Why hasn't Barr recused himself?

Jump to Last Post 1-3 of 3 discussions (48 posts)

83
Don Wposted 4 years ago
AG William Barr was implicated in the formal complaint submitted by a Whistleblower in the Intelligence Community (there are reports of a second whistleblower complaint , but I don't know if Barr is implicated in that complaint also). It's alleged he was instrumental in Trump's attempt to get a foreign leader to investigate the son of his political rival, in exchange for military aid.

Good legal practise dictates that Barr, as someone implicated in the allegation, recuse himself from decisions relating to that allegation.The reasons that's good practise I hope are obvious.

So when is Barr going to recuse himself, and why hasn't he already?
reply report
1. 62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  He won't recuse himself as long as he can help defend Trump in some manner. He already believes Trump is above the law and do no wrong. A dangerous concept for a free countrylike ours.
  reply report
  83
  Don Wposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Then the House should be calling for his recusal.
  
  How can someone who is named in an allegation, also be the person who makes decisions about how the DoJ responds to those allegations? It's like asking a lawyer who has been accused of corruption to decide if the case against him should go to court. It's madness.
  reply report
  76
  DoubleScorpionposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Doesn't this also describe Schiff and the whistleblower? How can someone preside over something if they are a fact witness?
  reply report
  83
  Don Wposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Schiff is not implicated in the complaint. Barr is. Just like Sessions was implicated in an allegation when he was AG. Whatever you think of Sessions, he did the right thing by recusing himself from the investigation. Barr should do the same.
  reply report
  79
  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  The WB statement was very vague. Seems one would need some form true complaint against Barr instead of ----- " appears to be involved as well".
  
  WB complaint " the complaint reads. “This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.”
  
  In regards to Schiff he lied openly on TV... Multiple times
  
  "The second lie is when Schiff said on national television that he and his committee had no prior contact with the whistleblower who filed a complaint about the phone call between Trump and the president of Ukraine that launched the impeachment inquiry.
  
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … tleblower/
  
  Even The Washington Post’s fact-checker called Schiff out on this, giving him four “Pinocchios” – the highest condemnation for a lie. The truth was that the whistleblower came to Schiff’s committee and then filed a complaint with the intelligence community’s inspector general.
  
  The truth should speak for itself. And the American people deserve it. We don’t need Adam Schiff’s spin and falsehoods."
  reply report
  83
  Don Wposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  The allegation that Barr was a "central figure" in Trump's scheme, is more than enough to warrant his recusal. Until investigations into these allegations are concluded, Barr should not be the person who makes decisions about how the DoJ responds to any criminal or law enforcement matters that arise from those allegations.
  
  Regarding Shiff, he said he should have been clearer. I tend to agree with the Post that, at best, he was being less than frank (though four pinocchios is a bit harsh). Either way, the committee Schiff chairs has contact with people submitting such complaints all the time. The standard advice seems to be to consult a lawyer and refer to the local Inspector General. All publicly available information suggests that is exactly what this whistleblower was advised also. None of that has any relevance to the impeachment inquiry and the question of whether Barr should recuse himself.
  reply report
  79
  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  He lied, and he meant to lie. He has been caught lying time after time. During the Mueller investigation, he repeatedly lied about having information that he could ensure the viewers Trump committed collusion. His lies will catch up to him.
  reply report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Schiff could never catch up with the number of Trump's falsehoods. Are you saying you dislike liars, Shar?
  reply report
  79
  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  The subject was Schiff recusing himself? He should recuse himself due to his bias and affinity to lie.
  reply report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  So what should Trump do about his daily lies, Shar? Resign? Just wanting to know if you like liars or not. Seems as if they're on the Right is doesn't count to you.
  reply report
  83
  Don Wposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  The subject is: Why hasn't Barr recused himself?
  reply report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I suspect Barr is playing a game by not recusing himself, Don. If he did, the Deputy AG could appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate of wrongdoing by Trump. As it is, the House is forced to do it's own investigation without the benefit of using the Justice Department's excellent investigators.
  reply report
  83
  Don Wposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Allegations against Shiff are irrelevant to whether Barr should recuse himself. Barr has been described as a "central figure" in a whistleblower complaint being investigated as part of an impeachment inquiry. He is the head of a department that makes prosecutorial decisions, and which includes a law enforcement agency. Legal good practice dictates he recuse himself from decisions relating to this inquiry, or matters arising from it, due to the clear conflict of interest. So, as per the title of this thread, why hasn't he recused himself?
  reply report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  This is Fox line, DS. They kill me with all of the evidence they haven't seen yet. They describe Schiff in terrible terms without having a clue of what's going on behind doors.
  
  The past weeks of inquires are held behind closed doors just as Grand Juries are because there's no Special Investigator. Andy why not, you may ask? Because Barr won't appoint one. Another reason for him to recuse himself.
  reply report
  76
  DoubleScorpionposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Schiff himself admitted to having contact with the whistleblower prior to...
  There was a special investigator...Mueller...so do we need another for this phone call, which had both the whistleblower report and transcript declassified and released?
  
  Schiff is doing some shady stuff, just based on what I see from the twitter accounts of various congress folks (including Schiff)...Just yesterday, more than a few congress folks were saying that Schiff was instructing the witness to not answer certain questions... but, since they are in private, content shouldn't be a factor, since leaks shouldn't be happening from a classified inquiry...correct? That is why they are doing this in private...due to classification concerned...correct? Although, I did hear Schiff say, he was doing it in private because he didn't want anyone to know what was happening, "to prevent witness tampering"..
  
  And just so you are aware...I don't watch the news...any channel or network...except the local news for weather and traffic in the am prior to leaving for work.
  reply report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  If Schiff does anything illegal, he should face the consequences with a lawsuit by the Republicans.
  
  Otherwise, none of us on either side of the issue can speculate what is happening behind closed doors.
  
  We'll see the evidence soon with the impeachment inquiry and the impeachment vote.
  reply report
  95
  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  "We'll see the evidence soon with the impeachment inquiry and the impeachment vote."
  
  How so? There isn't a chance that we the people will ever see all that went on behind the closed doors, and we already know that Democrats are going to vote in virtual lockstep along party lines, as will Republicans, on the impeachment vote. And you call this "evidence"? Evidence of American politics at work, maybe, but certainly not evidence of a crime (unless the failure to have any ethical standards is a crime).
  reply report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Obvious. Republicans can blab all they want to the public. They do it already.
  
  Show me a law that says Democrats can talk to the public and Republicans can't.
  reply report
  76
  DoubleScorpionposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  gag order by Schiff under threat of ethics charge...at least that is what they are saying.
  reply report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Who are "they"?
  reply report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I just did a quick search on "schiff gag order" and found nothing. I did find plenty about Trump putting a gag order on his own people.
  
  That said, any committee member who releases classified information to the public should face an ethics charge, don't you agree?
  reply report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  They wanted the witness to give them the Whistleblower's identity by asking him a loaded question, Scott. Schiff told the witness not to answer at that point.
  reply report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  That's legal protection of the whistleblower according to the Whistleblower Protection Act, which was passed by both Republicans and Democrats.
  
  It's not a gag order on Republicans for all apsects of the hearings.
  
  https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-con … 7D&r=3
  report
  76
  DoubleScorpionposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Well you could try looking into the interviews of the Republicans that get to sit in on these hearings and what they have to say...But, I doubt you are interested in their comments.
  
  And it is interesting that the only thing you can find in MSM is against Trump, but not on what is happening inside the impeachment hearings...For those interested in due process (the constitution), that should be concerning...
  reply report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  No need to get snippy. That's like saying, of course you don't care what Democrats have to say.
  
  Do you really think the Republicans on Fox News would admit if the hearings are legal?
  
  Anyone who is truly interested in the Constitution should care that the hearings are legal. Trump and his supporters are proving they don't. But Republicans in Congress do because they aren't doing a thing to stop them.
  
  If Schiff has gagged the Republicans or is doing anything illegal, then stop the partisan rhetoric and prove it.
  report
  76
  DoubleScorpionposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  As I have said to others...other than local news for weather and traffic before I go to work, I don't watch the news...
  
  I do however, follow a good portion of the "major" congressmembers...both parties, on twitter and various other Social Media...and I get to see what their official accounts say...
  
  So, I just repeat what they have posted on their official accounts...
  
  But, since it is all in private, it is a case of he said/she said...
  But, if it is true, then I would say it is very shady...
  And I am all about the constitution...and it says the HOUSE has authority to conduct impeachment proceedings....not just a few members of the house...
  
  have you read the proposal that is being voted on today?
  The restrictions, who gets to decide what will or will not happen, who can or can't be subpoenaed, what can or will be released to the public..? Does that sound like due process?
  
  What happens if this vote fails? What then?
  report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  No chance the vote will fail, DS. Wishful thinking of many though.
  report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Again, if Schiff has gagged the Republicans or is doing anything illegal, then prove it.
  
  Otherwise, explain why Republicans in Congress and the Trump administration aren't filing lawsuits to stop the impeachment inquiry.
  
  They certainly have the money, the power and the legal right.
  report
  95
  wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I'm curious: do you find it ethical (as opposed to legal) for Democrats to attempt to impeach a president of the opposing party without involving Republicans in the most serious thing they will do during their tenure in office?
  
  Seems to me that this action should absolutely be a bi-partisan affair, with both sides of the room deeply involved, yet it has been as one sided as possible, with the opposing political party virtually barred from any participation at all. Do you find that to be ethical?
  report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  "With the opposing political party virtually barred from any participation at all."
  
  Not only is that statement false, which I have proven repeatedly including comments above, but you are claiming unethical behavior with zero evidence.
  
  Likewise, I'd love to see an explanation of Republicans' "bipartisan" behavior during the Clinton impeacment.
  report
  89
  savvydatingposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Trump loves you.
  report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you, but irrelevent.
  report
  89
  savvydatingposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  wilderness....By now you know he is not concerned about ethics. He stated, "I have proven repeatedly including comments above, but you are claiming unethical behavior with zero evidence."
  
  Yet he has not proven anything repeatedly, nor will he ever.
  report
  0
  promisemposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Trolling again, eh?
  report
  89
  savvydatingposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  No, actually. Trolling is your MO, not mine. You failed to make your argument. I pointed that out. No need to be snarky.... as usual.
  
  Not that you care, but the rules of the resolution are not fair. They are as follows:
  
  https://www.scribd.com/document/4325897 … from_embed
  
  The Republicans have to prove, in writing, why they should be allowed to call a witness and provide testimony. Schiff, a known liar and someone who is not even respected by his peers, can then decide whether he will allow it. The entire process is a sham, not to mention, a waste of time and money.
  As for my part, I intend this to be my last communication with you. Some might find the pdf useful.
  report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  Not even close to a good flounce, SD. Try saying, "Well, I nevah"!
  report
  76
  DoubleScorpionposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  You know....I seriously doubt any proof I provided would be good enough....
  
  The problem with many...they are so pro or anti Trump that no amount of proof is good enough...
  
  The only thing I care about myself...is that everything is done legally and fairly...if Trump is guilty fine...if innocent then fine...but, after seeing the vote today...I would say this is a very partisan effort to impeach a president and while it may skirt the line of being legal...there is nothing fair or moral about what is going on currently.
  
  And I would guess that this whole affair is going to be very bad for the Democrat party..
  report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  So you have no problem with a sitting President holding up approved funding until the country opens an investigation into his main political opponent?
  report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  The Republicans are openly leaking this info, DS?
  report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  People never get to see all that goes on in a Grand Jury, Dan. That's why Barr doesn't want to release the unredacted Mueller GJ transcripts.
  reply report
  79
  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I will be investing in popcorn. Do you think it would be smarter to replace Adam Schiff before the open inquiry starts? It seems that there is already speculation on his ability to be non-bias. Just speaking with friends, I can see he has been labeled bias as well as not being "friends" with the truth
  
  it well appears he lied about when he was first aware of the whistleblower, and the fact the WB had contact with his office long before the complaint was reported.
  
  Just seems it would be wise for him to recuse himself.
  
  "The Washington Post’s fact-checker called Schiff out on this, giving him four “Pinocchios” – the highest condemnation for a lie. The truth was that the whistleblower came to Schiff’s committee and then filed a complaint with the intelligence community’s inspector general.
  reply report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  It's hilarious to see a Trump fan indignant when they accuse one of his antagonists of not telling the truth.
  reply report
  79
  Sharlee01posted 4 years agoin reply to this
  In his own words... He lied openly at press confremce
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqEi8tcFAOs
  
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … tleblower/
  
  The Washington Post’s fact-checker called Schiff out on this, giving him four “Pinocchios” – the highest condemnation for a lie. The truth was that the whistleblower came to Schiff’s committee and then filed a complaint with the intelligence community’s inspector general.
  reply report
  62
  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  For not watching any news you're parroting Hannity and Limbaugh well. So where do you get your facts if you don't watch any news sources?
  
  You apparently don't understand the process either.
  reply report
62
Randy Godwinposted 4 years ago
I wonder if there's a reason the House hasn't demanded his recusal? Nancy may have something up her sleeve....
reply report
1. 83
  Don Wposted 4 years agoin reply to this
  I wonder.
  
  The legal profession is taking notice though. The NY Bar Association is calling for Barr's recusal:
  
  "The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has a unique role in safeguarding the rule of law under the Constitution. By failing to recuse himself from DOJ’s review of the Ukraine Matter, Attorney General William P. Barr has undermined that role. To help remedy that failure, the New York City Bar Association urges that Mr. Barr recuse himself from any ongoing or future review by DOJ of Ukraine-related issues in which Mr. Barr is allegedly involved. If he fails to do so, he should resign or, failing that, be subject to sanctions, including possible removal, by Congress."
  
  https://thehill.com/homenews/administra … e-dealings
  
  That seems pretty clear to me.
  reply report
62
Randy Godwinposted 4 years ago
Hmmmm. Trump's GOP support drops 13% since July according to one poll. This comes out to average 1 in 4 Republicans changing their support for the cretin. Watch this snowball when everything comes out in the Impeachment hearings.
reply report

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

Necessary

Features

Marketing

Statistics

Approve All & Submit
Approve Checked Only

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Why hasn't Barr recused himself?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Why hasn't Barr recused himself?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies