- Apr 1, 2011
- 169,997
- 47,201
- 2,180
For those who believe the IG exonerated the FBI on starting the all out assault on Trump, Barr should have disabused you of that notion. People will be going to prison over this.
MR. BAKER: Could you tell us where exactly you disagree with Mr. Horowitz?
MR. BARR: I think there are three parts or issues, let’s say categories of analysis in the report. The first is, was the investigation adequately predicated, the start of it? The second one is, how was it conducted? And I break that down into two things: How was it conducted before the election and how was it conducted after the election? The real meat of Horowitz’s work, and the real thrust of the report actually deals with the conduct of the investigation, where I think it quickly became apparent that it was a travesty.
MR. BAKER: The abuses? I want to come onto these in detail, but the abuses that in particular refer to the application for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—
MR. BARR: And also the fact that from day one it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion. But put that aside for a minute, going back to the issue. In many ways the issue of whether it was adequately predicated is something of academic interest only.
I think that it’s a big deal to use the law enforcement and the intelligence resources of the United States government to investigate a campaign of especially an opposing party. I’m sure there were instances in the past, but I can’t think of any recent instance where that was done.
MR. BAKER: The report does make clear there were concerns about that and discussions at very high levels within the FBI as to the sensitive information—
MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that
MR. BARR: I think there are three parts or issues, let’s say categories of analysis in the report. The first is, was the investigation adequately predicated, the start of it? The second one is, how was it conducted? And I break that down into two things: How was it conducted before the election and how was it conducted after the election? The real meat of Horowitz’s work, and the real thrust of the report actually deals with the conduct of the investigation, where I think it quickly became apparent that it was a travesty.
MR. BAKER: The abuses? I want to come onto these in detail, but the abuses that in particular refer to the application for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—
MR. BARR: And also the fact that from day one it generated exculpatory information and nothing that substantiated any kind of collusion. But put that aside for a minute, going back to the issue. In many ways the issue of whether it was adequately predicated is something of academic interest only.
I think that it’s a big deal to use the law enforcement and the intelligence resources of the United States government to investigate a campaign of especially an opposing party. I’m sure there were instances in the past, but I can’t think of any recent instance where that was done.
MR. BAKER: The report does make clear there were concerns about that and discussions at very high levels within the FBI as to the sensitive information—
MR. BARR: What is the basis you have for looking into something? And what are reasonable steps to take, taking into consideration the weight of the evidence that’s prompting you to do that
Last edited by a moderator: