP will get their just due for the whole Trump s**t show in the end. How do I know this? If nothing else (and there's a LOT else) changing demographics will make it happen.

Correct, correct and correct!

[earlinclaifornia]

4 hours ago, rabas said:

Same Jerroid Nadler and team who wasted 3 years impeaching Trump knowing full well the Senate would block their political shenanigans? Why is it different now? No political hay to be made.

 

But the down ballot, thanks to the tanking President  means the Senate majority will change hands. Impeachment in his first term was the dagger! So much for you coining it shenanigans. Golden is more accurate

Edited June 22, 2020 by earlinclaifornia

[Mick501]

5 hours ago, Phoenix Rising said:

As usual you've got it wrong. Don't you even read the articles you reply to? Let me help you with a quote:

 

"Jerrold Nadler, the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee chairman who helped lead the Trump impeachment hearings last year, told CNN's "State of the Union" that the Republican-led Senate would block any effort to sanction Barr.

"He certainly deserves impeachment. But again, that's a waste of time because the Republicans in the Senate won't look at that," Nadler said."

 

There you have it. Anything else I can help you with?

A Dem telling one of the propaganda arms of the Dems that someone should be impeached.   Woah...déjà vu.   Must be a glitch in the matrix. 

 

Hilarious that some people think that counts as even slightly valid or impartial opinion, let alone the gospel as you have taken it.  Perhaps a beginner course in introspection may be useful before offering help to others.  Grasshopper must first learn walk before can fly.

Edited June 22, 2020 by Mick501

[johnpetersen]

3 minutes ago, Mick501 said:

A Dem telling one of the propaganda arms of the Dems that someone should be impeached.   Woah...déjà vu.   Must be a glitch in the matrix. 

 

Hilarious that some people think that counts as even slightly valid or impartial opinion, let alone the gospel as you have taken it.  Perhaps a beginner course in introspection may be useful before offering help to others.  Grasshopper must first learn walk before can fly.

So tell me, what impartial elected officials are there? Do you think that maybe, by the fact that they are politicians, who run for contested office, that impartiality is a ridiculous thing to expect from them?

[Mick501]

2 minutes ago, johnpetersen said:

So tell me, what impartial elected officials are there? Do you think that maybe, by the fact that they are politicians, who run for contested office, that impartiality is a ridiculous thing to expect from them?

Ooh, another Dems staple.  Put words in to my mouth.   Please show me where I have suggested otherwise?

 

But. your point, in any case, supports my point that citing a highly disputable opinion of a politician as gospel is foolhardy.

[Phoenix Rising]

20 minutes ago, Mick501 said:

A Dem telling one of the propaganda arms of the Dems that someone should be impeached.   Woah...déjà vu.   Must be a glitch in the matrix. 

Hilarious that some people think that counts as even slightly valid or impartial opinion, let alone the gospel as you have taken it.  Perhaps a beginner course in introspection may be useful before offering help to others.  Grasshopper must first learn walk before can fly.

The "gospel" is what's come to light regarding Trump's treachery and crimes which are, among other things, his use of the office of the president to blackmail foreign powers for own political benefit.

Obviously, what Bolton claims in his book should be thoroughly investigated and if they are true (and of that I have no doubt because it's sooo Trump) and if there was any fairness in the world Trump should be removed from office and spend the last miserable days of his life in Leavenworth. 

But since the world is not a fair place I can live with him being voted out and assigned a place in the stinkiest part of history's scrap heap.

 

PS. A grasshopper comes out of the egg fully capable of walking. At this stage of its life it's called a nymph. Happy to help in furthering your level of general knowledge.

Edited June 22, 2020 by Phoenix Rising

[Mick501]

6 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

The "gospel" is what's come to light regarding Trump's treachery and crimes which are, among other things, his use of the office of the president to blackmail foreign powers for own political benefit.

Obviously, what Bolton claims in his book should be thoroughly investigated and if they are true (and of that I have no doubt because it's sooo Trump) and if there was any fairness in the word Trump should be removed from office and spend the last miserable days of his life in Leavenworth. 

But since the world is not a fair place I can live with him being voted out and assigned a place in the stinkiest part of history's garbage dump.

Yeah, jog on....

[Tug]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

55555555555555555

Most knew the impeachment against Trump would fail in the Senate yet they still went ahead with it.

Anything else I can help you with?

Well you do realize most Americans take umbrage when a president is derelict in his oath to uphold the constitution and actively try’s to solicit foreign interference in our elections don’t think they had a choice they aren’t derelict in their oath to uphold the constitution and protect our elections 

[Peabody]

Impeach him before 3 January. Convict in new Senate after 3 January.

No witnesses need be called. Just vote.

 

The Republican Method

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

7 hours ago, rabas said:

Same Jerroid Nadler and team who wasted 3 years impeaching Trump knowing full well the Senate would block their political shenanigans? Why is it different now? No political hay to be made.

 

 

Perhaps it had something to do with the fact that Trump was clearly guilty of what he was accused of, and Barr is probably equally guilty of impeachable offenses in his various capers on Trump's behalf.

 

The fact that the spineless Republicans in the Senate refuse to uphold the law and justice doesn't exonerate Trump or Barr.  It's just an indelible stain on the credibility of the U.S. Senate under Republican leadership.

 

[joecoolfrog]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Have the Dems finally woken up to the fact that frivolous legal action that is doomed to failure only loses them votes?

I am certain that the huge majority of those who considered the impeachment process frivolous , would NOT have voted democrat.

On the other hand no doubt many votes were won by the dems , by those disgusted by the Senates refusal to have a real trial.

[cycolista]

4 hours ago, rabas said:

Probably because they didn't. 

 

But you may also not remember May 17, 2017 when Mueller began his investigation, in part based on potentially illegal but surely politically motivated activities of the Obama administration prior to leaving office. 

Mueller who was appointed by a Rosenstien a Republican who was appointed by Trump who is.... who knows.  Anyway, no Dems involved.

[Zillod]

8 more years

[johnpetersen]

6 hours ago, Mick501 said:

Ooh, another Dems staple.  Put words in to my mouth.   Please show me where I have suggested otherwise?

 

But. your point, in any case, supports my point that citing a highly disputable opinion of a politician as gospel is foolhardy.

So that would go for Trump being interviewed by a typical Fox host as well?

[Puchaiyank]

Impeach, impeach, impeach...to change the government!  

 

What ever happened to coming up with fresh and viable ideas to defeat your opponent in the polls?

[Masterton]

10 hours ago, Phoenix Rising said:

The "gospel" is what's come to light regarding Trump's treachery and crimes which are, among other things, his use of the office of the president to blackmail foreign powers for own political benefit.

Obviously, what Bolton claims in his book should be thoroughly investigated and if they are true (and of that I have no doubt because it's sooo Trump) and if there was any fairness in the world Trump should be removed from office and spend the last miserable days of his life in Leavenworth. 

But since the world is not a fair place I can live with him being voted out and assigned a place in the stinkiest part of history's scrap heap.

 

PS. A grasshopper comes out of the egg fully capable of walking. At this stage of its life it's called a nymph. Happy to help in furthering your level of general knowledge.

 

What complete and utter nonsense. This is what happens when you get your information from Democrat activist fake news media sources. No "treachery and crimes" have come to light. There was also no evidence of the president "blackmailing foreign powers". Did you not follow the hoax impeachment hearings? The House democrats tried to remove the president from office based on a false accusation with nothing factual to back it up and evidence that contradicted it. Funny how nearly all attack stories on Trump, including the comment on Bolton above, are preceded by the legend "if true". This is a common theme in the fake news media.  There are numerous clips of Bolton saying the opposite about Trump, it is funny how the Democrats and their gullible supporters attack anyone and everyone on the opposite side until it suits their agenda to believe them. If Bolton had any credibility, he would have come out with his claims a long time ago when he didn't have a book to peddle. 

[Paul Henry]

The Democrats did the right thing. Win or lose history will show and record TRUMP was impeached.

Good honest people do not get impeached.