Bill Barr and the House Judiciary Committee

pjohns · #1 (**permalink**) 07-28-2020, 01:27 PM

Just this morning, Attorney General William Barr appeared before the House Judiciary Committee.

The Democrats on that committee, however, seemed entirely combative--rather than truly interested in any answers that he might supply.

Sheila Jackson Lee (from Texas) was probably the worst. Every time that Barr would try to answer her question, she would immediately cut him off, claiming that she was only "reclaim[ing]" her time.

If I were Barr, I would have broken in, and said: "Is there a question in there? Because, if there is not, I suppose that I am merely wasting my time. I came here to answer questions--not to be made the object of a lecture."

Then, I would have given it one more try.

And if the lecture continued, I would simply have walked out.

Forthwith.

cnredd · #2 (**permalink**) 07-28-2020, 01:36 PM

Barr's opening statement...

Quote:

Ever since I made it clear that I was going to do everything I could to get to the bottom of the grave abuses involved in the bogus "Russiagate" scandal, many of the Democrats on this Committee have attempted to discredit me by conjuring up a narrative that I am simply the President's factotum who disposes of criminal cases according to his instructions. Judging from the letter inviting me to this hearing, that appears to be your agenda today....

Unfortunately, some have chosen to respond to George Floyd's death in a far less productive way -- by demonizing the police, promoting slogans like ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards), and making grossly irresponsible proposals to defund the police. The demonization of police is not only unfair and inconsistent with the principle that all people should be treated as individuals, but gravely injurious to our inner city communities. There is no harder job in America today than being a police officer. When officers respond to an emergency, whether a catastrophe like 9/11 or an everyday crime, they do not set out to protect white people or black people. They risk and sometimes give their lives to protect and serve all people, and all people owe them thanks.

When a community turns on and pillories its own police, officers naturally become more risk averse and crime rates soar. Unfortunately, we are seeing that now in many of our major cities. This is a critical problem that exists apart from disagreements on other issues. The threat to black lives posed by crime on the streets is massively greater than any threat posed by police misconduct. The leading cause of death for young black males is homicide. Every year approximately 7,500 black Americans are victims of homicide, and the vast majority of them – around 90 percent – are killed by other blacks, mainly by gunfire. Each of those lives matter.

And it is not just that crime snuffs out lives. Crime snuffs out opportunity. Children cannot thrive in playgrounds and schools dominated by gangs and drug pushers. Businesses do not locate in unsafe neighborhoods. When the police are attacked, when they are defunded, when they are driven out of urban communities, it is black lives that will suffer most from their absence.

...

Finally, I want to address a different breakdown in the rule of law that we have witnessed over the past two months. In the wake of George Floyd’s death, violent rioters and anarchists have hijacked legitimate protests to wreak senseless havoc and destruction on innocent victims. The current situation in Portland is a telling example. Every night for the past two months, a mob of hundreds of rioters has laid siege to the federal courthouse and other nearby federal property. The rioters arrive equipped for a fight, armed with powerful slingshots, tasers, sledgehammers, saws, knives, rifles, and explosive devices. Inside the courthouse are a relatively small number of federal law enforcement personnel charged with a defensive mission: to protect the courthouse, home to Article III federal judges, from being overrun and destroyed.

What unfolds nightly around the courthouse cannot reasonably be called a protest; it is, by any objective measure, an assault on the Government of the United States. In recent nights, rioters have barricaded the front door of the courthouse, pried plywood off the windows with crowbars, and thrown commercial-grade fireworks into the building in an apparent attempt to burn it down with federal personnel inside. The rioters have started fires outside the building, and then systematically attacked federal law enforcement officers who attempt to put them out--for example, by pelting the officers with rocks, frozen water bottles, cans of food, and balloons filled with fecal matter. A recent video showed a mob enthusiastically beating a Deputy U.S. Marshal who was trying to protect the courthouse – a property of the United States government funded by this Congress – from further destruction. A number of federal officers have been injured, including one severely burned by a mortar-style firework and three who have suffered serious eye injuries and may be permanently blind.

Largely absent from these scenes of destruction are even superficial attempts by the rioters to connect their actions to George Floyd’s death or any legitimate call for reform. Nor could such brazen acts of lawlessness plausibly be justified by a concern that police officers in Minnesota or elsewhere defied the law.

Remarkably, the response from many in the media and local elected offices to this organized assault has been to blame the federal government. To state what should be obvious, peaceful protesters do not throw explosives into federal courthouses, tear down plywood with crowbars, or launch fecal matter at federal officers. Such acts are in fact federal crimes under statutes enacted by this Congress.

As elected officials of the federal government, every Member of this Committee -- regardless of your political views or your feelings about the Trump Administration -- should condemn violence against federal officers and destruction of federal property. So should state and local leaders who have a responsibility to keep their communities safe. To tacitly condone destruction and anarchy is to abandon the basic rule-of-law principles that should unite us even in a politically divisive time. At the very least, we should all be able to agree that there is no place in this country for armed mobs that seek to establish autonomous zones beyond government control, or tear down statues and monuments that law-abiding communities chose to erect, or to destroy the property and livelihoods of innocent business owners. The most basic responsibility of government is to ensure the rule of law, so that people can live their lives safely and without fear.

CindyB · #3 (**permalink**) 07-28-2020, 03:14 PM

Barr should just get up and walk out and tell all those Democrats to screw themselves.

GetAClue · #4 (**permalink**) 07-28-2020, 04:46 PM

The Democrats made a complete mockery of the committee hearing. It was embarrassing as an American to see this hearing unfold the way the Democrats allowed it to unfold. Generally, in other committees, when a witness is asked a question and the Reps time expires, they witness has an opportunity to respond to the question. Nadler was having none of that. He is a complete joke of a congressman and a human being.

FrancSevin · #5 (**permalink**) 07-28-2020, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GetAClue

The Democrats made a complete mockery of the committee hearing. It was embarrassing as an American to see this hearing unfold the way the Democrats allowed it to unfold. Generally, in other committees, when a witness is asked a question and the Reps time expires, they witness has an opportunity to respond to the question. Nadler was having none of that. He is a complete joke of a congressman and a human being.

Just like they did with Judge Kavanaugh.

Who is surprised by that?

This charade is exposed and good Americans have a clear picture of the enemies to our government. their view, their judgements, will be made with ballots.

November 3rd cannot come too soon.

GetAClue · #6 (**permalink**) 08-03-2020, 01:48 PM

saltwn · #7 (**permalink**) 08-05-2020, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pjohns

Just this morning, Attorney General William Barr appeared before the House Judiciary Committee.

The Democrats on that committee, however, seemed entirely combative--rather than truly interested in any answers that he might supply.

Sheila Jackson Lee (from Texas) was probably the worst. Every time that Barr would try to answer her question, she would immediately cut him off, claiming that she was only "reclaim[ing]" her time.

If I were Barr, I would have broken in, and said: "Is there a question in there? Because, if there is not, I suppose that I am merely wasting my time. I came here to answer questions--not to be made the object of a lecture."

Then, I would have given it one more try.

And if the lecture continued, I would simply have walked out.

Forthwith.

they were pitiful

Jeerleader · #8 (**permalink**) 08-07-2020, 01:51 PM

So Barr was traveling in his car yesterday and saw a Back-the-Blue honk-n-wave in front of a police station in Virginia and tells his detail to turn around so he can thank them . . .

https://twitter.com/KerriKupecDOJ/st...30264229945344

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to pjohns For This Useful Post:
FrancSevin, GetAClue, Jeerleader, Lumara

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to cnredd For This Useful Post:
CindyB, Dog Man, Lumara, pjohns

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CindyB For This Useful Post:
Lumara, pjohns

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GetAClue For This Useful Post:
Dog Man, Jeerleader, pjohns

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to FrancSevin For This Useful Post:
GetAClue, Jeerleader, pjohns

The Following User Says Thank You to GetAClue For This Useful Post:
pjohns

The Following User Says Thank You to Jeerleader For This Useful Post:
GetAClue