Full Interview – AG Bill Barr Discusses IG Report and FBI Institutional Issues With Political Corruption…

U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr has sent the totality of the U.S. media into spasmodic fits of apoplexy today as he discusses the findings of the DOJ inspector general review of a highly corrupted FISA process.

The Attorney General talks about how the FBI weaponized their official duty in an effort to carry out what seems to be a political agenda.  Mr. Barr goes into detail with his thoughts on the current criminal review assigned to U.S. Attorney John Durham; and the unfortunate issues with a group at the top of the organization who politicized the FBI as an investigative agency and used an alliance of media assets to achieve political goals.

.

Many people are writing and asking for my personal opinion of AG Bill Barr. I shall provide that below.

.

Thoughts: Leading up to the trial of George Zimmerman he had two attorneys: Mark O’Mara and Don West. Don West was the deliberate and angered attorney who was rightly furious over how a completely false case was assembled against his client. The entire CTH community agreed on the value of Don West.

(Left to Right) Mark O’Mara, Don West, Mark Geragos.

However, Don West wasn’t the lead attorney… there was another, Mark O’Mara.

Mr. O’Mara gave the intentional impression of being above it all, elevated above the politics, and affable to the groups who wanted to hang Zimmerman in the town square and also understandable toward the defenders of Zimmerman who recognized the rail-roading.

O’Mara became a Rosetta stone. Some Zimmerman supporters saw O’Mara as self-serving, duplicitous, cunning (not in a good way) and essentially deceiving his client by not trying to be assertive in defense. Others saw O’Mara as smart, prudent and staying above the fray to be more influential toward the benefit of his client amid circles of media opposition.

The strong differences of opinion over O’Mara were fought on the pages of CTH for over a year. Pro-O’Mara and Anti-O’Mara we both good groups of people; excellent and passionate people; but each saw Mark O’Mara in a different way.

Personally I did not see Mark O’Mara in a good light. I predicted his positioning was to gain a lucrative media gig at the conclusion of a fraudulent trial. [He took a CNN contract within three weeks of trial ending]  But more important than that recognition of selfish sensibility was the evidence.

The evidence was overwhelming (at least to CTH in 2012) that Witness #8, Rachel Jeantel, was an imposter.

The anonymous Witness #8 was the only reason the State of Florida could get an arrest. Witness #8 was also manufactured by the corrupt Scheme Team of Trayvon’s family.

Completely made up.

Incredibly the corrupt State of FL prosecution team consisting of SAO Angela Corey and Bernie De La Rionda went along with a criminally corrupt prosecution using evidence they knew was manufactured.

If we knew the manufacturing of evidence to be true… demonstrably and provably true.. well, Don West and Mark O’Mara certainly knew it to be true.

Yet Mark O’Mara did nothing about it… EVER. O’Mara knew the state had manufactured evidence. O’Mara Explicitly knew his client was being railroaded by a criminal enterprise carried out by the State of Florida and Trayvon Martin Family. And Mark O’Mara never brought it up before, during, or even after the trial… Not once.

Attorney Mark O’Mara won the case because the case itself was a fraud. However, the “case” never should have gone to trial. In my passionately frustrated opinion O’Mara should have called out the fraud and defended his client by avoiding the ridiculous trial.

[NOTE: Seven years later, with Witness #8 admitting to the fraud, George Zimmerman is rightly suing all of those who participated.]

Why do I bring up this example?

Because in my opinion, having watched nine months of his professional effort, right now the metaphor is: Bill Barr is Mark O’Mara, the U.S. Constitution is George Zimmerman, and we’re about to go to trial again.

Peace.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Election 2020, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, Political correctness/cultural marxism, President Trump, Professional Idiots, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

572 Responses to Full Interview – AG Bill Barr Discusses IG Report and FBI Institutional Issues With Political Corruption…

  1. Carly says:

    Barr hit all the right nails on the head. He’s authentic. That’s my take and I see no reason to be a sourpuss today of all days.
    On a related note, we need to insert ourselves in as much as possible and not expect one man or a small team of men to do all the MAGA work.

    Liked by 9 people

    • L4grasshopper says:

      My confidence in Barr went up today.

      Liked by 6 people

    • Dr. Buzz says:

      I logged in to bring up a point. It’s nagging me like a splinter in my mind. What was the effect of this corrupt conspiracy, on the 2018 election? Why is no one talking about this? The country has suffered severe and irreparable harm. Millions and millions of dollars in bogus investigations, so called impeachment hearing, lost momentum and the will of the people circumvented. I want more than a pound of flesh. I want to see high level people including politicians in orange jump suits.

      Liked by 1 person

      • LIG says:

        Me too. When I found out DNC and Hitlary paid for the dossier and the coup plotters in government ran with it; I find them all guilty for this deep and wide coup. Jail jail jail for these treasonous traitors. Disrupt their lives, livelihood , and family should be stretched to the limit . Let them feel the shame of trials, jail time and the kiss from the devil when they are identified for their part of the plot. If there is no justice for these wrongs our investigators, Fib , and police can never be trusted again. This will harm our county in a way we may never be able to overcome. I’m praying for attorney general Barr and the Durham team that they will expose this treason.

        Like

      • Super Elite says:

        I agree with you, Doc. I’d like my pound of flesh from the heart.

        Like

    • What motive would Barr have in making such “inflammatory” comments, if not to undercut the victory lap the seditionists would otherwise be taking and telling MAGA nation to keep the faith?

      Liked by 1 person

    • I have a hard time not getting enthusiastic about Barr-Durham. If there was not intent to follow-up, why would they be making such inflammatory statements and cutting off the victory lap the seditionists would otherwise be taking?

      Like

  2. The Far Side says:

    Thanks SD for your honesty and clarity. Our contry is teetering like Guam. Ready to capsize.
    Good to come here for a foothold.
    BTW…PT45 is on fire in PA!!!

    Liked by 6 people

  3. cocamars says:

    Barr isn’t currying favor with the MSM. In fact he is now Public Enemy #2 (Trump is #1 forever.) He could be sitting in an easy chair getting a tan in the Villages in Florida. He doesn’t need this thankless gig, but he is doing this because he is going to expose the Swamp underbelly.. This NBC interview is his warning shot.

    Liked by 18 people

    • vikingmom says:

      From your lips to God’s ear…I pray that you are correct!

      Liked by 5 people

    • I appreciate your opinion, but looking at Sd’s comments on Barr, historically, can you really argue?

      Like

      • cocamars says:

        As far as people’s motive, SD isn’t 100%, but who is? I recall positive comments about the “white hats” like Priestap and Sessions, who weren’t .
        However I tip my hat to SD’s dissection of government documents I would never have the patience to go through and tracking down people on the internet ( Monica McLean, Blasey Ford’s beach friend springs to mind). That’s what keeps me coming to this site.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Gregreyalan says:

      I gotta say….
      There is a often occurring tendency to
      fail to put things in proper HISTORICAL
      The actions and Words ( like it or not the currency of the realm)
      of AG BARR, in support of Our vsgpdjt..
      Cannot be underestimated!!!
      As the now common understanding of FAKE NEWS, this is historic stuff, many of us have be fighting to advance for Decades!

      Sundance, and many… need to take a Bow!
      Take a step back, and marvel at the PROGRESS!!!!

      (Patriot fans were booing a 10-3 team, somehow)

      I marvel at my iPhone…
      Think about when cell phones first appeared..
      And now we have these!!!!

      Smell the Roses for a bit.

      Think of the Pressure BARR is under, and how he could have weaseled around…
      (which would be crushing, given the timing )
      He Didn’t!!!
      He stood TALL.

      (Side note much like my comments on nicki haley,
      a few weeks ago, not what you say, in support of PDJT
      but when)

      So to fellow treepers…
      Step back and admire the gains.
      Smile
      and remain optimistic.
      Remember if We trust Lord Trump…
      then trust him.

      ☮️

      Liked by 1 person

    • flyboy46 says:

      I saw somewhere Barr has 3 daughters, and they ALL became lawyers. Now how likely is that? Obviously he loves the law, and that was transmitted to the girls at home. I’d bet my life on it.

      Like

      • jebg46 says:

        Perhaps this is more about his daughters and his grandchildren so it’s his legacy to their future. He didn’t need to wade back into this swamp to just coverup all the corruption. We can hope and pray this is why he stuck his head up above the swamp dwellers.

        Like

  4. Sundance, I think that your comparison is wildly inappropriate and I think that you should withdraw this piece. It’s simply not fair to Mr. Barr.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Sharon says:

      Sundance expresses his opinion and gives his reasons. Why on earth should he withdraw his opinion just because of what you think?

      It’s kind of like he has a blog where he prepares and writes things and a number of people read daily to be informed – not to be told what to think.

      The fact that you have a different opinion does not constitute reason for him to remove a post.

      Liked by 18 people

    • Me says:

      I don’t think so. Because I think Sundance is only using an analog to describe Barr being is a similar situation where he (Barr), like O’Mara, was aware of fraudulent activity as plain as day, and from this point forward it will be determined whether Barr maintains his original middle-name or will he forever be called William ‘O’Mara’ Barr. It makes sense to me. 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

      • gustheairedale says:

        Do you charge the wave, the wake from a larger faster ship, or, run past it before cutting over? Strategy, which one. Same me thinks for O’Mara and Barr. I get where SD comes from, I have that cold anger as well, but some situations require other approaches. Bottom line, like O’Mara’s choice or SD’s, I have faith in Barr’s intent and it’s his show now.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Bradley says:

      I agree. This article by SD, who does fantastic work here, basically says that we shouldn’t trust Trump.

      Trump totally trusts Barr and he exudes great confidence that “we got them all”. That’s good enough for me. If Barr was going to whitewash this deal, his golden opportunity was yesterday. All he had to do was accept the IG report as it and the whole thing would have faded into the sunset. Instead he stuck his neck out there.

      Liked by 3 people

      • FriarBob says:

        Just for the record, Trump also initially trusted (or at least publicly claimed to trust) several people, including:

        Reince Priebus
        Steve Bannon
        Anthony Scaramucci
        Jeff Sessions
        Rod Rosenstein

        Some of the people Trump started off trusting turned out to be a mistake. (Not all of course, but some.) So while I hope SD is wrong here, ‘hope’ is not ‘proof’. And just because Trump *currently* trusts Barr does NOT mean Barr is actually ‘in the clear’ (so to speak).

        Liked by 1 person

      • Texian says:

        Robinson – Bradley..

        Deceptive Pursuasion Stylometry in stereo..

        Like

      • Elizabeth Raynor Short says:

        Historically, Barr has been supportive of a strong Executive and the constitutional concept of the Unitary Executive – i.e., the President is the executive branch of of USG and departments or individuals can’t go off on their own preferred policies. The President is the only one who makes policy and USG executive branch must carry it out. For this reason, if no other, Barr will fight for this concept and necessarily for PT. Therefore, I think we should at least trust and verify at this point.

        Like

    • dbobway says:

      ‘Wildly inappropriate’? Come on Mike.
      AG Barr made his career working for the Bush family.
      His job is to take down the edges of the deep state,
      And protect the core of the apparatus, who are the elite few that aspire to control, the everyman, in the world.
      We are dangerously close to exposing them, beyond the rumors.

      Sundance’s metaphor, describing the players is perfectly laid.
      President Trump is sucking the power out of these purveyors of tyranny.
      If the left loses the Black voter, and we get about 10 million people off their ass and vote for their own future?
      It’s over.
      The President will have the support to attack the richest of the greedy, that call our Republic home. Then these miscreants can go off to their caves in New Zealand,
      and rot!
      Best case scenario!

      Liked by 2 people

    • islandpalmtrees says:

      Be careful, I was asking earlier for help in identifying the spies on President Trump and his campaign for a reason. You see, a great many people, I see seriously connected with this story is CIA. To include Barr. I don’t believe in accidents or should consequences.

      Their is more to this story, yet.

      Like

    • Debra says:

      So, George Zimmerman should never have been allowed to defend himself publicly whereupon he could thereby be vindicated by ALL that he had to go through . . .?

      Like

    • Justin Green says:

      You’ve already said this, Mike.

      Wildly inappropriate?

      You’ve defended Horowitz, lol.

      He and Comey both attended the Sergeant Schultz School For Finding Intent and Bias.

      Like

    • milktrader says:

      I agree Mike.

      PTSD check brother with love

      Like

  5. Mike Van says:

    I get your skepticism sundance. I do. Un like the trevon martin case that was watched by housewives and news junkies like us. This is being forced on everyday americans.in their faces every day. Bar cant afford to be on the wrong side of history. THE BIG UGLY HAS STARTED!!!!

    Liked by 2 people

  6. As the leading authority and possibly the only honest and thorough one on the Travonne case, I’ll bet my bank on SD.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Justin Green says:

    Barr talks a better game than Lindsey Graham. But Graham, despite his double talk in front of every camera he can find, won’t lift a finger to fix this national disaster.

    Barr can make speeches all day long. So do Democrats. So do the liberal media. Liberals also act, though. Liberals are about to impeach Trump, and not ONE person has gone to jail over this illegal coup. Not ONE person in jail or facing jail as a result of this coup, including Flynn, has yet to be vindicated and released by this illegal coup.

    Barr, as far as I know, controls the attorneys continuing the illegal case against Flynn. Now would be the perfect time to call off the dogs and shoot them in the head for being rabid. But that hasn’t been done, either.

    Talk all the hell you want. I want to see action.

    I can play Devil’s advocate for Barr all day long, but it wouldn’t convince me. My jury is still out.
    Durham’s statement is, likewise, just talk at this point.

    What motivations does Barr have to be AG when he’s otherwise retired? How about collecting a pension AND receiving a salary at the same time for flying around on taxpayer money and making a few speeches, which he probably misses anyway.

    I’ve written my Congressmen – twice each – only one response out of six contacts – and the response was a generic, non-applicable response. All three have lost my vote.

    I’m donating to Trump directly. I will NOT donate OR VOTE for any other Republican next fall if there are not a string of people doing hard time for their roll in this coup. Period.

    My subsequent donations will be to secessionist groups and groups that support a Convention of the States to make Constitutional amendments to stop this evil bovine excrement.

    Period. Republicans can rot in HELL for allowing this to go this far. We have what, 286 members out of 535 seats in Congress? And I can count on one hand the ones I’d trust to do the right thing – less than 2%.

    Liked by 4 people

    • richard verney says:

      Who do you think gave (or at any rate authorised the provision of) all the new evidence to Sydney Powell? She said that she obtained it from the DOJ. I would have thought that it was inconceivabke that barr was not involved in that.

      This new evidence has blown the Flynn case out of the water. We have yet to see, of course, whether the judge dismisses the case, but the chances of that now happening are quite good.

      The provision of this evidence, which is exposing the dirty deeds of FBI & DOJ, in a judicial setting, could be a very good first move by Barr.

      I do not see how any objective person could, at this stage, justly draw adverse conclusions against Barr. He has not been in office long, and in my opinion, he has achieved quite a bit. and unlike the FBI FISA fiasco, where procedures were not followed and ‘mistakes’ made, Barr knows that everything needs to be done by the book, if proper account is to be made, and perpetrators convicted. There are no short cuts here when the stakes are so high.

      In due course time will tell.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Justin Green says:

        Who gave the evidence to Syndey to help Flynn?

        Why, the same fellow that could have just ordered the DOJ attorneys to drop the case immediately. That’s who.

        Liked by 2 people

      • jbowen82 says:

        Correct, the case against Flynn is a leftover Mueller case. I think Barr is letting it run its course and won’t intervene unless he has to (and he has, in the production of documents to Sydney Powell).

        One of the toughest things to learn as a lawyer is when not to do anything. For me, that was a really frustrating lesson as a “baby lawyer,” because as a Type-A person I wanted to fight everything, but the lead partner of the litigation section at the firm where I started was really (in retrospect) very wise about when to go hard at something and when to hold back. (Not to mention that the client generally can’t afford for his lawyers to fight everything tooth and nail, so the client depends on the lawyer to be efficient with the client’s resources.)

        I think Barr would be perfectly happy to let Sydney Powell be the hero and for his role to be after the fact, in cleaning up the team that will have been demonstrated in open court to be corrupt and unjust.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Justin Green says:

          “Barr’s letting it run its course and won’t intervene unless he has to…”

          Think about that and what he just said in the video above.

          His duty is to prevent the executive branch from abusing its powers.

          Okay, then drop the case against Flynn – tomorrow morning. Prove you meant what you said, Barr.

          Like

        • X XYZ says:

          I’m not a lawyer and I would never want to be one. I literally told that sentence verbatim recently to a judge in consultation of my pre-trial case during litigation, and she laughed and said “Me, neither!”

          I’m not into Zen either. But universal truths and concepts apply, as they are universally applicable. Sometimes the best course of action, as you mentioned, is to say or do nothing. Silence is golden. When you deliberately choose to remain silent – to stop talking and instead focus on your other senses – to see, and hear and think, it is unnerving to your opponents. Then they often will reveal themselves, and you have an advantage over them.

          From what you said, apparently this is not taught in law school. It can be learned through philosophy and attained through life experience.

          This ability does not require a law degree. It helps to have an education, but any fool can do this. Sometimes all it takes is knowing when to shut up. 😉

          Liked by 1 person

          • jbowen82 says:

            Yeah, I’ve had a problem with that my whole life. My first company commander used to tell me at my monthly counseling every month that my strength was that I was in the best shape of any of the LTs and my weakness was that I spoke my mind too much.

            Like

          • X XYZ says:

            Self realization and actualization often come with age. I suspect that the seeds of this were instilled in them when they were young, and they blossomed over time.

            Knowledge + experience = wisdom.

            Some of the few wise people I have ever known had little formal education but attained that attribute over time. Religion and ethical moral standards often were a part of their character and outlook. OTOH, I’ve known many oldsters who were old but assumed that that their age automatically made them wise, and worthy of respect. In that case the only difference between a young fool and an old fool is the number of years.

            Like

      • Justin Green says:

        IOW – Barr doesn’t need to wait on a judge.

        Flynn was a victim of what Barr has just stated he knows to be an abuse of FISA? Then, by golly, you call the prosecutors prosecuting Flynn and tell them to immediately withdraw their case.

        No judgement necessary.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. MNBV says:

    If you are an upper Washington bureaucrat / ex bureaucrat your entire peer / social group is Admin State.
    Your first loyalty is to that elite not to the US nation.
    Barr is doing the good cop for the Deplorables benefit, giving us some crumbs.
    If he’s the real deal he will never get another dinner party invitation.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Justin Green says:

      “Crumbs” would equal several prison sentences. Frankly, speeches aren’t “crumbs” except to the naive. And I don’t think people who follow this – like those here – buy speeches as “crumbs”, either.

      Not only do people need to go to prison, but the right people need to go to prison.

      Prison and punishment are a deterrent to crime. When you let drug dealers off, refuse to prosecute small time crimes, etc., then you get more of it. Simple behavioral theory. If nobody goes to prison over this, or if even it’s only low level people who go to prison, then you’ve provided no deterrent to those actually orchestrating the crimes, and they will continue to commit them as long as it profits them.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. chojun says:

    Nobody:

    Sundance: fire in the hole!

    My personal assessment of Barr is that he recognizes the hyper- partisan political environment of present times. He has to carefully navigate the single largest political scandal in government in US history, which spawned a seditious conspiracy in government and Congress that has been running the entire duration of the Trump administration.

    Barr recognizes the need to put a stop to it. But he has to do it in a manner so as not to join the fray himself.

    That means he will not be able to make everyone happy. But in the end if the conspiracy doesn’t end in civil war 2.0 then he will have succeeded.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Justin Green says:

      But Barr is a retired bureaucrat doing this for love of country. There’s little need for Barr to do anything but the right thing. Which is start sending people to prison.

      Liked by 1 person

      • jbowen82 says:

        The problem, as has been discussed before on these pages, is a DC jury. There’s no way to put together a jury pool in DC that doesn’t include at least one Trump-hating Democrat who will never, ever vote to convict, even if the evidence is staring them in the face. The prosecutors know it and the defense attorneys know it. That means, unfortunately, we may have to be satisfied with less than what justice demands. The process may be the only punishment, in many cases. That being said, my nomination for who turns John Dean is Loretta Lynch. She won’t go down for the others when the evidence starts to stack up.

        And there aren’t going to be any military tribunal trials for sedition for this stuff. All bets are off as to what happens after the inauguration, where I predict there will be violent riots and terrorist incidents. Indeed, after the reelection on November 8, there will be violent attacks on ICE and CBP facilities and officers, abetted and encouraged by prominent Democrats and some in the media. Members of the Electoral College should have round-the-clock protection until they meet in their respective state capitals, because there will be a concerted effort to prevent them from voting to reelect the President. Sorry for getting OT.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Justin Green says:

          Unless Barr starts sweating folks, Loretta Lynch may as well be Sainted by the Pope.

          The first thing Barr can do is have his lawyers drop their case against Flynn. Immediately. There’s little controversy in that, it doesn’t require the right jury, it doesn’t depend on the judge, and it’s justifiable based on the IG report alone.

          And, it’s a no-brainer baby step that could be done within the next few days.

          Let Barr put his money where his mouth is.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Trump Train says:

          Change the venue

          Liked by 1 person

        • Oscar Oddpicker says:

          JB, I appreciate your thoughtful comments. My son (age 15 at the time) and I attended President Trump’s first inauguration. My son and I will attend the second inauguration. We Deplorables out number the leftists 3 to 1. We must show up in person and prove to the leftists who’s really in charge of this great nation.

          Liked by 1 person

        • ann says:

          Change the damn rules. Not meant personally, but really,Mr. Barr.

          What’s more critical, to have an effective prompt means to punish all these crooks who ruined our country or to keep procedures in place in a crooked prosecutors offices, in tainted districts that makes fair trials nearly impossible

          Our government has gone rogue , it’s not serving us, the JD is predatory, it’s treating people who crossed them & their cron8ex as prey

          Why did SDNY swoop in and arrest Rudy’s staff as soon as they returned from Ukraine ?

          The priority is our country, not offending DC “ colleagues”.

          Like

    • sundance says:

      I don’t think I’ll enjoy living in the type of country that Bill Barr plans on saving.

      Like

  10. At about position 7:12 in this interview, Mr. Barr presents an excellent explanation of the “very deferential standard” that – by design – is used by the Office of the Inspector General in conducting its investigations. Take note of it as you read the report. Mr. Horowitz explicitly understands these principles and follows them “by the book.”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Justin Green says:

      Horowitz is a career bureaucrat and Democrat.

      He couldn’t find “bias” if you labeled it, wrapped it in a bow, and shipped it to his door step.

      Horowitz is a degenerate.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Justin Green says:

      To explain further, there’s a concept of ipso facto in the law. “By the fact or act”.

      In other words, the fact that out of all the numerous (17 or more) “errors” that Horowitz found, 100% of them were to Trump’s deficit, is the evidence necessary to prove bias. Period. This is “ipso facto” bias. Could be prosecutorial over-zealousness bias, confirmation bias, or political bias. Factor in the numerous text messages we have so far, the make-up of the Mueller team, and other factors, and even a second grader would be able to recognize the political bias.

      If Horowitz, to “find bias”, needed to find an email that explicitly states, “Because I hate Trump, I am illegally altering evidence to obtain a FISA renewal”, then Horowitz doesn’t know the law, and isn’t doing the FBI any favors as IG, either, even given his limited scope.

      He’s a fraud. Just like Comey was when he couldn’t “find intent” for a violation of the law that by statute requires no evidence of intent.

      FRAUD.

      Liked by 2 people

      • OlderAndWiser says:

        Yep. If the errors were truly unbiased, then the probability of each error to be in trumps favor would be 50%, and the probability of each error to be against trump would be 50%. Just like an unbiased flip of an unbiased coin. So then the probability of ALL the 17 errors to be against Trump would be 1 in 2^17 which is 1 in 131072. Large odds those. Add in the texts and you have a convincing case in court.
        It is actually worse. There is a third possibility – that the error was neutral – it did not help or harm trump. I’d the probability of that is the same as the others then the overall probability is 1 in 3^17!or 1 in about 129 million! Real odds are between the two.
        And if you want to make matters worse, look at the errors in the mid year exam – by the same people! And then the odds become astronomical – billions or trillions.
        Easy case to make.
        If anyone on this site tweets. Please tweet this to the Fox News folks, the senate judiciary folks (including Lindsey), to trump himself along with others on his campaign.
        Show the world the real bias.

        Liked by 2 people

      • jbowen82 says:

        I think the term in this case is “res ipsa loquitor” — the thing speaks for itself. If a wall falls over and someone is found dead under the brick pile, it’s possible that he was already dead of a heart attack before the wall collapsed, but that’s not very likely, and a jury can find that the collapse of the wall was the cause of the person’s death. The thing speaks for itself.

        In this case, I agree with you. Horowitz doesn’t have to “find” anything related to bias — just look at the facts, and the thing speaks for itself.

        Liked by 1 person

      • BitterC says:

        Horowitz says he found no TESTIMONIAL OR DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE of bias (more than once I think…I actually haven’t read the entire document).
        He then goes on to say something to the effect that he got less than satisfactory answers.

        My point is he doesn’t say “there was no bias”. He merely says he found no proof. No one confessed and there were no smoking gun emails.

        The media has run with that statement by ignoring what it really says, and in true GOP fashion, the messaging isn’t addressing this. Even the president whiffed on this tonite at the rally.

        Our side really sucks at messaging

        Like

    • IGiveUp says:

      I always enjoy your comments, including this one. I think though that people would like a system of oversight that applies a very deferential standard to the citizenry and not to the institution in question. To put it another way, many may not like and trust and believe the system of self-policing that’s in place. Is that unreasonable in today’s day and age?

      Liked by 2 people

    • bessie2003 says:

      While I am still reading the IG report, about 2/3 through, I do get it that Horowitz’ focus is to show what happened and to not, absolutely not, make a judgment about what the report uncovers so as to not be accused of bias himself, leaving the conclusion to the AG. That seems to be a given for anyone in an inspector position, like an auditor, just look at the facts, lay out what they are, and move on.

      Seeing how clearly he has held to that approach while reading the report explains to me the reactions of the disconnect from the text of the report vs. the summary of the report that I’ve been picking up on from listening to local and national news sell the summary assumption of justification for spying while the report clearly (so far) hasn’t drawn any conclusions if it was right or wrong, it’s only showing how they did the spying.

      I understand that, this looking at things at a distance, it is by design, writing as un-opinionated report as possible, that’s his job. So far he seems to have done this quite well.

      What will be interesting will be to see how he maintains his non-committal approach in tomorrow’s testimony while being battered with questions from the two highly opposite and partisan sides of this situation. How Mr. Horowitz manages to maintain any semblance of non-partisanship in his answers will show the depth of his commitment, and ability, to do the job asked of an inspector General which will be an example for future Inspector Generals, but if he wavers and starts to show a bias toward one side’s conclusion over the other, could also cause damage to that department’s ability going forward with any agency they will be tasked with to inspect. Similar to what we see in cop shows where no one wants to have any part with internal review boards.

      Like

      • ed furman says:

        Don’t we already know how the “Horowitz Report Chronicles” play out from the original? For the most part, he found no bias last year after laying out example after example of obvious, impactful bias. I honestly don’t remember exactly how he held up last time, but the way I remember it was he held to his no bias conclusions even after being confronted with examples from his report that made the claim look plain silly. I expect the same..

        ‘Horowitz Report Chronicles

        Like

  11. DeWalt says:

    This is frustrating. Keeps saying thinnest of predicate. How about none at all. All the characters in this play knows everything is completely made up but no one will say it. And using Brennan and Obambies phone calls accusing the Russians of bad behavior as proof they were behaving badly. Really, do you think it would dawn on Barr they were doing to the Russians what they were doing to Trump?

    Liked by 1 person

    • CanaCon says:

      I just wish that, instead of just characterizing the predicate as thin, someone would point out that, thin or robust, it was entirely MANUFACTURED (unlike the border crisis).

      Or maybe he’s waiting for Durham. At this point we can only hope.

      Liked by 3 people

      • jbowen82 says:

        I think that’s it. I think he’s being careful to wait until the chain of events leading up to the Downer tip is exposed with evidence that will stand up in court.

        Like

  12. Linda K. says:

    I heard Barr say that Comey refused to sign up for his security clearance renewal, so he could not be questioned by the Inspector General. That is wiley, on Comey’s part. But Durham can get him into a Grand Jury for his past misdeeds and I hope he will.

    Liked by 2 people

    • joeknuckles says:

      Didn’t Jimmy the Weasel give a TV interview after he got fired in which he stated that the pee pee story could be true, for all he knew? Funny that, per the IG report, he knew long before then that it was made up. He was lying his ass off.

      Liked by 1 person

      • CanaCon says:

        I think it was here that I read Comey passed on the security clearance so that he wouldn’t be able to review any classified material that might “refresh his memory”. I believe McCabe pulled the same move.

        Liked by 1 person

  13. Super Elite Lt. Col. Covfefe999 says:

    We’ll see. 🙂

    Like

  14. JohnCasper says:

    Mitt Romney seems much more like Mark O’Mara to me than does William Barr.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. If SD is correct about Barr, Barr is currently outmaneuvering Trump vía the AOTD playbook.

    Barr has the sole declass authority and keeps allowing the redactions in the released reports. He is paying lip service to the FBI crimes but, on the surface doing nothing to stop them.

    On the flip side there is Giuliani doing his OANN stuff whilst under FISA surveillance (trap?).
    I’ll have a glass of wine and let smarter people comment from here.

    Like

    • ed furman says:

      I understand this Durham fella is a bipartisan anti-corruption bloodhound/pitbull. Why hire that guy if the intent is to let it all slide? When taking everything into account since his hire, if Barr is running an inside swamp job, It’s one of the most brilliantly executed cons in history. The Deep State will have earned victory if Barr is playing for them.

      Like

  16. Sharon says:

    As expectations, projections, and assumptions are reduced, so is frustration.

    I don’t expect anything from any of them other than what they have actually produced. I’m never disappointed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ed furman says:

      Deep down inside you still have a little hope. You would be disappointed if those who have produced in the past under similar circumstances didn’t produce in the future. Maybe you’ll only be crushed a little bit for a short period of time. If this has an unhappy ending, you’ll be disappointed. The most pessimistic among us will still be disappointed. Its way too big not to be.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Sharon says:

        I will be horrified if it has an unhappy ending. And I will run ammo for those whose hands and arms are strong enough to handle the weapons. Mine are not.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sharon says:

        If they are not stopped, the harvest of the betrayals being played out will leave me livid.

        The reason I periodically make a statement re expectations is that many seem to be hanging breathlessly on every statement, document, lie, assertion, exposure–desperate to believe that “this will fix them, for sure”. I will not subject myself to that syndrome, much of which does not rise out of authentic, reality-based optimism. It may, in fact, be fed by extreme fear about what is happening and has already happened.

        Like

  17. NC Nana says:

    I haven’t found a reason to trust or distrust AG Barr.

    I haven’t watched his rah, rah speeches lately re: right and wrong. I am strictly watching his actual actions.

    The AG appointed US Attny Durham to do what is a herculean job. By all reports Mr. Durham is a man of integrity and willing to make the really hard decisions based on law. That is good.

    Mr. Barr keeps Christopher Wray as his FBI Director. Mr. Wray has never shown any independent leadership even though he is the leader of a Department. Mr. Wray follows findings and decisions of other people and makes changes based on the requirements set forth by someone else. By doing this he gets the AG’s words of praise and keeps his job.

    The FBI Director is set to serve for a total of 10 years. What will happen when Wray doesn’t get the needed close instructions on how to manage the Department? I don’t trust he can carry through on his own. IMO AG Barr is lacking in this area.

    In reality Wray should be gone. It makes it hard to fully trust Barr when Wray hangs onto his job and walks around bragging about his brand while not showing true leadership. (Look at Admiral Rogers and Congressman Nunes for leaders.)

    Probably my weighty final evaluation may be on how Durham’s investigation is handled. It will be the end decider in the kind of Justice we see and whether there is any hope of cleaning the swamp.

    We’ll see.

    Liked by 2 people

    • NC Patriot says:

      Don’t forget—15 top FBI people are GONE Wray can replace with better ones !

      Like

      • pbr22 says:

        And then get rid of himself.

        Liked by 1 person

      • NC Nana says:

        This is an interesting comment. It made me start thinking. We know who many of the leaders are in some of these Shenanigans; do we know who the foot soldiers are?

        People I would classify as small group leaders are Comey, McCabe, Carlin, McCord, Lisa Page, Peter Strock, James Baker (FBI), E. W. Priestap, and Yates.

        People I think of as possible foot soldiers are Ohr (message carrier for Nellie and Steele), and Clinesmith (document FISA falsifier).

        Some of these people were gone before Wray was appointed. I don’t know how many of the FBI employees were eliminated by Wray and how many he was told to eliminate.

        In January, 2018 Sundance said:

        “In addition to the FBI and DOJ leadership, a small group of around 20 people participated in the weaponization of the FBI Counterintelligence Unit, the DOJ National Security Division, and later the Robert Mueller Special Counsel investigation. All of the investigative headlines surround the former political use of the FBI and DOJ.”

        https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/01/05/walls-close-in-around-doj-and-fbi-small-group-participants/

        ****My question ***

        Do we know who these 20 people are? How many of them were in the FBI. How many are gone?

        Like

        • NC Nana says:

          Ooops, I meant to include Rod (what do want me to do Andy?) Rosenstein on the list of foot soldiers above.

          I think of him using the Nuremberg Defense. Even though he was in a senior classification/position he seemed to follow the orders of others. I don’t see him as the ‘big dog’ at all. In other words he seemed easy to push around. – – Just talking impressions here. Like Wray I wonder how he ever got to such a high position.

          Like

    • Justin Green says:

      I’ll give you one great example, and one that is testable over the next few weeks:

      Barr is in charge of the federal prosecutors prosecuting Flynn. IF Barr actually means what he says, he will instruct the lawyers prosecuting Flynn to immediately withdraw and drop their charges.

      Let’s see what happens.

      Like

      • Linda K. says:

        First, I want the lawyers prosecuting Flynn to be held in contempt of court. Then, I want all evidence that was exculpatory to Flynn be released by the DOJ. Then, I want Flynn exonerated and all charges dropped.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Justin Green says:

          Me, too. But, dropping the charges and slinking away quietly is kind of the minimum bar for doing the right thing. It’s the first step in doing the right thing relative to Flynn.

          Let’s see if Barr even takes the first step. The IG report is out. Barr is flat out of excuses for NOT doing this NOW.

          Like

      • OlderAndWiser says:

        This should actually be a slam dunk for Sidney Powell now – I hope she gets it also. As per Horowitz the db I was already surveillance Flynn. So when saint coney sends two FBI agents to interview him and they don’t tell him he’s already under surveillance and that he should have a lawyer present, then it’s an absolutely clear case of Miranda rights violation. Before, it was an arguable case. The fact that the fbi was already surveillance him makes a huge difference IMHO.

        Liked by 3 people

        • OlderAndWiser says:

          Silly autocorrect issues in above post – but I think you get the gist.

          Liked by 1 person

        • jbowen82 says:

          As noted above, it’s plausible to think that Barr is holding back to let Sydney Powell be the hero, if the case is already headed in that direction, while supporting quietly with document disclosures. After Judge Sullivan dismisses it, that will make it much easier later to clean up the malefactors in his department.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Justin Green says:

            Why wait on the judge? Both attorneys filed a joint motion to defer hearings until after the IG report is out.

            It’s out. A lot of what has caused this mess is rank and file bureaucrats not doing the right things when they see their superiors doing the wrong things, or when their superiors directing them to do the wrong things.

            What would restore more confidence in the DOJ? A judge ruling against the lawyers who continued to prosecute a case despite the AG clearly implying that this case has no merit, or the withdrawal of the case by the DOJ attorneys themselves?

            Liked by 1 person

            • jbowen82 says:

              I think if it were not heading toward the desired conclusion, he would intervene to a greater extent. But I think he sees it ending favorably for Flynn, and then he will be in a position to seem more impartial as he deals out justice to Van Grack, in particular. Van Grack will be disciplined and will probably fired, and Barr will be the authority who approves the review board’s findings (just like in the case of Comey and McCabe), so he needs to be neutral with respect to giving Van Grack his opportunity to state his case without having a biased adjudicator.

              Liked by 1 person

    • tacocat43 says:

      Do you remember how quickly Mueller wrapped up the investigation when Barr came on boar?. Uh, Huh. And how quickly Rosie was gon?. Uh Huh.

      Liked by 1 person

    • lemmonee says:

      Trump gets re-elected, then he can dump Wray and other mistakes

      Like

  18. The Demon Slick says:

    I like Barr. I have a lot of hope for him. He stands at the threshold of Greatness. We all need him to step on through, even though it’s hot.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. James Bryan says:

    I am inclined to give Barr the benefit of the doubt. For the Durham investigation to have credibility, he has to exercise some restraint. I suspect Durham will do the right thing… at least I hope so.

    I hope and pray that DJT gets a second term, I think at that point, the gloves might just come off. A wholesale purging of the Obama deep state hold overs. Hopefully one of the first items is the firing of the Chris Wray…. Who recommended this clown anyway!

    Liked by 4 people

  20. Sundance, in the interest of fairness (and with proper deference to yourself and your legendary reputation as a journalist), I cordially request that you withdraw this post and replace it with two: First, one which includes this Barr interview and which comments on its (to me, very important) content – which readers might understandably not choose to actually listen-to in its 24-minute entirety. Then, second, one which expresses your original comparison, which I continue to find to be both incongruous and unfair. Mr. Barr says a lot of very important things in this interview, and I think that we, your readers, are very much looking for your breakdown and analysis of the same. The present treatment does not do it justice. Please, first, give Mr. Barr’s interview “the customarily excellent CTH treatment.” Then, if you still choose to do so, barbecue him by a (to me …) very awkward comparison to an entirely different individual and situation. I think that’s “fair(er) journalism.”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Justin Green says:

      Actions speak louder than MSNBC interviews.

      Liked by 1 person

    • islandpalmtrees says:

      Mike have you not recognized the unusual number of connections to the CIA with is impeachment coup?

      I asked earlier for help in identifying the spies on President Trump and his campaign for a reason. You see, a great many people, I see seriously connected with this story are CIA. Barr worked for the CIA at one point. I don’t believe in coincidences.

      This makes me nervous.

      Like

    • Texian says:

      You buy stuff off of late night infomercials.. don’t you..

      Liked by 1 person

  21. Pete says:

    I’m so lost.

    Like

  22. Roni says:

    I think Barr did a great job explaining spygate/the coup. He wasn’t intimidated by Williams, clearly stated his reservations about why the investigation continued, and didn’t back off from his spying comment. His demeanor reminded me of the kindly father who has no problem sitting you down to re-explain the rules, how you broke each one, and how you’re now going to be punished.

    Liked by 2 people

    • OlderAndWiser says:

      The ONLY thing that I’d wished he had done was when he was asked whether it’s ok to criticize cops and his short answer was Yes. He should have added “And the same with the FBI.”
      Other than that – extremely articulate.

      Liked by 1 person

  23. andy says:

    We had our ‘witness coming out’ moment with overstock dot com ex CEO.

    If the truth falls in the forest and nobodyh is there to hear it, what difference now does it make.

    News wont cover it, and the 20 percent of crybaby trump haters wont listen until they do

    Liked by 1 person

  24. mazziflol says:

    Every minute Barr spends talking about all this stuff is another minute he is not declassiying documents.

    Like

  25. tyshab says:

    I agree with sundance. Barr’s actions completely drown out his words.

    Liked by 2 people

  26. mynameisasherlev says:

    Barr, like O’Meara, first has to gain a foothold. Remember, his jury was all female. He had to be gentle, gentlemanly, and non-aggressive. Once he got that foothold, he gained respect and acceptance and that acceptance turned into credibility. Perhaps Barr is doing the same thing. He has to be gentle, gentlemanly, and non-aggressive to gain credibility. Then go for the win.

    The discoveries about the girlfriend are really a separate issue. We can’t say for sure why things were done the way they were done; we would need to interview the lawyers. But the important thing is the win.

    Liked by 1 person

    • mynameisasherlev says:

      He has to be different from his client-this is a common thing-a calming lawyer and a polarizing client. A lawyer and a client that are cut from the same cloth don’t necessarily jive with a jury.

      Liked by 2 people

    • jbowen82 says:

      Remember also that the AG is supposed to be on the side of justice, which includes giving the scum who perpetrated the attempted coup the benefit of due process and being assumed not guilty until convicted at trial. He is the nation’s chief prosecutor, but we don’t want him to be OUR Weismann.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Andy Krause says:

      The switch in girlfriends is the entire issue as SD cogently pointed out. This was a criminal fraud perpetrated on the court. O’Mara knew the truth. The case should never have gone to trial.

      Liked by 2 people

  27. tacocat43 says:

    Rush is rarely wrong and he has confidence in Bill Barr. Let’s hope he is right.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Justin Green says:

      He’s right 98.9% of the time, so he says. His theory today was that this is so complicated, and the people investigating this are risking so much, that they have to go SLOW and get everything right.

      It’s always easy to make predictions like this. Yet, in other recent Rush shows, he doesn’t want to guess about whether anyone goes to jail.

      IMHO, Rush is still doing good work and millions still listen to him. But he’s displayed a lack of familiarity with all the relevant facts. Facts even this East Texan has grasped and remembered, and I don’t make $40,000,000 pontificating.

      Liked by 1 person

    • rightmover says:

      I am a more vigorous defender of Rush than many Treepers here, but Rush did refer to Marco Rubio as an authentic, “full-throated” conservative during the 2016 primaries. So even the best and the brightest are wrong sometimes.

      Liked by 1 person

  28. AnotherView says:

    Spot on Sundance! It’s a travesty they got away with it.

    Like

  29. Cathy M. says:

    No evidence of political bias?

    I believe a case could be made that there was political bias by the constant, relentless drip, drip drip of leaks to the press by the coup participants. Leaks that provided detailed information of what Trump & his campaign allegedly did that allegedly proved that Trump, et al was a puppet of Putin.

    The FBI would not leak to the press their entire case (which they essentially did) if they thought that they actually had a case against the Pres. Doing so gives an edge to a defendant if the case goes to trial, not to mention giving a defendant time to hide or destroy evidence.

    So why would the FBI provide such info to the MSM if not for a political bias smear job.

    Strzok “my gut sense” that there was “no big there there.”
    He shoulda listened to his gut.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Justin Green says:

      Leaks, text messages, political donations, illegal acts which unanimously adversely impact Trump, etc.

      Political bias is oozing out of every corner of this sham, and Horowitz is Sargeant Schultz stupid about it.

      Liked by 2 people

  30. PatriotKate says:

    Barr does talk about patience and the fact these things take time. A part of me understands that. Yet, I mostly feel that the fervor will die down and few will be held accountable or criminally charged.

    I believe that, at the end of the day, a lot of us are going to be disappointed at the outcome and accountability. That is what Sundance is alluding to. While AG Barr talks a good game, so far the pattern is consistent with many past investigations that acknowledge wrong-doing. Yet, few are ever held accountable in the true sense of justice as we see it.

    I believe that AG Barr is there to preserve the institution itself. In this interview he pointed out that most of those with any wrongdoing are not longer there, as if it’s now “behind” us. As hopeful as I’d like to be about Durham’s investigation, history isn’t on our side.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. The Boss says:

    I’ll take ‘Peace’.
    Sincerely, Ten Bears

    Like

  32. CharterOakie says:

    Very interesting interview, and encouraging.

    Barr’s contempt for the media comes across several times. But he jabs his points home in a rather gentlemanly manner, doesn’t he?

    He talks about Durham’s investigation coming to a “watershed” perhaps next spring. Maybe that’s deliberate disinformation. But if all of this results is the decimation of the DemonRats going into the next election; justice meted out to traitors, seditionists, and corrupt politicians broadly; and the bankruptcy of some major media companies as well… then I’ll wait patiently and happily.

    Liked by 1 person

    • franz dorn says:

      There is a strong case for perjury against Brennan now. Why not bring it now and bring the rest later.
      Test my woke DC grand Jury theory on this narrow issue. Many things could be declassified without “giving secrets away to the perps”.

      Barr is not beyond criticism. I don’t totally agree with Sundance, but I abhor Mr. Robinson’s
      suggestion of censorship.

      Liked by 1 person

  33. Rgt says:

    Pretty cynical

    Like

  34. dammit_janet says:

    Well whatever it is he’s selling I’m buying it because he seems thoughtful, engaged, sincere, methodic, and deliberate. I get the solid impression that when he speaks publicly about a matter under his authority he already has rock solid facts & evidence to back it up.

    There have been times I’ve questioned things he’s said or done, like handing over Exec. Privilege stuff, then later came to think that was perhaps part of President Trump’s ‘Heaping Coals of Fire’ strategy in dealing with a duplicitous enemy.

    I always say, though, go with your gut instincts. Better to be prepared and looking in the right places than blindsided by someone you knew you shouldn’t trust. Thank you for sharing that inside story. I wasn’t following you during that time. So glad I’ve found you now.

    Liked by 2 people

  35. atomichillbilly says:

    If Barr can shut this down without a trial, would that be the best thing?

    Because it it does, Trump won’t be the one on trial (unlike in the Zimmerman analogy), it would be the swamp that’s on trial.

    I keep thinking back to Barr’s speech at the federalist society, where he seemed to be making the case that the entire institutional lefts is engaging in a seditious “insurgency” against our constitutional form of government.
    As if that is his real target, and the coup plotters are how he’ll open that can of worms…

    If that’s the case, I’m inclined to give Barr some latitude to pull that off.

    My inner card player says Barr is on the level in spite of his roots in the swamp. He may be an “institutional man”, but he’s mad about what they’re doing to his institution.

    Liked by 4 people

  36. mtnforge says:

    This system, this regime, is so broken exactly because of those in power running it, how can this same system then fix itself from inside, when at every opportunity, not the least opportunity it artificially creates to increase its every opportunity to profit more and to obtain and garner more despotism to itself as absolute power to act as it wants without consequence or responsibility for its actions.
    The rational answer is it can not fix the corruption it created and perpetuates to begin with. This is why it is called special interest government. It is exclusive to all others or any, all, or other agency of the people.
    How can it even want to fix what works splendidly and profitably at the outsides expense and injury?
    In particular we who are not of the inside, how can we then effect positive change, when those who are the ones whose job it is to fix such things on the inside are from the inside, are also those who are going full retard trying everything possible to stop the system from being fixed by us on the outside?
    The only recourse or remedy is to do away with the inside in totality. It is because the festering corruption the inside is, is exactly why it has to be eliminated, because such a malignancy can not be left to regrow again into the festering tumor it is today.
    Or all we end up doing is the definition of insanity, committing the same mistakes again hoping for different results.

    The inside is not going to give up what it has created. Not voluntarily. Not because a few token actors are thrown to the Deplorable’s in an act of wrist slapping of lowest level expendables within a circus of clowns running a bread & circus grift.

    The least of which obstacles barring the way to positive effective recourse is a self serving system of perpetuation and assured survival of its system to start with built into the regimes structure, in simplest terms: everything outside of it’s system be damned, ie we got ours, fuck you. And by the way, we are makinf all of you dirt people into imaginary fake domestic terrorists for defying us and trying to stick up for your natural God given Liberty and it’s blessings of freedom and self determination.

    Run along now, or we will put you on a train to the gulags, or worse we will Kulak you like we did the dirt people in Russia, otherwise called genocide of millions.

    Not in any way saying this will come true. No.
    What I’m saying here is Freemen become manifest in their freedom and Liberty, that there’s gonna be a fight, and in the larger scope, what matters is Barr and all the rest are toast, they just don’t see it or even comprehend us dirt people are the ones who ever effect positive change in this world. That too, is as it should be.
    Looking like Virginia will be the watershed moment, the great paradigm of the Deplorable’s. This agenda of disarming us Freemen is their bridge too far. When they loose in Virginia to the motive power and great audacity of freemen manifest in their natural rights, read legitimacy, their end is at hand, for they can not survive the great legion of DFreemen who turn their backs and withdraw their consent for these honor-less corrupt despots liars and thieves, and their entire construct falls like Dominoes. This is the nature of such power. Barr’s job is to create an illusion something is being done fundamentally to change the system from the inside out, top down, all Barr is is a very sophisticated sly fixer of last resorts. He wasa instrumental in going in behind the unmitigated disaster of government applied violence and use of force at Ruby Ridge and Waco, it was Barrs job to create a public image damage control action in order to direct the dirt peoples attention away from the underlying despotism of the Clinton organized crime syndicate, and their federal armed badged leg breakers who they sent forth to create the system of totalitarian power necessary for the deep states continuity of power. In otherwords, use the threat of force, and the careful application of violence, to make as many afraid as possible, people who will submit to their council of fears for an illusion they will be left alone, thus leaving all who defy and resist to stick out like a sire thumb, where they can be picked off at leisure, piecemeal, and also use them as a whipping post to keep the scared America in line.
    It is divide and conquer 101. The tyrants tried and true system of totalitarian control.
    Barr’s job is to go in behind after the usual blunders and assclowneray of a elitist class that really could give a crap what happens to the rest of us, long as they retain their power over our system of government.
    Yet, it is the nature of such power that is can not last, and when it’s grasp on the levers of power are wrenched away, a task at first not easy, but thankfully a trait all involve share in common, they collapse easily, and when they begin to collapse, their demise happens so quickly if your not looking right at it in real time with your eyeballs you miss it’s happening.
    Their old institutional order is failing.
    They are in serious trouble, they have gone too far.
    Barr can not fix what is unfixable.
    What the unfixable part here is is too many know the truth.
    Truth, that has no agenda. So it is something where there is nothing to fix to begin with. Barr is applying plausible deniability window dressing to an illusion of legitimacy of a State and it’s power predicated on a system of unbroken plausible deniability beginning about the time of the war of northern aggression against a people who only wanted to be free of the economic tyranny of the north. That line is now broken and we are seeing the early stages of collapse.
    Remember, everything is connected with these guys.
    E.V.E.R.Y.T.H.I.N.G.

    Except our Liberty. Funny how that works.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. pristach says:

    If you really study Barr’s demeanor, you can tell that Hillary Clinton’s exoneration in the mid year exam case is where the rubber meets the road.

    He had to have acknowledged how utterly corrupt the doj had become.

    Liked by 2 people

  38. Bruce_Dern's_Finger says:

    FISA abuse and other high crimes and misdemeanors against President Donald Trump?!
    Look no further than the faux black messiah – aka Obama.

    Like

  39. Sundance is the man and may be right, but I see one problem with the analogy –

    I suspect that the consequences of bucking the system were radically different for O’Mara than they currently are for Barr.

    The complexity of the corruption and evil needed to pull off Spygate/Fisagate is staggering and involves serious forces that play for keeps. They had no problem destroying innocent people’s lives and did it with impunity. Although I would not want to mess with the team that went after Zimmerman, I would imagine that they have less resources than the globalist forces trying to kill Trump.

    Liked by 2 people

  40. nobodyspecial1958 says:

    Bet there are some crappy pants around after that interview. “ It is my job to make sure that the intelligence apparatus of the United States is not abused. I am going to do my job. “ That is a shot across the bow if I ever heard one. I think he is saying to friends, “ don’t worry” and to enemies, worry. Be interesting to see how loud they are tomorrow.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Brant says:

    I don’t know where this might fit, but has anyone found in the IG report why the Flynn situation was requested to delay until presumably after the report was out? So, now what happens on the Flynn issue?

    Like

  42. Genie says:

    MSNBC played the Barr interview this afternoon and then followed it with commentary by Chris Matthews regarding the political division of our country since the Viet Nam war. He made some interesting points not usually heard by lefties. Then he explained that Lindsey Graham is defending President Trump only so Graham can win re-election (for life.) The clip should cue up at 29:30 and goes about 5-1/2 minutes.

    I’m not a Matthews fan. I clicked on MSNBC to see the Barr interview. I usually find Matthews annoying and was surprised by his comments today.

    Like

  43. FPCHmom says:

    It is interesting to see who is upset with Barr’s interview –
    https://mobile.twitter.com/thebradfordfile/status/1204462200590684166

    https://mobile.twitter.com/thebradfordfile/status/1204509842611851264

    He must be getting close to the target.

    Like

  44. 6x47 says:

    I am reassured by Barr. He states the facts, but refuses to connect the dots that ANYONE listening to him can connect. The Left is going completely insane about this interview, denouncing him as a conspiracy nut and Trump’s goon.

    And US Attorney Durham coming out with his “not so fast there, Horowitz!” statement tag-teaming off Barr also rejecting key findings definitely knocked the Left back on their heels.

    Like

  45. Linus in W.PA. says:

    This one’s for you Sundance.

    Here in Western PA, we’re basically all Steelers fans. RIght now, I can’t even remember who our starting QB was a decade or so back before he got injured and our second string QB, Ben Roethlisberger came in and took over. Ben became our guy pretty quickly.

    So Ben got injured early this season with an elbow thing and goes out for the season. We’ve got this high draft selection guy, Rudolph, in the wings. He get’s in there, looks OK now and again, and we wonder, is this the new guy? He looks like he could be the ‘guy,’ maybe. But he doesn’t quite ‘look’ like Ben. Now, Ben is older, probably saved some money, and could easily retire, or be guided out. So Rudolph is moving along….and then he get’s into that fight with the Brown’s player…and get’s himself hit in the head with his own helmet. Now, it was all wrong on both sides, probably. But when that whole debacle happened, Rudolph looked kind of stupid, and we had to wonder…..is this really the new guy?

    So mid game, about 3 games back, Rudolph get’s benched, and our third stringer, Hodges gets the nod. Hodges has a very different persona. He just seems to give off a different vibe, and the headband he wears under his helmet only adds to it. I’m not at all saying any thing about Hodges’ sexuality…not a thing. If you try to think ‘proto-typical looking QB,’ you don’t think of Hodges. He looks like he could bust out at any moment and give Richard Simmons a run for his money in an aerobics dance contest, while on the sidelines at the football games when our defense is on the field.

    Hodges has won three in a row now. There’s all these rubber ducks around now. We’ve got a chance to make the playoffs. Is Hodges the new guy? I’m cheering for him. We’re cheering for him. He’s the new guy.

    So, Sundance… are you getting too hung up on what Barr ‘look’s like,’ or his ‘style’ of communication?

    To me, he seems to be saying exactly the right things. He’s also showing concern for what the public thinks about all this. We are the public. He also said that some what things to happen rapidly, but that they take time…to do it right. We are those ‘some’ who want things to happen quickly. It just seems he is speaking directly to us.

    (…now, I have no idea about the excessive praise for Wray. Barr want’s him around for some reason)

    Like

  46. candyman says:

    Why the Wray oxymoron today?

    Like

  47. Phil aka Felipe says:

    Toward the end of the interview, Barr says,

    “These things take time. I-I know there’s a lot of impatience. People want results immediately, but those are people who don’t understand our process. Uh, we have to be careful about the way we collect evidence. And we have to make sure we have enough evidence uh, to justify our actions. And that – we’re not going to cut corners in that respect. Uh, I, uh you know, some people think this thing is going to drop in a few weeks. That’s not the case. I see this perhaps uh, uuh reaching an important watershed perhaps in the, in the late spring or early summer.”

    “important watershed perhaps in the, in the late spring or early summer.”

    Treepers here that have followed Sundance’s superb reporting and analysis are a lot smarter and informed than most phd’s in political science, current events, and geopolitical machinations.
    The rest of our fellow citizens that have not been exposed to this education and infotainment are not so blessed.

    Our wonderful POTUS and our fellow patriots that are with him in this fight have to remember we cannot get too far ahead of our logistical support and supply lines. Our reinforcements need to be educated and trained.

    Declassification of documents and continual roll out of more info about the enemy and their schemes being exposed through hearings will prepare the troops and motivate them to engage. It takes time. And I would say, the planned “watershed” drops from Durham in “late spring or early summer” will be optimal for effect just as the campaign season is in full swing with the Parties’ Conventions in sight.

    During Barr’s interview, at first I was concerned that Barr did not seem that motivated to look into Ukraine’s influence in our elections. But now that I think about it and listen to Barr’s reasoning, he seems to recognize (and I agree if that is the case) that the biggest threats are not from Russia, Ukraine, or China interfering in our elections, but from our own Law Enforcement-Intelligence-Political Leaders-Big Media working in tandem together to destroy this Republic by working to remove the person WE, The People elected to the Highest Office of the Land.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Genie says:

      Good points all. Especially the army analogy of outrunning the supply lines. We’d like a Patton or a Grant to plow deep and fast, but the full successful action needs an Eisenhower.

      Liked by 1 person

  48. franuche says:

    Barr used a lot of the right words today. Good words. Great words!

    If only words were enough. They’re not.

    Like

  49. Ernie Hemway says:

    Those looking for an ultimate definition of winning will never find it to satisfaction. I would maintain we really don’t even grasp what it is or what it means. Which is to say life is a process and establishing justice, peace and prosperity is a day by day undertaking. Barr’s comments are a positive step forward for those seeking good. It is refreshing to hear an adult voice. I am thankful. And tomorrow, I will trust by God’s goodness and divine reckoning we will make one more positive step in revealing light and understanding truth. Hang in there folks.

    Liked by 4 people

    • jbowen82 says:

      Yeah, one of the comments above reminded me that we do not want our side to be Weismann. We have to respect due process, the rights of the accused, etc., even when they wouldn’t afford those same protections to the people on our side.

      Like

    • Phil aka Felipe says:

      Very well said, Ernie.

      Like

    • X XYZ says:

      Interesting perspective, with which I agree.

      “‘I can’t get no…Satisfaction. I’ve tried, and I’ve tried, and I’VE TRIED, AND I’VE TRIED!!! (Etc.)
      Most of us are familiar with that lyric. I’m not a Stones fan, but Mick Jagger is still alive – which means he is not stupid.

      Think it, Say it. DO IT.

      Most people can’t even get to step one or two. Politicians often will say all sorts of things to get elected. But their phony, forced smiles and mannerisms betray them. How do we know they are lying? Because their lips are moving. Unfortunately, voters usually don’t notice that. Are we starting to notice that now?

      Step three is the hardest to achieve. Barr is at step two He’s at the end of his career and he is not running for office That’s a positive sign that he is genuine. All indications are that he will do his level best to accomplish step three.

      Hey, that’s more than the pathetic Sessions ever did. That’s progress…

      Like

  50. I have the utmost respect and gratitude for all Sundance provides. I am balancing his take on Barr against the insights of an acquaintance who had a distinguished career in federal law enforcement. His most poignant comments were somewhat in the vernacular of McCabe’s “first we F Flynn and then we F Trump”.
    He applied the old story of the two bulls on top of the hill overlooking the botttomland grazing ground filled with cows. The young bull (some Treepers) tell the old bull, “let’s run down there and F one of those cows.” The old bull (Barr) responds, “No. Let’s WALK down there and F them ALL!”

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s