AG Nominee William Barr Will Not Stop Mueller’s Work

Imagine the scene:

The president spends over a year harassing and demeaning his first choice for attorney general, because said attorney general failed to act as a shield and loyal subject to the crown, by not stopping an investigation that is uncomfortable to him.

After finally forcing out the attorney general, he replaces him, for the time being, with the AG’s chief of staff, based not on qualifications, but because of that man’s public statement of opposition to the inconvenient investigation.

Knowing there were far too many negatives already stacked against that one to get him through a confirmation process, he chooses another, equally opposed to the investigation, and an out-and-proud MAGA train rider.

And the stage is set for a showdown in the Senate.

Likely, Attorney General nominee William Barr is well aware of the facts that Democrats will be pounding him hard over his past negative statements about special counsel Robert Mueller and the ongoing probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

How could he not be? He wrote a memo referring to the obstruction investigation as “fatally misconceived.”

There are plenty of law enforcement professionals that see it differently.

With the Tuesday confirmation hearing hours away, Barr has reportedly crafted a statement to deliver before the Senate Judiciary Committee, suggesting that he would allow Mueller to complete his work.

“The country needs a credible resolution of these issues,” Mr. Barr said, according to remarks released ahead of the hearing. “If confirmed, I will not permit partisan politics, personal interests, or any other improper consideration to interfere with this or any other investigation.”

In the remarks, Mr. Barr acknowledges that will provide “as much transparency” as he can under the law.

“I can assure you that, where judgements are to be made by me, I will make those judgements based solely on the law and will let no personal, political or other improper interests influence my decision,” according to the remarks.

We’ll see if that’s enough to appease Democrats, as well as some Republican lawmakers who remain on the fence.

“The big question in my mind is will he leave Mueller alone,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat and ranking Judiciary Committee member, said last week.

“That means no interference, no budgetary control, no stoppage, nothing,” she told reporters. “That is only going to get answered well in public.”

She’s right to bring that up. Had Barr, a former attorney general, not seemed a safe ally to the Trumpian cause, he never would have been nominated.

Barr, however, intends to assure the members of the committee that as a former AG, he often comments on legal matters, and the memo was simply his views on the obstruction portion of the investigation, but not the entirety of Mueller’s work.

“The memo did not address — or in any way question — the special counsel’s core investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election,” the remarks said. “Nor did it address other potential obstruction-of-justice theories or argue, as some have erroneously suggested that a president can never obstruct justice.”

At this point, it’s probably less about what it does say, and more about what it doesn’t say.

Can Barr be trusted to remain an impartial arbiter of the law, without regard to the man who gave him the job, for the sole purpose of acting as a buffer between the president and the laws of our nation?

We’ll know soon just how convincing he is.