New Emails Show Unsuccessful and Unrelenting Pressure on Barr and Rosen from Trump to Intervene in the Election

Newly released emails show the pressure brought by the White House on both former Attorney General Bill Barr and his brief successor, acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, to intervene in the 2020 election.  Both Barr and Rosen refused to intervene and pushed aside numerous efforts to arrange meetings with Trump counsel and to file federal complaints.  What is astonishing is the degree to which these pressures continued in the brief period in which Rosen served as acting Attorney General in the final days of the Administration.

The emails given to the House Oversight Committee show how Barr refused to give credence to the electoral fraud claims of individuals like Rudy Giuliani before Trump forced him out in the waning days of the Trump Administration. The pressure was then brought on Rosen to do what Barr refused to do including filing a complaint drafted by the Trump legal team. The pressure was highly inappropriate and Rosen continued the position of Barr in refusing special efforts.

When Barr was pushed out by Trump after public attacks, it appeared entirely gratuitous and unnecessary.  After all, there were only a few days left to the Administration. However, it now appears that Trump counsel used the substitution to resume the pressure for an intervention. Many of the emails reference the theory that Dominion Voting Systems were used to change votes and the more recently discussed theory that Italy was using satellites and military technology to change votes.

The pressure on Rosen came from a number of sources, including Trump’s chief of staff, Mark Meadows, who asked about investigating the Italian satellite allegations.  When Meadows’ email was forwarded by Rosen to Rich Donoghue, the acting deputy attorney general, Donoghue wrote back that it was “pure insanity.” Rosen responded that he was pressed to arrange a meeting between the FBI and a Giuliani associate, but refused. He told them to use the FBI tip line — a suggestion that Rosen recounted was viewed as “insulting” by Giuliani.  It was a clear message that there would be no back channel to the DOJ.

What is troubling is that the pressure on Rosen started as soon as Barr announced his resignation for later that month.  This included the sending of a draft complaint for the Justice Department to file to “declare that the Electoral College votes cast” in the six battleground states that Trump lost “cannot be counted.”  The draft was reportedly sent to Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall and is highly unusual and, in my view, highly improper.  One email leaves no question of where the pressure is coming from, stating “As I said on our call, the President of the United States has seen this complaint, and he directed me last night to brief AG Rosen in person today and discuss bringing this action,” he wrote in one email. “I have been instructed to report back to the President this afternoon after this meeting.”

Not only do the emails further vindicate Barr in this protection of the integrity of the Department but the disclosures follow Attorney General Merrick Garland adopting some of the Barr positions previously denounced as raw political abuses by legal experts on networks like CNN and MSNBC.

595 thoughts on “New Emails Show Unsuccessful and Unrelenting Pressure on Barr and Rosen from Trump to Intervene in the Election”

  1. Ben you can beleive whatever you wish regarding Biden.

    All your remarks do is confirm that you do not live in reality.

    What is happening – is actually happening.

    If you wish to wear rose colored glasses and pretend that black is white and up is down – i can not stop you.

    But reality exists – and whether we beleive in it or not – we live in it.

    I hope that things do not get as bad as many predict – despite Biden – we all want a healthy and robust economy.

    We do not want a repeat of the obama administration where what should have been a strong and quick rfecovery was stomped on by the Obama administration. But we are seeing the same and worse right now.

    Whoever was elected in 2020 should have been able to coast through an incredible 2021 – as the ecconomy shifted into high gear.

    There is plenty of evidence that it is TRYING to do so. But results are way below expectations.
    And more serious dark predictions of hyper inflation, stagnation even recession are emerging.

    The reality is that Biden has dramatically underperformed – not expectations of Biden – but of just doing nothing.

    And fear is starting to overshadow hope.

  2. “Trump lost.”

    He did ? How do we know ?

    Three states would have flipped the election – a total of 45,000 votes.

    NYC just screwed up 135,000 votes int he democratic primary.

    In New Jersey the courts through out 25% – about 250,000 ballots in the 2020 primary.

    The problems in NJ and NYC were SMALLER than what we know occured in 6 cities in the US.

    All we know so far is that – democrats and the courts are perfectly able to see problems in their own primaries – but go lawless and blind when their opponents are republican.

    That is pretty damning to democrats – and to the courts.

    Raffensberger – you know your “hero” – is now moving to get the Fulton county elections offices decertified – for a long history of fraud and incompetence. He wants the State of GA to take over elections in Fulton county – the problems there are so bad.

    We also now know that he lied publicly and to Trump.
    FOIA request have exposed emails from election officials reporting actual instances of 2020 fraud to Raffensburger and tghe GA state department as well as discussions of what to do about it – while Raffensberger was telling the public and Trump there was no fraud.

    1. ““Trump lost.”
      He did ? How do we know ?”

      John, that is the question the rhetoric of the left doesn’t seem to answer. Once one of those posters is made to respond in a stickler Stigler way they have no answer. If they recognized mathematics as a scientific discipline, rather than one involving race they would better understand many of the responses that make sense to intelligent people but not to them.

      1. I am absolutely for open transparent elections conducted such that we KNOW we can trust them.

        There should be absolutely no black boxes.

        We should NEVER accept “Trust me”.

        We should presume that left or right – those running elections can not be trusted.

        We should presume that left or right – those seeking election will exploit any oportunity to gain advantage
        and conduct elections accordingly.

        I am not opposed to “federalizing” the elections – to the extent the constitution allows – even changing the constitution to do so if necescary.

        But that should result in more trustworthy elections – not less.

        Ballots should NEVER leave the control of government. Not that i trust government – but atleast is secret ballot elections we know that any ballot fraud is by election officials – not anyone in the universe.

        The entire election process – every step should be subject to public scrutiny. No one should handle any aspect of elections without meaningful public oversight.

        Government issued photo ID should be an absolute requirement to vote – conversely voter registration should go away.

        Primaries should not be conducted by the government. Only general elections. Then there is no need for anything but Voter ID.

        Voting should be in person on a single 24 hour day with poll opening and closing at the same time from maine to Honolulu.

        Absentee voting should be limited to military and for cause.
        There should be no mailin voting.

        Ballots should be on paper and produced with as much effort to preclude forgery as our money.

        Ballots should be counted by hand under public observation. With a viable objection and review process.
        Any machine counting of ballots should be subject to hand audit within a few weeks of the election.

        If the federal government wishes to go after states and localities – go after them for long lines.
        There is no sane reason that urban democrats should have to wait in line while rural republicans can vote in minutes.
        IF rural areas can manage – so can urban ones.

        Just as therte should be no lones to vote – counts should be complete near simultaneously accross the country.

        We should ALWAYS be suspicious when some precinct or county is hours later then the rest of the country.

        It used to be that rural returns came in last – now it is the cities – despite having far more resources.
        Something smells very fishy.

        Where things stink – there should be investigations – ALWAYS.

        Voting is too important. When our courts thwart investigation – our country is in trouble and our government is not legitimate.

        The details I outlined above are not actually critical

        What is important to understand – which is true of government more generally – is there are a million ways to conduct an election.

        But only a handful that can be trusted.

        There is not only one correct answer – but most answers are incorrect.

        1. “Ballots should be on paper and produced with as much effort to preclude forgery as our money.”

          Absolutely! The criminal class doesn’t like counterfeiting to be difficult. Those that object to sound ballots likely have criminal intent.

          1. One of the fundimental issues – one that distinguishes libertarians from the left – and often the right is that of trust.

            Libertarians trust that people will always seek their own self interest. The purpose of government is to prevent them from using force to do so – to thwart criminality – not self interest.

            Libertarians understand that for good or evil people almost always act in their own self interest.

            The same factors that drive people to sell pizza also drive them to counterfeit money.

            We should always allow the greatest individual freedom – but we should always understand that free people acting in their own interest can do so for either good or evil.

            Free markets are a massive force coercing self interest to the good. Freedom means choice – you can buy from the “good guy or the “bad guy” – all other things equal – who do you think will prevail ?

            But elections coerce self interest towards the bad. We must expect that where self interest can result in bad acts and is not regulated by free choice in free markets – that the results will be bad.

            Libertarians acknowledge the need for insitutions with power – but we do not trust anyone with power unregulated by the freedom of others to choose.

            Government misconduct or misconduct in elections has no market force to regulate it. Therefore it WILL occur.

            I do not know whether fraud altered the outcome of this past election.

            I do know that the failure of the courts to enquire assures that it will in the future.

            What is the message the courts sent ?

            That is easy – the threshold for election challenges is so high – that republican or democrat – do your damnest the courts will not interfere.

            1. “Libertarians trust that people will always seek their own self interest.”

              That is basic economics. Create a government agency or even a private charity. The first thought of those working in a government agency is preserving their jobs. Therefore, if the agency was created to monitor a problem or fix one, the end is difficult to achieve.. Doing so is contrary to their self interest. That is why government bureaucracy continues to grow. It is the same with charities. Candy Lightner created MADD, but when it reached its aims, the charity set new targets. I think that is why Candy Lightner resigned.

              1. ““Libertarians trust that people will always seek their own self interest.”

                That is basic economics.”
                It is. Most of libertarianism is classical liberal economics.

                1. John, there is no disagreement. That is why libertarianism presents itself as such a wide spectrum of belief. Some libertarians will not compromise and others will compromise to such a degree that one would not recognize their libertarianism. Reality causes compromise and compromise causes most people to appear as a mixture of different ideologies.

                  1. Compromise is a massive political problem today.

                    PA Act 77 was a compromise between Gov. Wolf and the PA legislature.
                    Ignoring the fact that pa Act 77 violates the PA constitution on its face – and the PA SCOTUS should have struck it.
                    What subsequently happened is that Gov. Wolf essentially reneged on the compromise.
                    He enforced – and even used the courts to expand – well beyond the text of the law those portions of the law he liked while
                    failing to enforce the provisions he did not like.

                    He effectively converted PA Act 77 from the compromise to the legislation democrats would have passed on their own if they could.

                    That is a major reason why in PA there is pretty intense animosity between the legislature which is controlled by republicans and the governor – a democrat. Wolf can not be trusted.

                    This is also a reflection of what is wrong with the modern left – though some of this has been ongoing for 40 years.

                    I would remind everyone that “The Wall” was legally authorized by congress in the 80’s – as a result of a compromise between republicans and democrats. As president Trump has ALWAYS had full legal authority to build the wall – every president since Reagan has.

                    What he did not have was budgeted money to do so. Democrats approved building the wall (several times) but have repeatedly refused to fullfill the WHOLE agreement and fund it.

                    This is also part of the reason for the polarized nature of our politics – while this is worse today than ever, democrats – and particularly those on the left can not be trusted.

                    The entire Rahm Emanuel phrase – never let a crisis go to waste exemplifies that for democrats – the ends always justifies the means.

                    Trust is not relevant. This is also why Rep. Schiff, Rep. Swalwell, and Sen. Warner can LIE about such things as the collusion delusion and face no consequences.

                    We also see this with posters here like ATS or Nutacha, or Ben, or svelaz – they either do not see that their hero’s lie constantly or they do not care.

                    You seem to value compromise.

                    You can not compromise with people you can not trust.
                    There is no reason to even try.

                    And we see that more and more in politics.

                    Sen Manchin is getting lots of flack for standing in the way of democrats doing whatever they please – for essentially sticking to past agreements and past norms.

                    I doubt I would agree with Manchin on some policy issues.

                    But it is clear that he is someone that can be trusted.

                    That begs the question what is wrong with the other 49 democrat senators ?

                    I do not like McConnell and he has taken lots of flack for his handling of the Scalia and Ginsberge SCOTUS appointments.
                    But he did NOT violate any norms or rules or agreements in doing so.

                    There are no instances in which the Senate was controlled by one party and the president another in which a SCOTUS appointment was approved in the last year of that presidents term.
                    There are no instances where the president and senate were controlled by the same party in which a supreme court apointment was NOT confirmed.

                    That is blatantly political, but it is a centuries old norm.

                    Seeing Garland as AG – I am very glad he was not put on SCOTUS – he is a revoltingly political AG.

                    I would further note that Garland is compelling me to re-assess Barr.

                    Barr stood up to the lawless forces in the DOJ – but he also stood up to Trump.

                    He worked tirelessly to depoliticize the AG’s office.

                    And Garland has wiped that away like tissue – Barr was ultimately a failure.

                    We are also learning that Trump pressured Barr to investigate election fraud – and Barr resisted.

                    The left portray’s that as condemning Trump.
                    But as we learn more – it is increasingly evident that DOJ needed to step in.
                    To do an honest and thorough investigation of the actual conduct of the election.

                    We now have GA Sec. State Raffensburger – who the left addored when he was standing up to Trump – seeing to decertify The Fulton County Board of elections – why – because they are incompetent, politically corrupt, and fraudlent – with a long history of all of the above.

                    Yet for much of the past 9 months we were told – even by Raffensberger – that was not so.

                    Today Raffensberger is saying that the very people he stood behind in 2020 have NEVER been capable of running a trustworthy election.

                    We also now know that Raffensberger was aware of numerous credible allegations of fraud – and lied to the public and president about them.

                    My point is the importance of Trust.

                    To a large extent I Trust republicans.

                    I do NOT trust them to “do the right thing” – I trust them to “keep their promises”. This is especially true of the so called Trumpists.

                    Those are not the same. Trump and Republicans are WRONG an many issues. With power they will do the WRONG things if they can.
                    But they will do as they promise.

                    Mostly I feel sorry for Biden – I have little doubt he is in serious mental decline and it is hard to hold denile people responsible for their words and actions – but at the same time Biden exemplifies the democratic party.

                    Biden LIED repeatedly in the debates – bald faced lies.
                    He lied about what he had previously done.
                    He lied about what he had previously said.
                    He lied about what he would do as president.

                    During the election – no one had any doubt were Trump stood on any issue – agree or disagree, you knew where he stood.

                    Conversely it was self evident during the election that Biden was lying to half his potential voters on issue after issue.

                    He sought to convince half of them he was a moderate centrist democrat – and the other half that he was a left wing nut.

                    Today we know he lied to the centrists – though that was trivially predictable.

                    And we learn more and more all the time. I can not keep track of the revelations regarding Hunter Biden.
                    Further it is also increasingly self evident – even documented – that Joe Biden KNEW and participated in Hunter’s conduct.

                    I honestly do not care much about Hunter – except that if there were pictures of Eric Trump coked out naked banging an underage girl he would be in jail.

                    What I care about is Joe Biden. Joe Biden sold out his office. He did so as Senator, as VP and is doing so now as president.

                    Democrat, republican – that is not acceptable.

                    Trump was impeached – for attempting to investigate Biden’s public corruption – that speaks very badly of every Senator or house member who voted for Impeachment.

                    Apparently we can not investigate democratic public corruption anymore.

                    Again – how do you work with those you can not trust ?

                    Compromise is a VALUE – it is NOT a principle.
                    It is not possible without trust.
                    It is not desireable when principles are at stake.

                    Compromise is a useful tool – but it is vastly overrated.

                    Way too many political centrists elevate compromise to the level of principle.

                    That is both dangerous and immoral.

                    I do not speak for all libertarains. But I think your assertion regarding liberarians and compromise is flawed.

                    One of our most significant disagreements is that you place too much importance on compromise.

                    Compromise is a legitimate means to an end – it is a tool – it is NOT an end in and of itself.

                    Compromise can be wise, it can also be a huge mistake. The significance of compromise varies with the facts.

                    Today one of the most critical facts is that the left and democratic party are not even close to trustworthy – not even by abysmal political standards of trust.

                    That means compromise is outside consideration and will be until trust is restored.

                    1. “You seem to value compromise.”

                      John, that is true and for some of my business to function compromise is a necessity. However, compromise means both parties maintain trustworthiness and principles. The Democrats of today are not trustworthy and they espouse no principles. They are hypocrites so compromise today is impossible. Many Republicans have no principles as well. That is a problem.

                      As you well know in business one learns who they are dealing with so history is important. (You disagree with that concept on the blog). Think, simple negotiation is compromise, and that is why in the end a solid legally binding contract is a necessity.

                    2. “John, that is true and for some of my business to function compromise is a necessity.”

                      Government is radically different from business.

                      I am hard pressed to think of a common instance in which compromise in business involves principles.
                      The few I can think of have government on one side.

                      Conversely most government political compromises require compromise of principles.

                      “The Democrats of today are not trustworthy and they espouse no principles.”
                      Politicians are mostly not trustworthy. Democrats are merely worse than most.

                      “They are hypocrites so compromise today is impossible. Many Republicans have no principles as well. That is a problem.”
                      Few republicans have principles. At best they are not as bad as democrats.

                      “As you well know in business one learns who they are dealing with so history is important.”
                      Voluntary exchange is always about trust – Would you buy a hamburger from someone you do not trust ?

                      One of the big deals of ecommerce has been establishing the means for two parties who have not direct history to trust each other.

                      The reputation systems that ebay and amazon and other internat vendors have established are critical.

                      “You disagree with that concept on the blog”
                      I did ? When ?

                      “Think, simple negotiation is compromise, and that is why in the end a solid legally binding contract is a necessity.”

                      That is more complex. Enforcement of contracts is a legitimate role of government.
                      The fact that government is to be a neutral arbiter of contracts is part of why they should not participate in commerce.

                      You can not both be a participant and a neitral arbiter.

                    3. “The fact that government is to be a neutral arbiter of contracts is part of why they should not participate in commerce.“

                      Government shouldn’t. If it were small as intended major principles would not be involved. They would be following the Constitution. They would be compromising on things like, how big an army was needed. In the end the Constitution was a compromise and the acceptance of the Bill of Rights was as well.

  3. “You are a classic, not-too-bright conspiracy theory nutcase.”

    So what conspiracy theory have I advanced that has proven false ?

    You keep fixating on nonsense like Chem trails no one has heard of.

    “And Election Fraud is the latest BS iceberg you are clinging to.”
    I have made no allegations of election fraud.
    The election was inarguably lawless – that enabled fraud.
    How much fraud – we do not know.

    All elections have fraud.
    All elections have error.

    Error’s mostly cancel, Fraud usually does not.

    But we can not tell the scale of the fraud and its effect without investigation.

    The lefts idiotic claims regarding 2016 were thoroughly investigated – and came to naught.

    Hopefully we will get a real investigation of 2020.

    “Darren: Please ban me. This is a waste of time.”

    You are capable of banning yourself. You do not need Daren to impose discipline on you.

    Regardless, lets vote on how quickly you will be back under a different name.

Leave a Reply to john Say Cancel reply