Barr Hits Bottom

Former AG backs the Democrats’ Jan. 6 show trial.

By Lloyd Billingsley, FPM   22.6.22

Last week, former Attorney General William Barr told the Democrats’ Jan. 6 Committee he hadn’t seen evidence of voter fraud on a scale that could have affected the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. In late November of 2020, Barr told reporters, “to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.”

Before the 2020 election, voters may recall, Joe Biden openly touted “the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” Voter fraud is a crime, but Biden’s boast failed to spark any investigation by Attorney General William Barr. The addled Biden hunkered down in a basement and scarcely campaigned at all.

For AG William Barr, the Delaware Democrat won fair and square. Barr saw no need to look for evidence of voter fraud, now available in the form of Dinesh D’Souza’s 2000 Mules.

The film used cell phone data and government surveillance tapes to document illegal vote harvesting in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Texas. In Georgia alone, the film reviewed four million minutes of drop-box video. In his deposition for the Democrats, Barr erupted in laughter.

The tracking and photographic evidence was “unimpressive,” Barr said, the documentary “didn’t establish widespread illegal harvesting, and the conclusions of the documentary were “indefensible.” D’Souza called him out.

“What do you say, Barr?” D’Souza tweeted, “Do you dare back up your belly laughs with arguments that can withstand rebuttal and cross-examination?” Barr wasn’t going for it, and the former AG was also of interest for what he did not say.

On January 6, 2021, Capitol Police officer Michal Byrd shot dead unarmed Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt, a veteran of the U.S. Airforce. The shooting of Babbitt was the only death by gunfire on that day. In stark contrast to other shootings by police officers, Byrd faced no charges. Observers might think that a former U.S. Attorney General, the nation’s top law enforcement official, would show some interest in a case like that. When it comes to federal agents shooting unarmed civilians, particularly women, Barr can boast experience.

During the Ruby Ridge siege of 1992, FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi shot unarmed Vicki Weaver in the head as she held her infant child. Snipers are trained carefully to “acquire” the target so the killing was not accidental, as FBI boss Louis Freeh claimed. This went down during Barr’s first stint as attorney general from 1991-1993.

Barr showed little if any concern for the slain mother. On the other hand, he did spend two weeks organizing former attorney generals to defend Horiuchi, who already had government lawyers working on his behalf. Barr told reporters he was not directly involved in Ruby Ridge but the Washington Post revealed that the DOJ made 20 telephone contacts with the operation, two of them from William Barr.

The Weaver family filed a wrongful death lawsuit and the DOJ paid $3 million. When an Idaho county filed criminal charges against Horiuchi, Barr sought immunity for the FBI sniper. Appeal court judge Alex Kozinski warned of a “007 standard for the use of deadly force” against American citizens who posed no immediate threat.

The shoot-without-provocation rules were approved by the FBI’s Larry Potts. When Clinton attorney general Janet Reno nominated Potts for deputy director of the FBI, William Barr told the New York Times Potts was “deliberate and careful” and “I can’t think of enough good things to say about him.”

With that record, it comes as no surprise that Barr would find nothing amiss with the FBI and DOJ bosses who conducted covert operations to smear candidate Donald Trump and attempted to take down the duly elected president of the United States. In Barr’s recent book, One Damn Thing After Another: Memoirs of an Attorney General, they all get good reviews.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein suddenly appointed Robert Mueller to investigate Trump. “Few can appreciate the complexities Rod faced during that tumultuous time,” writes Barr, “and even fewer will know the important contributions he made to the administration and the country.” Since Barr names not a single one, a ballpark figure for these important contributions is zero.

Barr counts Robert Mueller as a friend and helped James Comey become U.S. Attorney in New York. Current FBI boss Christopher Wray, who denied any government spying on Trump, gets Barr’s full approval.

Back in December of 1969, William Barr applied for an internship with the CIA and was admitted to the program. As a lawyer, Barr continued to work in the CIA’s Office of Legislative Counsel. Aside from Jimmy Carter pick Stansfield Turner, “a disaster,” CIA bosses come off pretty well in Barr’s memoir.

John Brennan shows up on page 190 claiming that the CIA knew what Russians were doing in the 2016 election. In the 1976 election, John Brennan voted for the Stalinist Gus Hall, candidate of the Communist Party USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Soviet Union. Barr is not curious why the CIA would hire such a person.

Barr tasked U.S. Attorney John Durham to look into the Russia hoax, but as the memoir explains, “I made it clear that neither President Obama nor Vice President Biden were in Durham’s crosshairs.” So for AG William Barr, some people are indeed above the law.

William Barr still believes Joe Biden won fair and square, so by implication the people were panting for the disastrous conditions now prevailing. With no independent investigation, Barr agrees with Democrats’ proclamation that the 2020 election was the most secure in history. If Capitol cops or FBI snipers gun down unarmed women, William Barr has their back.

Unlike Winston Smith in George Orwell’s 1984, William Barr never needed to win the victory over himself. Right from the start, he loved Big Brother. In the depths of the DC swamp, William Barr is the lowest bottom feeder.


June 23, 2022 | 5 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

5 Comments / 5 Comments

  1. Ya gotta wonder how Barr was ever able to worm his way into Trump’s staff. Barr is a ”Fifth Columnist”, worse than any Democrat or RINO.

  2. No time to look up the video, but by Barr’s own words, I can see he is a coward who knows the truth, but speaks the lie because there’s too much “peer pressure” in the Deep State, where he has made his bed.

  3. How dumb does Barr think people are? Perhaps a better question is, how dumb does he want us to believe he is? An even better question might be, why is he trying to pretend what we all now know is true, is not actually true at all? Of course, the answer to the why of his pretense, will by itself lead to a great many more questions regarding Barr and his complicity in the Safest-Election-in-History-Fraud.

    Federal investigators have long known about the use of geocoding and the detail with which it can offer and its ability to track perpetrators in real time with incredibly reliable accuracy. The idea that AG Barr is unaware of this info, even without it being explained to him, does, by itself, require a hearty laugh. Hence, his abject dishonesty related to this matter is quite apparent, and yet no one seems to find it a relavent question to ask him about how he could be AG and still be ignorant of the warranted use of this info to track down perpetrators. Furthermore, it is in fact the geocoding data that allowed the FBI to begin arresting people within hours and days of Jan 6, of course, they had to have been tracking them prior to Jan 6 to be able to have such ready access to the geocoding on Jan 6, and that means that this tracking likely began prior to Barr’s being removed as AG.

    Another thing about the geocoding. Why was the Jan 6 Pipe Bomber never persued using geocoding? Or was it that the Pipe Bomber didn’t have a cell phone on them at the time of planting the bombs? Of course, this would indicate that the Pipe Bomber was aware of the use of geocoding to track perps, and yet AG Barr did not??

    Was the laugh an attempt to mislead or was it the best defense he has for his own culpability in what stemmed from the insurrection of Nov 3 or that led to the political persecutions related to Jan 6? Many questions for Barr and I expect his answers will prove to be far from humorous.

Leave a Reply