No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: Trump Attacks Barr On Not Disclosing Ongoing Biden Investigations

This morning, Brian Kilmeade did an excellent interview with President Donald Trump and pressed him on issues like a possible floor challenge to the certification of the 2020 election under what I have called a “Death Star” strategy.   Trump notably refused to answer that question and whether he would attend the inauguration by saying “I don’t want to talk about that.”  What he clearly wanted to talk about was Attorney General Bill Barr, who is facing calls to be fired for his maintaining confidentiality over ongoing federal investigations linked to Hunter Biden. Kilmeade pressed Trump on the attacks on Attorney General Bill Barr and quoted me as saying that Barr acted correctly in declining to reveal ongoing investigations related to Hunter Biden.  Trump responded that he is only asking for what Special Counsel Robert Mueller did in correcting a false news story in 2019. I disagree with the analogy with that clarification, which presented a very different ethical and factual situation.  Barr did exactly what he had to do to protect not just the integrity of these investigations but the integrity of the Justice Department as a whole.

In the interview, the President slammed Barr after Kilmeade noted that he is obviously “disappointed” in Barr not disclosing the investigations. Trump responded by saying that “everybody is …who is not disappointed?”  The President then cited the occasion when Special Counsel Bob Mueller went public to correct a story that ran in BuzzFeed as untrue. President Trump declared “when Buzzfeed put out a phoney article, Bob Mueller stood up and he interjected that this article was false. Bill Barr should have done the same thing…”

Kilmeade then told the President that “Jonathan Turley said he had no choice . . . it would have been like James Comey again.”  However, the President repeated the BuzzFeed point and his point that “All he had to do is say that an investigation is going on . . . Bill Barr frankly did the wrong thing.  Bill Barr had an obligation to set the record straight just as Mueller set the record straight.”


Kilmeade is correct that I have defended Barr on his actions on Hunter Biden investigation as well as past actions. For full disclosure, I have known Barr for decades, represented him in a past case, and testified in support of his confirmation before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The criticism of Barr shows how no good deed goes unpunished in this Administration. There were a host of reasons for Barr not disclosing the ongoing investigations.

First, there is a long standing policy not to issue indictments or make public comments before an election. While I have discussed that vague policy in the past, I wrote before the election that Durham and Barr should wait until after the election to avoid their work being used for political purposes.  Notably, even without such formal confirmation, many of us had already written about the obvious investigations into Hunter Biden. While the media had a blackout on coverage to protect Biden before the election, it was clear that there was a federal investigation in the field from the prior subpoena and other information. Many of us also wrote on the ludicrous assertion of Joe Biden that “no one has suggested my son did anything wrong.” The problem was not the lack of express confirmation by Barr. The problem was that the media was (and continues to be) in the bag for Biden. If Barr confirmed an investigation, the Biden campaign would do what it just did last week in declaring that this was about “tax affairs.”

This was a good deed by Barr. Not only do the DOJ policies and rules discourage such public statements before an election, Barr would have pulled a Comey. This is precisely what President Trump and both Republicans and Democrats criticized James Comey for doing before he was fired. Indeed, it figured prominently in the scathing review of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in his Comey memo.

There is also the separate policy not to discuss ongoing investigations. Such disclosure is left to the U.S. Attorney and local prosecutors in how they proceed in investigations to avoid or reveal their work. Confirmation of an investigation can undermine the investigation by alerting possible targets.  It is also unfair to targets like Biden who might not be ultimately charged.

What is astonishing about this attack is that Barr’s actions guaranteed the continuation of these investigations despite calls by Democrats for the investigations to be scuttled by a Biden Justice Department. If Barr did what the President demanded, it would have given the Democrats exactly what they wanted as an excuse to close the investigations. He would have pulled a Comey and they would have pulled the plug on the investigations.

Now for the BuzzFeed claim. The President’s point is a fair one but I believe that it falls far short of being a convincing basis for Barr violating these policies.

First, the facts. BuzzFeed ran a false story that President Trump ordered his personal attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress, for which Cohen was prosecuted.  Democrats and various legal experts ran with the story to demand impeachment.  The date is key. That was January 2019.  That was roughly two months before the release of the Mueller Report when the Special Counsel’s office was preparing to disclose its findings.

I was frankly surprised by the clarification at the time but there were a couple of obvious distinguishing factors. First, the Mueller investigation was public as was its focus in terms of crimes.  The Hunter Biden investigation and its focus was not public information. Second, the clarification dealt with Michael Cohen who was sentenced in December 2018. His case was over. This was a comment not on the ongoing Mueller investigation but more about the closed Cohen case. Third, the delay in releasing the report raised calls for clarification of the Cohen statements shortly before his testimony in Congress. Mueller clearly decided that, given the plea by Cohen and the tangential aspect of the story, a public clarification was warranted. Accordingly, the office stated “BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate.”

That is vastly different from revealing ongoing investigations before anyone has been charged, which was the question facing Barr.  In fact, Hunter Biden has not and is still not formally accused of wrongdoing in terms of a federal indictment. He is at most a target or subject of a federal investigation. For any public statement of Barr to satisfy the President, he would have had to go into details on allegations that were still be investigated and not confirmed. Otherwise, he would issue a statement that would have been radically misconstrued. That is pulling a Comey.

That is why Bill Barr did the right thing. Yet, as the poem by by Franklin Piece Adams is entitled, “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished (So Shines a Good Deed in a Naughty World)

I have previously said that Barr spends a great deal of time thinking about doing the right thing and little time thinking about how it will be perceived. However, history will vindicate this and other decisions that he has made as Attorney General.

As I have previously argued, the media has run proven false accounts against Barr, including the false claim that he cleared Lafayette Park for a presidential photo op.   History will show, to take a line from King Lear, that Barr remains “a man more sinned against than sinning.”


195 thoughts on “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: Trump Attacks Barr On Not Disclosing Ongoing Biden Investigations”

  1. Finally, a forensic audit of the Dominion machines.

    The Dominion voting machines were used in some 19 states (and most of the swing states). It has long been known that those machines are easily corruptible. (See the 3 Texas reports on why they rejected Dominion.)

    And now, a *post-election* forensic audit of those machines has been completed. The report was ordered to be released by Circuit Judge Kevin Elsenheimer. Here are some of the highlights (lowlights?) from that audit:

    — “We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is *intentionally and purposefully* designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results. The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors.” (Emphasis added.)

    — “The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008%). We observed an error rate of
    68.05%. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity.”

    Let that sink in.

    The FEC allowable error rate for voting systems is .0008%.
    The dominion machines error rate is *68.05%*.

    — “A staggering number of votes required adjudication. This was a 2020 issue not seen in previous election cycles still stored on the server. This is caused by *intentional errors in the system*. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency or audit trail.” (Emphasis added.)

    Combine the above point with this:

    — “Significantly, the computer system shows vote adjudication logs for prior years; but *all adjudication log entries for the 2020 election cycle are missing*. The adjudication process is the simplest way to manually manipulate votes. The lack of records prevents any form of audit accountability, and their conspicuous absence is extremely suspicious since the files exist for previous years using the same software.” (Emphasis added.)

    Here is the complete report:

    Please do not claim: “Well, even if that report is accurate, it’s only a few Dominion machines that were rigged.”

    SOP in audits: If some in a lot are found to be tainted, assume the entire lot is tainted — and throw them *all* out. That is why manufacturers clear out the shelves of a product — nationwide — when just some are found to be tainted.

    If you trust Dominion, I dare you to eat a brand of ice cream in, say Georgia, when that brand has been found to contain listeria in, say, Michigan.

    (Before you commit the fallacy of ad hominem, by smearing the auditors, you might want to check out their credentials. Better yet, focus on their *argument*.)

    1. Sam, this is the same outfit that previously claimed fraud in Michigan because it confused data from a town in Minnesota with one in Michigan.

      “Benson, Nessel, Michigan Elections Director Jonathan Brater, Dominion and Antrim County Clerk Sheryl Guy all pushed back on the report.

      Guy, a Republican, said she was saddened by the efforts to discredit the equipment.

      “I did read the report and find that there are many misleading statements that are simply not accurate,” Guy said.

      Dominion said in a statement that there were no software glitches in Antrim County or anywhere else. The problems in the county were “isolated human errors not involving Dominion.” Officials failed to update the programming in their tabulators after requiring changes to their ballot, the company said.

      The clerk’s staff in Antrim County did not update the media drives for all of the tabulators in the county, so some tabulators did not communicate properly with the county’s central election management system software, according to the Michigan Secretary of State’s Office.

      After discovering the error in reporting the unofficial results, the clerk’s office worked to report correct unofficial results by reviewing the printed totals tape on each tabulator and hand-entering the results for each race, for each precinct in the county, the secretary of state’s office previously said.

      In a signed statement filed in court, Brater said the report makes a “series of unsupported conclusions” and “ascribes motives of fraud and obfuscation to processes that are easily explained as routine election procedures or error corrections.”

      Michigan uses hand-marked paper ballots, Brater noted. The Michigan Bureau of Elections and Antrim County will conduct a hand tally of all ballots cast in the presidential election there, he said.”

      1. “Sam, this is the same outfit that previously claimed fraud in Michigan because it confused data from a town in Minnesota with one in Michigan.”

        That an an error was made based on the initial of a state doesn’t mean that the fraud in votes doesn’t exist.That is a foolish way of looking at things, but you do it all the time. The same thing to some extent is done by Commit To… below.

        The two of you have the same problem of loading responses up with junk and omitting the truth.

    2. “The report is signed by Russell Ramsland of Allied Security Operations Group. Ramsland, a cybersecurity analyst and former Republican congressional candidate, mistook voting jurisdictions in Minnesota for Michigan towns in one recent flawed analysis of voter turnout in the Nov. 3 election. In another, filed in support of a federal lawsuit filed in Michigan, he made wildly inaccurate claims about voter turnout in various Michigan municipalities claiming that Detroit, where turnout was 51%, had turnout of 139%, and that North Muskegon, which had turnout of 78%, had voter turnout of 782%.
      “… ‘Because voting tabulators in Michigan use hand-marked, paper ballots, any alleged errors in tabulators can be caught during a hand recount, which any candidate could have requested in Antrim County,’ [Michigan Elections Director] Brater said. ‘This week the Michigan Bureau of Elections and Antrim County will also be conducting a hand tally of all ballots cast in the presidential election in Antrim County, which will provide further verification that the Antrim County results are accurate.’ That audit is set to begin Thursday, officials said. …
      “In a joint statement, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and Attorney General Dana Nessel said ASOG ‘has no apparent expertise in election administration and technology,’ and its work appears ‘limited to the previous release and amplification of other false information and fake documents.'”

      The report is clearly disputed, and Ramsland has previously included totally false statements in his reports. Not sure why you have confidence in someone who makes demonstrated errors like the ones identified above.

      We’ll find out more on Thursday.

  2. Turley busy carrying Trump water again, pretending the HB story is the most important one out there, after a day when our new President’s election was confirmed by the EC – and hey, this time it’s the guy American voters actually pickerd! – and his buddy Barr was executed after signing a humiliating letter praising Dear Leader.. Ho-hum

    Well, maybe Jonathan will get on Hannity again. They need a new subject now that The Loser’s fate is sealed.

  3. CISA’s Dishonest Statement

    On November 12, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), issued a widely touted statement that included this tagline:

    “There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

    CISA’s statement is dishonest, by omission. They failed to disclose the fact that its Board members include Dominion Voting Systems (yes, *that* Dominion), along with Smartmatic and sundry state and local elections officials.

    Here is CISA’s statement, rewritten to reflect truth in advertising:

    “We, the election security officials, certify that we, the election providers, conducted a clean and fair election. There’s nothing to see here. Move along.”

    What next — Bernie Madoff audits his own books?

    The first clue that the statement was bogus is the fact that it was issued a scant *8 days* after the election — while some states were still counting ballots. In 8 days, you couldn’t investigate and settle a charge of loitering.

    What’s needed is an “Election Integrity Commission” — one *not* headed by Jimmy Carter, and one that does *not* include Dominion and its cronies.

    1. “its Board members include Dominion Voting Systems”

      No, Dominion is not on CISA’s “Board.”

      The statement came from “The members of Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council (GCC) Executive Committee – Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Assistant Director Bob Kolasky, U.S. Election Assistance Commission Chair Benjamin Hovland, National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) President Maggie Toulouse Oliver, National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) President Lori Augino, and Escambia County (Florida) Supervisor of Elections David Stafford – and the members of the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council (SCC) – Chair Brian Hancock (Unisyn Voting Solutions), Vice Chair Sam Derheimer (Hart InterCivic), Chris Wlaschin (Election Systems & Software), Ericka Haas (Electronic Registration Information Center), and Maria Bianchi (Democracy Works)”

      Dominion is one of many, many members of the Government Facilities Sector – Election Infrastructure Subsector group, which is not CISA’s “Board”:
      But they didn’t contribute to the statement that was released.

      If you’re going to be making these kinds of arguments, check your facts before posting fake claims.

      1. +1

        Sam just keeps posting BS.

        The Georgia machine vote was confirmed by the counting of paper ballots.

        Of the counties across the 6 swing states which have been the focus of “controversy” which used Dominion machines, Trump won the majority.

        We still have idiots like the president and the #2 Republican in the House (Scalise) MAKING THE STUPID – I MEAN DUMB ASS STUFF – argument that Trump leading at 11 PM on Nov 3 should have been conclusive and the votes counted late showed fraud. We all know that Trump asked his supporters to show up on election day and that the GOP legislators in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania turned down a request that the mail in votes be counted as they came in. Scalise even made the doubly stupid – more likely lying – argument that Florida had no such troubles. That’s right because Florida counts mail-ins as they come in. THEY ARE STILL MAKING THIS ARGUMENT!!! HELLLLOOOOO!!!

        If there was fraud perpetrated in the big cities of these states – as alleged – we’d expect to see large unexpected tallies there. It didn’t happen. Biden under-performed Hillary in Philly, Atlanta, and Detroit, and was even with her in Milwaukee. He over performed her in the red counties in those states and in the suburbs around those cities. Helllooo! Those were independents and Republicans who had enough of the toad. This map shows how this worked in Georgia – the colors indicate changes from 2016.

        Atlanta is white – no change or very little. The suburbs are very blue and all over the state there is blue – again this doesn’t mean those locations voted for Biden, it means he increased the Democratic vote in those places compared to Hillary – that’s how he won.

  4. How will history vindicate Bill Barr when this investigation has taken TWO YEARS and counting, while Joe Biden lied about it, may be implicated in the crime by his son’s emails, Bobulibsky’s testimony and his own admission about blackmailing Ukraine, and may now be President and a criminal?

    How about Bill Barr ignoring all the referrals by the Senate and his own IG, with reams of evidence?

    Will you defend the end the two party system by the Democrats when they end the filibuster, pack the Senate and the SCOTUS, give amnesty to 25 million illegal aliens and encourage even more, because it will all be done as legally as Hugo Chavez did in Venezuela?

    1. I remember several months ago Barr being asked in an interview about this and his answer was I can’t answer that. If he has said yes the media would have done the same and downplayed it just as they are doing now. The bigger problem in the US is a lack of real investigation journalism. Media’s majority is nothing more than Trump hating propagandists for the Democrat party..

  5. “integrity of the justice department”

    a contradiction so large in a single statement, entire galaxies drive through it, without so much as moving a single photon!

    John Turley….I understand the points you are making…I get it. But this entire notion that somehow the integrity of the justice department is THE MAIN cause for doing NOTHING against obvious provable criminal acts and conspiracies of a unlawful coup using unlawful spy powers is laughable. No, correction, it is heresy.

    Barr’s inaction will go down in history as the MOST DAMAGING IMPACT in an election in US history.

    We are witnessing a corruption so harmful to the republic, I’m serious when I say, we can’t keep it anymore. It’s lost. Done. Kaput.

    this embecile has signaled to every single criminal operating in the US: go for it. There are no consequences. Except of course, if you are some jackwagon in connecticut who made adam shiface anxious on social media. Then by god, mountains will be moved. the legacy of barr on display.

    a mockery. a ruinous meat bag of low character and less honor.

    pitiful and a disgrace to the very foundations of justice.

    and don’t look NOW, but Barr is doing the VERY SAME THING WITH BIDEN.

    it’s all about having and using compromising evidence for those in power….not to pursue justice…but to control them.

    that’s how the “new justice department” rolls.

    get with the programme. It’s a big club.

    we ain’t in it.

    1. The justice department was not doing nothing. It was simply investigating the Bidens. The same way it acted in 2016 it waited until the election was over to announce the Russian collusion investigation

  6. I’m a voter in the election 11.03. I think the justice department was wrong in keeping the Hunter Biden investigation secret. It directly affected the US election. Hunter was involved in corrupt dealings with several countries. The big guy (JOE) was directly involved so was his brother. This was proven with the Lap Top. Also Bobliniski confirmed all this. It is all a fact. No conspiracy theory. Compare this with Don Jr. Who was constantly harrassed and accursed of being a Russian spy. Look what the FBI did to Roger Stone. Is seems to me the American people should have been informed about all of the Biden family corrupt affairs. Which were illegal at the very least. Joe, Hunter, and Joe’s brother. Are all comprised. And American people should have been told.

    1. Lin, it sounds like you’re too new to this country to understand our electoral process. In fact, I’m surprised Trump let you into this country! Though realistically I’m sure you’re just our usual troll masquerading as yet another puppet.

      1. I’m over 70, born in this great country. Parents born here. G.Parents born here. So what else do u need to know. I also have common sense.

    2. @Lin- Looks like you got the old “Progressive Welcome” from our dear friend Anonymous. The party of tolerance, indeed!

      1. Comments on here seem to indicate he is an angry homosexual. Maybe he has Wuhan on top of HIV making him into a missed opportunity? Joking. Not.

  7. The “Law & Order” Mentality

    Apparently drunk on TV crime shows, some people have an uninformed view (to put it politely) of how corruption and fraud cases are investigated and prosecuted, in the real world.

    It can take months to investigate and settle a simple charge such as shoplifting, and that’s with the awesome powers of the government. Corruption and fraud cases, by comparison, are notoriously difficult to investigate and prosecute because there is a massive, tangled web. Those types of cases can take *years* to adjudicate — and, again, that’s with the nearly unlimited resources of the government.

    From its first reporting in the press, the Enron fraud case, for example, took some *4 years* to adjudicate. The WorldCom fraud took some *6 years* to uncover and adjudicate. (The Hunter Biden case has been under investigation for some 2 years.)

    And now that “Law & Order” mentality is crowing: “Look. Trump and his allies have lost 30, 40, 50 (!) court cases. See, that proves that the election was clean — that there was no corruption or fraud.”

    Those court decisions, a mere *5 months* after the election, prove nothing — other than, perhaps, that the cases were a Sisyphean task.

    1. Sam, some people who’ve committed fraud in the election have already been arrested:

      I don’t think anyone is saying that there was no fraud at all in the election, and if they are, then they’re wrong. What I and others are saying is that there’s no real evidence to date of significant fraud. Multiple judges have commented on this. The affidavits that have been submitted are generally either hearsay (“I heard someone say that they saw …) or observations / misinterpretations of things that are legal (as with the allegation about “suitcases” of illegal ballots, which turned out to be legal ballots in ballot containers that were placed there in full view of everyone).

      The burden of proof is on the people making the allegations. So far, they can’t prove what they’ve alleged.

      1. “The burden of proof is on the people making the allegations. So far, they can’t prove what they’ve alleged.”

        There are many cases that have gone to trial where Democrats have been found guilty of election fraud. Too many to recite in the past 2 years alone….40 years. Since you’re adept at copying/pasting fake news, you dare not post the guilty findings in these cases because it would undermine your talking points….ones that only you believe if that

        1. JJ, we’ve never seen your name before. Just popped out of nowhere?? Funny how that goes.

          1. Someone said below that you are a crazy mofo. That person was being polite. Maybe if you just accepted yourself and stop hating your sexual orientation you would not be so driven to lash out at everyone. Cray cray gonna cray cray!

        2. I’m talking about the most recent election, not the last 40 years.

          I already linked to an instance of fraud from November’s election. It’s not fake news.

      2. Hundreds of people under perjury attest to the dem fraud. Absolutely suspect dominion voting corruption. And you have the gall to state no real evidence to date of significant fraud. You are quite daft and partisan…no bounds known there either. This “election” was banked on being defrauded by the minions of the left with financing from tech billionaires and there good old chicom business partners. You just won’t see the forest for the trees.

        1. That someone attests to fraud under penalty of perjury doesn’t guarantee that the affidavit is truly evidence of fraud. Many of the affidavits has nothing more than hearsay. Some of the affidavits complained about things that are legal rather than fraud.

          Judges have looked at many of the affidavits and ruled on these things. A couple of examples:

      3. Key words”To date”. Most of these cases were not even heard, so it is not a matter of they could not prove their case.

      1. There is a reason why Youtue has historically removed videos of Antifa commiting anarchy across America, but why bother. The Democrats lost more than a dozen US House Seats for that very fact alone.

      2. Olly: “[T]hese same folks are rooting against law & order.”

        Yep — more of “the ends justifies the means.”

    2. Sam, these court cases prove the Trump’s campaign can’t even lay-out credible evidence to keep judges from slamming doors in their face.

      And your use of Enron and Worldcom as examples are laughably ridiculous. Both of those companies saw their stocks implode when word got out they cooked the books. That’s ‘when’ the investigations began.

  8. I’m not happy about Trump’s misfortune, but I have to agree with Professor Turley.

    There’s always a natural tug-of-war in every administration over the AG. Every president wants the AG to be his personal attorney (Reno and Holder are unfortunate examples), and some AG’s are determined to serve the Constitution–Barr and Sessions are notable in this regard.

    Trump lost that tug-of-war both times. So much for Trump being a dictator. That was always a media canard.

    Biden’s AG will be problematical for sure. His AG is either Biden’s personal attorney, keeping Harris–and the West Coast mafia–out of the Oval Office, or the AG who walks ol’ Joe off the premises for what… senility, influence peddling, hooliganism? The last we’ll ever hear of the Constitution might be the 25th Amendment. The rest of our Constitution will be deep-state toilet paper. Just try and find any on the shelves.

    1. Perhaps a Biden presidency is what is needed for half the US to wake up. We need something to reset and rid us of Woke culture.



    In a remarkable show of near-unanimity across the nation’s judiciary, at least 86 judges — ranging from jurists serving at the lowest levels of state court systems to members of the United States Supreme Court — rejected at least one post-election lawsuit filed by Trump or his supporters, a Washington Post review of court filings found.

    The string of losses was punctuated Friday by the brief and blunt order of the Supreme Court, which dismissed an attempt by the state of Texas to thwart the electoral votes of four states that went for President-elect Joe Biden.

    Taken together, the judges’s decisions — some short and to the point and others sweeping defenses of American democracy — have comprehensively dismantled the arguments advanced by Trump in his effort to get the courts to subvert Biden’s victory.

    The Post found that 38 judges appointed by Republicans dealt blows to such suits, with some writing searing opinions.

    The latest example came Saturday, when federal District Judge Brett H. Ludwig, a Trump nominee who took the bench in September, dismissed a lawsuit filed by the president that sought to throw out the election results in Wisconsin, calling the request “extraordinary.”

    “A sitting president who did not prevail in his bid for reelection has asked for federal court help in setting aside the popular vote based on disputed issues of election administration, issues he plainly could have raised before the vote occurred,” he wrote. “This Court has allowed plaintiff the chance to make his case and he has lost on the merits.”

    Trump asked for the rule of law to be followed, Ludwig noted, adding: “It has been.”

    After appointing more than 200 judges during his administration, including three Supreme Court justices, Trump made clear that he believed the courts would side with his unprecedented attempts to reverse the election results.

    After his latest gambit to get before the high court failed, Trump tweeted Saturday: “This is a great and disgraceful miscarriage of justice. The people of the United States were cheated, and our Country disgraced. Never even given our day in Court!”

    In fact, Trump was given his day in dozens of courts. The refusal of so many judges to rule as he wished speaks to the limits on his ability to shape the judicial branch.

    As of Friday, more than 50 of Trump’s cases have failed or been tossed out of court. Just one minor suit — which shortened the period of time in which Pennsylvania voters could fix errors on certain mail ballots — was successful.

    Judges consistently found there was no substantive evidence to support claims of fraud and irregularities — that Biden’s votes were, in fact, legal votes.

    The Post review found striking diversity in the political orientation and experience among the judges who ruled against Trump or his allies. Fifty-four were men, 32 were women. They ranged in age from 42 to 82.

    Edited from: “The Last Wall: How Dozens Of Judges Across The Political Spectrum Rejected Trump’s Efforts To Overturn Election”

    The Washington Post, 12/12/20

    1. Anon: “The refusal of so many judges to rule as [Trump] wished speaks to the limits on his ability to shape the judicial branch.”

      That’s odd. You’d think that WaPo would praise Trump’s judgment in selecting those judges.

      1. It doesn’t make them good judges in general, it only shows the legal weakness of Trump’s and his friends’ efforts.

      2. Sam, it’s right there in the story. It’s not like WaPo needs to insert a ‘Note From The Editor’ that says, “These rulings speak on the limits of Trump’s ability to shape the courts”.

  10. The GA Supreme Court just dismissed Trump’s cert petition for his effort to contest the GA election results. This is the 59th court loss for Trump and his allies.

  11. So here’s what Mueller set straight: that Trump engaged in a bunch of obstruction that would’ve been prosecuted if he were not a sitting president and that the Russians interfered in the ’16 election. Also that Spanky was individual one.

    And no he didn’t clear Trump of collusion, he just said he couldn’t prove it ( no wonder given his guidelines to steer cleer of trump finances and the refusal of trump to be interviewed). Still, a solid report given that it was essentially the trump administration investigating itself.

    Elvis Bug

    1. Stop it. He didn’t say Trump would have prosecuted for obstruction if he weren’t President. Saying that would have been awfully silly when (a) there wouldn’t have been an investigation in search of a crime if Trump hadn’t been President and (2) the Mueller report didn’t identify any possible crimes of obstruction. The report talked about some “episodes” but didn’t attempt to tie any of them to any statute that might have been violated.

      1. The Mueller Report identified 10 possible crimes of obstruction by Trump and tied them to multiple statutes: “Consistent with precedent and the Department of Justice’s general approach to interpreting obstruction statutes, we concluded that several statutes could apply here. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1505, 1512(b)(3), 1512(c)(2)” (quoting from Vol. 2 of the report).

        Mueller said that they did not assess whether Trump should be indicted because the OLC Memo precluded indictment of a sitting president. Instead, they concluded “if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legalstandards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

        If you want more details:

        1. Good catch. Of course for those that dislike Trump they will only read the last line.

      2. It is obvious that the anonymous poster is dumb and lacks the ability to understand what happened

        1. Poor Allan insults every liberal he disagrees with. He attributes his own weaknesses to others.

          1. You must be referring to me. I only intentionally insult 2Liberals because one is dumber than the other. Tweedledee and Tweedledum. But it isn’t really an insult rather a recognition of the truth based on the actions we see.

            Where have you demonstrated any intellectual development? Virtually non-existent.

            1. Are you innumerate, Allan? You intentionally insult more than 2 liberals on a regular basis.

        2. That was a quote from the Mueller report. Given the facts and legal standards they did not conclude there was obstruction. No matter how much Weissman wanted to.

  12. “BuzzFeed ran a false story that President Trump ordered his personal attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress, for which Cohen was prosecuted.”

    That’s misleading. Cohen was prosecuted for lying to Congress about the Trump Org’s Moscow Project and in an effort to minimize Trump’s connection to that ( He lied to protect Trump, and as Turley notes, what the SCO said is “BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the special counsel’s office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony are not accurate.” That statement was made before the Mueller Report was released, but the Report itself clarified that Trump’s attorney told Cohen to “stay on message, and not contradict the President,” and that “While there is evidence … that the president knew Cohen provided false testimony to Congress … the evidence to us does not establish the president directed or aided Cohen’s false testimony.” A reminder: “does not establish” was used in the Mueller Report to indicate that they didn’t have sufficient evidence to prove something in court; it was *not* used to mean “it’s false.” They were explicit when something was false/disproved.

    Trump was asked by Mueller about his conversations with Cohen about the Moscow Project and largely responded that he didn’t recall:
    But the SSCI Report indicates that Trump lied in answering a different question from Mueller, so who knows.

    1. Michael Cohen was a liar much like you. He wasn’t convicted of crimes. He settled. He was guilty but the guilt, though listed in his pre-sentencing statement, like everything else wasn’t an exact replication of what he actually did.

    2. Sessions, Barr and the DOJ, FBI, CIA, DHS ect… career government workers with children and relatives working for said alphabet soup… you think they care one whit about America or Americans?
      4 yrs and nothing happened… fux that.

      1. Barr was in retirement and had been only on the Board of Directors of Time Warner since 2009. He left the DC swamp 1993 and was working in corps since 1994.

    3. You need to read the Mueller report. After becoming the Republican candidate Trump dropped the project. Anything done after that was Cohen by his own initiative.

  13. Nice. This is how you extricate from the Trump clown car, Jon. While we disagree on many things Barr, I appreciate your step back into somewhat normalcy with this topic.

    Elvis Bug

  14. “The most frightening thing about liberals is that they don’t believe they are political beings. They simply espouse the right and proper way of things and they are the right and proper people to lead the rest of us there. This liberal end justifies a whole lot of illiberal means.“

    – Mark Bauerlein

    America Is A Nation Of Rogues
    A country is more than a set of principles. It is a character—and America’s is rebellious.

    Mark Bauerlein in American Conservative

    George Hanson is the alcoholic lawyer played by Jack Nicholson who joins the easy riders until some locals attack them in the woods and George is killed. Billy and Wyatt don’t understand why the townspeople have run them off.

    “They think we’re gonna cut their throat or something,” Billy tells him. “They’re scared, man.”

    “They’re not scared of you,” George says, “they’re scared of what you represent to them.”

    “Hey, man, all we represent to them, man, is somebody who needs a haircut.”

    “Oh, no,” George corrects him, “what you represent to them is freedom.”

    “What the hell’s wrong with freedom, man,” Billy replies. “That’s what it’s all about.”

    1. “The most frightening thing about liberals is that they don’t believe they are political beings. They simply espouse the right and proper way of things and they are the right and proper people to lead the rest of us there. This liberal end justifies a whole lot of illiberal means.“

      That’s false. I’m a liberal, and I believe I’m a political being. Every liberal I know believes they’re political beings.

      People throughout the political spectrum espouse what they believe is the right and proper way of things and suggest that they are the right and proper people to lead the rest of us there. This is just as true of conservatives as it is of liberals. People throughout the political spectrum sometimes think that the ends justify the means and other times don’t think that, depending on the particular issue.

      Why do you choose to post such nonsense?

      1. “I’m a liberal, and I believe I’m a political being.”

        That is true, but what separates you from decent people is that you are willing to stray from the truth.

              1. One has to take that comment for what it is worth, Nothing. I don’t think you know what truth is.

                1. You said Commit is willing to stray from the truth. Link to where she strayed, and we’ll see if you’re right or blowing it out your ass.

                  1. Since you are neither truthful or know what the truth is your request is unnecessary.

                    1. Blowing it, out your ass, weho, histrionic queen behavior

                      no wonder you are anonymous

        1. You prove her posts right, that they believe they are the arbiters of truth, right and wrong thinking.

    2. I borrowed a leather jacket from his daughter once. I like to think it was the one he wore in the movie.




    Professor Turley reminds us in this column that he and William Barr are longtime personal friends. William Barr, more than any Trump cabinet pick, has leveraged his credibility on Trump’s behalf.

    Barr, in fact, betrayed another friend, Robert Mueller, by misrepresenting the Special Counsel’s report on the Russia Probe. That one act alone caused millions to question Barr’s integrity. Yet here, in the 11th hour of his presidency, Trump predictably turns on Barr when the latter decides his credibility is already stretched too far.

    So ‘why’ then is Professor Turley still defending Donald Trump?? If Trump can turn on William Barr, he will turn on anyone. And we knew long ago that Trump has no loyalties. There comes a point where Trump falls-out with even the most groveling of deputies. That’s Donald Trump: ‘No loyalty whatsoever’.

    1. and you are loyal to whom Peter Shill / John Burgoyne / Seth Warner / Enoch Poor / Batsh!t crazy Anonymous-multi-colored avatars

      I used to think George was the craziest on this blog. You, our dear little multiple personality crazy as frack blithering idiot, provide many of us free entertainment, for which we thank you

      Regards to the boys in WeHo

      1. Estovir, your endless parade of puppets never alters the fact that you are a nerdy, loser of a troll and undoubtedly a closet queen. Only closet queens keep bringing up that gay crap day after day. That’s you and your WeHo fantasies.

      2. Liberals demand blind obedience and unity of thought or you are destroyed. So he judges by his own standard.

    2. Disagreeing is not turning on someone. Even the closest of friends don’t always agree.

    3. Where do you get loyalty has anything to due with opinion just because it is not harshly condemning as you wish it to be?

  16. Mr, Trurley: To leak or not to leak?,,,that is the question. The ethics depend on the situation and how it is addressed. If leaking would result in 4 more years of the greatest presidency in American history and not tarnish the reputation of USDOJ and FBI any more than it already was tarnished and if not leaking would result in the worst presidency in American history and the reputation of USDOJ and FBI could be addressed later, the virtuous choice is to leak. The “never leak” ethical rule is not virtuous if the result is harmful to the nation.
    This is the ancient question about the ends justifying the means. Philosophers differ on the answer. And, by the way, the means used to achieve the ends has bearing on the virtue of the choice. A one-time leak conveying to the American people what al most all of the D.C. cognoscenti and media already knew (and were suppressing) is much more ethical than what we saw during the Mueller investigation. I think you should rethink your opinion. It is too rigid for use in the real world. You remind me of Sissela Bok.

    1. Information was out there of Hunter’s business dealings for those paying attention. An investigation is just that. Let me know when there is a trial and conviction. That is what really counts.

  17. The Death Star was constructed by an evil Empire and was blown up by the Alliance. That analogy works.

  18. The Republican Party accuses the incoming Biden administration of corrupt ties to the Chinese Communist Party. The Democratic Party accuses the outgoing Trump administration of corrupt ties to United Russia.

    Independents in US Justice and Intelligence are pressured to credit what is true and discredit what is false in these claims without compromising the balance of sensitive hard and soft power negotiations between the US, China and Russia.

    More broadly, balance of power in the US interest includes multilateral reform of the United Nations Security Council for maximization of human health and prosperity within the planet’s ecological carrying capacity.

    More specifically, it includes the security of Israel and the Arab League against Iranian aggression, without prejudice against the natural security interests of the Muslim majority West Asian region, from Ankara and Nur-Sultan to Islamabad and Tehran.

    Attorney General Barr must bear up with President Trump’s disappointment and prepare for his successor with all of these interests in mind.

    It can only be an enormously tough job and Professor Turley’s support must be quite welcome in the midst of it.

    1. “The Republican Party accuses the incoming Biden administration of corrupt ties to the Chinese Communist Party.”

      There is plenty of proof to back up this claim.

      The Democratic Party accuses the outgoing Trump administration of corrupt ties to United Russia.

      Four years of investigation and spying revealed no such thing. Trups actions against Russian interests proves the opposite.

      1. North America, Western Europe and Eastern Europe including Russia share a number of hard and soft security interests. President Trump’s fraught containment of President Obama’s reluctant steps in Ukraine and Syria toward hot war with United Russia could signal growing bipartisan resistance to excessively divisive pressure on northern Christendom from the CCP and much of the global south, including extremist jihadists. Russia and NATO need to spend less on military conflict within northern Christendom and more on shared infrastructure for secure and sustainable negotiations with Muslims, Hindus, atheistic Chinese, interfaith southern Africans and mostly Catholic Iberian Americans. Australia, New Zealand and Japan, meanwhile, continue to explore Pacific north-south partnership opportunities for free and fair trade in a securely expanding nuclear-weapons free buffer zone between east and west.

        1. Americans seem to ignore Russia also battles Islamic terrorism. CCP has made no secret their intent is world economic and military dominance. Meanwhile our media pushes the Russian red scare that does not exist and ignores the China real red scare. China a country that puts people in camps for their spiritual beliefs and does not permit freedom of though in their population.

        2. a subtle comment Jonathan. i read it and agree

          however, the war powers have Russia as a tried and true bete noire, and the mass media approves, so little will change

          moreover, “Western” military and strategic analysts refuse to consider the West as anything like “Christendom” and would consider that a concession to Russian thinking with which they disapprove. So, it never gets off the ground, no matter how obvious it may be

          the billionaires are cutting the checks, they call the tune, and they are the enemy

          Saloth Sar

    2. Barr is far from a shrinking flower and no doubt there is more he and Trump agree on than not.

    3. according to the scientists the Earth’s carrying capacity is about half as many people as it is now, or less;

      with carbon consumption per useless CO2 exhaling, farting worker in the west, at about 10X times “acceptable levels” if a “carbon neutral economy” is to be reached in time to avert climate change catastrophe. See, the interview of Sir Ian Hutchinson, MIT physics professor, by Lex Fridman, that’s i”ve posted here often

      Im wondering how the UN and the Scientists are going to decide which billions will have to die to avert the catastrophe?

      Is this what they’re going to acomplish with their new idea: “national carbon emergencies?

      Saloth Sar

  19. “History will show…” The Left writes the history books. Given the current direction of the Left’s academicians, what do you think the chances are of Barr or anyone associated with Trump getting a fair shake?

Comments are closed.