Press "Enter" to skip to content


13 Feb 20


Yesterday, in THIS article, we discussed how the Left has shifted it’s focus of coup operations away from President Trump and has squarely placed them directly over Attorney General William Barr and his Department of Justice.

It didn’t take long for things to shakeout after the Left turned it’s cross-hairs away from President Trump and sighted them onto Barr and the DOJ he oversees. In the article, I discussed the rich irony of how Barr’s effort to defend the institutions; especially his own, was now deeply entangled in the President’s defense germane to the impeachment and coup. Previously, those two were opposed in particular ways.

His forthcoming reaction stood to be questioned and I suggested that it may even open a window for declassification. Nope. That wasn’t even close. He went 180-degrees and back to his inherent nature as a creature of the swamp. Barr’s counter-punch to the President was a sucker punch to me. I suppose I let optimism overrule objectivity in my position on him. I even ignored my own previous warnings about him being an inherent creature of the swamp.

So, the real question now centers on why he maneuvered the way he did. Was it to lay pretext for forthcoming legal traction that intentionally fails to meet expectations (smells like institutional preservation)? Is he attempting to deflect the targeting back to the President? Is he just being outspoken about his fidelity to process and the rule of law; but with little actual evidence to support such a position? Or is that the DSSG is yanking his chain and reminding him to bring POTUS to heel to preserve the landscape for ulterior objectives? Or perhaps he’s reminding everyone that he has an obligation – self-imposed or imposed by others – to preserve the institutions; including his very own.

As I’ve written about at length, institutional preservation and self-preservation are mutually destructive in this instance because the likely defendants facing exposure to severe legal jeopardy are members of these very same institutions. Barr is conducing a political balancing act on a dangerous high line. It’s a precarious exercise in balancing the ratio of robbing Peter to pay Paul so as to protect the institutions and likely some select individuals within them.

As Fox News is reporting (emphasis mine) (SOURCE), consider Barr’s words.

The White House says President Trump isn’t “bothered” or deterred after Attorney General Bill Barr told ABC News on Thursday that the president’s tweets “make it impossible for me to do my job,” in an unusual swipe at the president — although Barr emphasized that Trump “has never asked me to do anything in a criminal case.”

“I think it’s time to stop the tweeting about Department of Justice criminal cases,” Barr said. “I’m not going to be bullied or influenced by anybody … whether it’s Congress, a newspaper editorial board, or the president.”

Barr continued, “I’m gonna do what I think is right, and you know… I cannot do my job here at the department with a constant background commentary that undercuts me.”

The attorney general said he could not “assure the courts and the prosecutors and the department that we’re doing our work with integrity” if the White House appeared involved in DOJ decisionmaking for political or personal reasons.


Barr’s comments are concerning.

If Barr states that the President has never asked him to do anything in a criminal case, then how is he undercutting Barr by making factual statements in exercising his First Amendment rights relative and instrumental to his Presidency; especially when those comments often controvert a lying and corrupt MSM?

If Barr is in charge of the department and its prosecutors as he says, then he’s the one ultimately responsible for ensuring that an adequate and effective level of integrity is in place. Barr can complain all he wants but the President is not out of line in making such public statements and so far, Barr hasn’t provided a sufficiently predicated reason to attempt to muzzle the President of the United States on matters of such importance.

If Barr would simply apply the rule of law, the US Constitution and the US legal code with absolute fidelity, all of the decisions would essentially be made for him and on resolute ground upon which he could stand tall and firmly. In such an instance, when his critics rage at him as they are sure to do, he can simply point to those three things.

If Barr insists on being the swamp creature he is, he’ll stay the course for institutional preservation, which will include legal traction; but perhaps not in accordance to what we all want to see; and it will look and sound a lot like what he stated above.

Concerning remarks at a concerning time. Stay tuned. Time will tell.

One Comment

Leave a ReplyCancel reply