“I think our nation was turned on its head for 3 years based on a bogus narrative,”
~ Attorney General Bill Barr in an interview with Pete Williams of NBC News
Attorney General Bill Barr thinks the FBI might have acted in “bad faith” in the predication of the Trump-Russia collusion and the continuation of the probe. The Attorney General made his comments in an interview with NBC News’ Pete Williams.
“I think our nation was turned on its head for three years based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely fanned and hyped by a completely irresponsible press,” Barr said. “I think there were gross abuses…and inexplicable behavior that is intolerable in the FBI.”
“I think that leaves open the possibility that there was bad faith.”
Barr argued that Horowitz didn’t look very hard and that the inspector general accepted the FBI’s explanations at face value.
“All he said was, people gave me an explanation and I didn’t find anything to contradict it…he hasn’t decided the issue of improper motive,” Barr said. “I think we have to wait until the full investigation is done.”
He told Williams there was spying on the campaign.
“It was clearly spied upon,” Barr said. “That’s what electronic surveillance is … going through people’s emails, wiring people up.”
He said that using the “thinnest” of reasons to start a counterintelligence probe of a presidential campaign could mean the potent powers of the state will be used against a president. It has never been done before.
“From a civil liberties standpoint, the greatest danger to our free system is that the incumbent government use the apparatus of the state … both to spy on political opponents but also to use them in a way that could effect the outcome of an election,” Barr said. He added that this was the first time in history that “counterintelligence techniques,” were used against a presidential campaign.
They relied on “very flimsy” reasons and there should be reasoned thought in such a situation. It turned out that it was completely baseless.
Barr explained that Presidents are frequently in contact with foreign governments during a campaign and you don’t automatically say it’s “nefarious.”
It is clear that Barr is worried about the erosion of the presidency.
Barr said the biggest outrage is that the FBI’s “case collapsed after the election and they never told the court and they kept on getting these renewals.”
NBC diverted and said the report doesn’t say it collapsed, it says the FBI says the dossier was collapsing but they had moved well beyond that. The report might say that but it’s obvious Barr thinks it collapsed at that point.
On Monday, Durham added his voice to Barr’s criticism of the IG report, saying, “Last month, we advised the inspector general that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the F.B.I. case was opened.”
Barr said Durham’s much-criticized statement was appropriate.
“It was necessary to avoid public confusion,” he said. “It was sort of being reported by the press that the issue of predication was sort of done and over. I think it was important for people to understand that Durham’s work was not being preempted and that Durham was doing something different.”
The probe hardly seems like it was based on the slightest bit of good judgment. It has torn the country apart and cost at least $34 million dollars while keeping the President from leading. It was baseless and they found nothing with which to charge the President.
The 400+ page FISA abuse report by Inspector General Michael Horowitz has three bottom lines. One is there is no political bias, two, that the predication is legitimate, and three, the FBI was dishonest in obtaining FISA warrants.
This report shows the FBI withheld exculpatory evidence so how can there be no political bias? The only other possible explanation is the FBI is incapable. The premier law enforcement agency in the world where only the best of the best need apply couldn’t supply exculpatory evidence or act on it. That is what they are telling us.
The report is filled with excuses. It revolves around typical rationalizations. In order to believe its conclusions, one must also believe that the FBI doesn’t know how to properly request an investigation of a campaign.
Their dishonesty in securing the warrants demonstrates bias and a predisposition as to the conclusions that are to be drawn.
The endless pages of the report try to reinforce the conclusion with excuses as to why they proceeded — allegedly lawfully — with a probe on the thinnest of evidence. The evidence is one alcohol-fueled conversation with Trump ally, Australian diplomat Alexander Downer, and extraneous campaign adviser George Papadopoulos. That is the reason they gave for the probe of a presidential campaign. The flimsy information Papadopoulos shared was given to him by a shady character with ties to the FBI and other intelligence agencies.
Basically, the most important reason they give as predication is they are allowed to according to the directive and their interpretation of it. Where good judgment, common sense, and decency enter into it is unknown.
They did not extend the courtesy of briefing the President with the truth as they have done in the past with Senator Diane Feinstein and her alleged spy, or the late Senator McCain, and his oligarch friend.
As far as political bias, it’s evident all over the report. You can read it for yourselves. One example is with the dossier. They knew it was bunk, yet they used it to get a FISA warrant on an innocent American — Carter Page. That’s only one of many examples.
Do you believe the FBI can’t fill out FISA warrants? Then you will like this report.