Congress will see Barr's redacted version of the Mueller Report

[sakinago]

The investigation was over collusion allegations that all stemmed from a dossier that was not only uncorroborated, but also known to have validity issues from the get-go.

There's the problem.

It DIDN'T "stem from a dossier".

Now that we have that out of the way I assume you now realize that it was entirely warranted

Fox News’ Chris Wallace Sets Record Straight: Russia Investigation Did Not Start With Trump Dossier

But but...Rushbo said....

We know what papadopolous did, AND ITS NO DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN DID WITH THE STEELE DOSSIER. It’s just the Clinton camp hired a middleman to “contact his Russian sources” to dig up dirt on trump.

What’s the difference Lesh? The only thing papadopulous did wrong was lie to the FBI about meeting with ONE Russian national in Britain who claimed to have dirt on Hillary. Really just a mix of classic Russian misinformation and trying to get compra-mat in meeting with someone. Papa was low level too, and got zero actionable stuff from the meet. So, if the trump campaign hired a private espionage firm to meet up with Russian ops to get dirt on Hillary, you’re saying he wouldn’t be guilty of collusion?

 

[sakinago]

The investigation was over collusion allegations that all stemmed from a dossier that was not only uncorroborated, but also known to have validity issues from the get-go. So, yea I’d agree it was ill conceived. Usually you try to corroborate some information from a source before going full blown investigation. The dossier was Russia’s most successful troll, and probably will go down as the biggest troll in all of history

So, today you've been the one tasked with swallowing and regurgitating the moldiest, most oft-debunked talking points, the task that usually falls to the most criminally stupid of the Trumpleton crowd, and you still complied. Have you no self-respect, sir?

Love how y’all do this, sweeping verbose rebukes without actually refuting anything. Let me summarize what you just said. “You’re wrong, because I said so, and now I’m gonna call you some names and feign moral superiority.” Nice. You really got me there.

You’re free to correct me if I’m wrong...but I’m not. 95% of what was investigated was based ALL on the dossier. The dossier that the Cohen testimony hammered in the final nail in the coffin.

If trump wasn’t investigated because of the dossier, then the allegations of collusion would have been entirely baseless. You could try to argue papadop...though you wouldn’t get far at all, because we knew very quickly what that was about. I think that was resolved even before the mueller probe started.

We have the Hillary campaign that actually did what they accused trump of doing. They just did it through a middleman in Steele. Steele contacted Russian “sources” (definitely wasn’t contacting grocery store clerks, he was contacting Russian ops), and he paid 6 million (reimbursed by the Clinton campaign) to these sources to get dirt on trump. So if you do it through a middleman, that’s better? This what I’m hearing from the left. The left who can’t even think their way through a paper bag when it comes to this issue.

Matt Taibi from Vox said it best, y’all were so blindsided and devastated by trumps win you needed the collusion to be true to help explain it. Taibi was one of the biggest Trump/Russia collusion punch drinkers out there btw. At least he’s being mature about being wrong and can actually think his way out of a paper bag. I get why y’all wanted this to be true, but y’all are clearly stuck in echo chambers as evidenced by the fact you’re all still in denial about Trump being exonerated from collusion by mueller. It’s one of the most bizzare things I’ve seen.

 

[hunarcy]

Mueller could not indict Trump, neither can Barr. DOJ rules forbid the indictment of a sitting President. That is the reason why the un-redacted version of the Mueller Report should go to Congress. Congress has the responsibility of oversight, not Barr.

Trump lied to Americans again. I knew it when he said it. It was just a matter of time before he backtracked.

“Let people see it. That’s up to the attorney general,” Trump told reporters on March 20. Yes, he just contradicted himself. Trump has a problem with the English language. “There was no collusion. There was no obstruction. There was no nothing,” he added. The point is, he wanted to "let people see it," or so he said.

Now his tune has changed. Like I said, it was just a matter of time. Trump is transparent and highly predictable.

Today Trump dismissed Democrats’ efforts to compel the release of special counsel Robert Mueller's full report as a "somewhat of a waste of time" on the eve of a House panel vote to authorize a subpoena for the entire document and its underlying evidence.

"So there’s no collusion. The attorney general now and the deputy attorney general ruled no obstruction. They said no obstruction," Trump said during an Oval Office meeting with the head of NATO. Writer's note: Trump is lying again. He has not seen the Mueller Report. He knows as much as we do about what is in the report, which is absolutely nothing.

"So there’s no collusion, there’s no obstruction, and now we’re going to start this process all over again?" he continued. "I think it’s a disgrace. These are just Democrats that want to try and demean this country, and it shouldn’t be allowed."

“There is no amount of testimony or document production that can satisfy Jerry Nadler or Shifty Adam Schiff,” Trump tweeted earlier, naming two top House Democrats seeking the report. “It is now time to focus exclusively on properly running our great Country!”

Again, Trump is lying to Americans. On the issue of the Mueller Report and White Houses staffers appearing before Democratic House committees, Trump has refused every time. He has given the House nothing.

Then why did the Congress write the laws the way they did?

 

[Olde Europe]

Love how y’all do this, sweeping verbose rebukes without actually refuting anything. Let me summarize what you just said. “You’re wrong, because I said so, and now I’m gonna call you some names and feign moral superiority.” Nice. You really got me there.

You’re free to correct me if I’m wrong...but I’m not. 95% of what was investigated was based ALL on the dossier. The dossier that the Cohen testimony hammered in the final nail in the coffin.

If trump wasn’t investigated because of the dossier, then the allegations of collusion would have been entirely baseless. You could try to argue papadop...though you wouldn’t get far at all, because we knew very quickly what that was about. I think that was resolved even before the mueller probe started.

We have the Hillary campaign that actually did what they accused trump of doing. They just did it through a middleman in Steele. Steele contacted Russian “sources” (definitely wasn’t contacting grocery store clerks, he was contacting Russian ops), and he paid 6 million (reimbursed by the Clinton campaign) to these sources to get dirt on trump. So if you do it through a middleman, that’s better? This what I’m hearing from the left. The left who can’t even think their way through a paper bag when it comes to this issue.

Matt Taibi from Vox said it best, y’all were so blindsided and devastated by trumps win you needed the collusion to be true to help explain it. Taibi was one of the biggest Trump/Russia collusion punch drinkers out there btw. At least he’s being mature about being wrong and can actually think his way out of a paper bag. I get why y’all wanted this to be true, but y’all are clearly stuck in echo chambers as evidenced by the fact you’re all still in denial about Trump being exonerated from collusion by mueller. It’s one of the most bizzare things I’ve seen.

So, instead of you getting informed, we get informed that you are actually capable of a more elaborate version of your stash of stupid and wrong. Splendid. You know, there's a FISA application out there. You could try to read it, determine what portion thereof is dedicated to the Steele dossier, and inform yourself instead of being, and remaining, befuddled, delusional, and wrong.

And no, Hillary did not what Trump is accused of doing - there were no illicit contacts between the Hillary campaign and Russian intelligence officials so as to establish at least the appearance of collusion. And no, Trump was not, so far as we know, exonerated by Mueller.

But then, you don't read, except for careful study of your talking points, and are fully invested in being, and remaining, befuddled, delusional, and wrong. So be it.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Attorney General William Barr needs to follow a multistep redaction process before he can release additional details from Robert Mueller’s report on the Russia probe, Sen. Lindsey Graham said Wednesday.

Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a close ally of Trump, also said that “everything” that doesn’t threaten the law or national security will be revealed.

Apparently, Graham doesn't trust members of Congress who have a top secret clearance and see some of our nation's most sensitive material.

Other Republicans feel the same way. One of them brought up old ghosts. “It is clear that high-ranking officials entrusted with the law enforcement powers of our country abused this trust to influence the 2016 presidential election and ultimately to undermine its outcome,” Rep. Tim McClintock (R-CA) said Wednesday. McClintock used the change-the-subject tactic.

Jordan was equally disingenuous. “t seems to me that we’re here because the Mueller report wasn’t what the Democrats thought it was going to be. In fact, it was just the opposite. What the attorney general tell us is that the principle finding of Mr. Mueller’s report were no new indictments, no sealed indictments, no collusion, no obstruction,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH). Like the rest of us, Jordan hasn't seen the Mueller Report. He has only seen what Trump's surrogate has said about the Mueller Report..

What is patently obvious is this. Trump Republicans in Congress strongly feel that Trump and his campaign team collaborated with the Russian government, and they do not want Democrats to see an un-redacted version of the Mueller Report.

They want Congress to see only the redacted version provided by Barr who will religiously follow DOJ rule 6(e), which prevents the dissemination of critical information if the DOJ is not going to indict a person. The DOJ has another rule. The DOJ cannot indict a sitting President, which amounts to a self-fulfilling prophecy where Barr is concerned. He can protect Trump by simply following DOJ rules.

Trump's fans also strongly believe Trump is guilty of collaborating with the Russians. They strongly oppose Congress getting an un-redacted version of the Mueller Report. That can only mean they know Trump has something to hide.

Trump, of course, is strongly opposed to Congress getting the un-redacted version. That should tell his fans something.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Trump's appointee, William Barr, will determine what Congress sees in the Mueller Report, according to Barr.

The special counsel’s report on the investigation into Russia’s election interference will be made public by mid-April, Barr told lawmakers on Friday.

“Everyone will soon be able to read it,” Barr wrote in a letter to the chairmen of the congressional judiciary committees.

Prosecutors from the office of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and other law enforcement officials are scouring the report for sensitive information to black out before releasing it, including secret grand jury testimony, classified materials and information about other continuing federal investigations, Barr wrote.

Many are weary of hearing what Barr has to say about Robert S. Mueller III and the Mueller Report. They would like to hear what Mueller has to say about Mueller and the Mueller report.

Why? Because Barr is a bit biased when it comes to the Mueller Report. Barr authored a memo in June 2018. saying he thought the Mueller investigation was "fatally misconceived."

Trump's pick for attorney general warns Mueller's obstruction inquiry 'fatally misconceived' in memo to DOJ - CNNPolitics

In addition, Barr is a strong believer in the unitary executive. According to the unitary executive theory, since the Constitution assigns the president all of “the executive power”, he can set aside laws that attempt to limit his power over national security. This is an enormous power: critics charge that it effectively places the president above the law.

It is for these two reasons that Trump choose Barr in the first place. This is the man who will determine what Congress sees if Barr gets his way. The Democrats obviously are not enthused with the idea.

Of particular interest to the Democrats is Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), which Barr says will be used in the redaction process. In essence, 6(e) says that if the prosecutor is not going to charge a person with a crime, the DOJ is prohibited from divulging evidence concerning that individual. Since the DOJ has another rule -- a sitting President cannot be charged with a crime -- it is certainly possible that evidentiary evidence against the President will be excluded in Barr's version of the report to Congress.

I think WE, THE PEOPLE, should get it BEFORE Congress, so none of those kuunts have time to spin and make up bullshit.

.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.

At stake in the dispute — the first evidence of tension between Mr. Barr and the special counsel’s office — is who shapes the public’s initial understanding of one of the most consequential government investigations in American history. Some members of Mr. Mueller’s team are concerned that, because Mr. Barr created the first narrative of the special counsel’s findings, Americans’ views will have hardened before the investigation’s conclusions become public.

Mr. Barr has said he will move quickly to release the nearly 400-page report but needs time to scrub out confidential information. The special counsel’s investigators had already written multiple summaries of the report, and some team members believe that Mr. Barr should have included more of their material in the four-page letter he wrote on March 24 laying out their main conclusions, according to government officials familiar with the investigation. Mr. Barr only briefly cited the special counsel’s work in his letter.

However, the special counsel’s office never asked Mr. Barr to release the summaries soon after he received the report, a person familiar with the investigation said. And the Justice Department quickly determined that the summaries contain sensitive information, like classified material, secret grand-jury testimony and information related to current federal investigations that must remain confidential, according to two government officials.

Some on Mueller’s Team Say Report Was More Damaging Than Barr Revealed

Of course, some of us are actively discouraging the false conclusions reached by Barr because he is highly prejudicial.

Barr believes the President is omnipotent. Barr is a strong believer in the unitary executive. According to the unitary executive theory, since the Constitution assigns the president all of “the executive power”, he can set aside laws that attempt to limit his power over national security. This is an enormous power: critics charge that it effectively places the president above the law.

Barr authored a memo in June 2018. saying he thought the Mueller investigation was "fatally misconceived."

Barr said his redacted report to Congress would be governed by DOJ rule 6(e) which prohibits disclosure of evidence if the person is not going to be indicted. The DOJ does not allow the indictment of a sitting President. Barr has still not made the distinction between a person and the President.

 

[sakinago]

Love how y’all do this, sweeping verbose rebukes without actually refuting anything. Let me summarize what you just said. “You’re wrong, because I said so, and now I’m gonna call you some names and feign moral superiority.” Nice. You really got me there.

You’re free to correct me if I’m wrong...but I’m not. 95% of what was investigated was based ALL on the dossier. The dossier that the Cohen testimony hammered in the final nail in the coffin.

If trump wasn’t investigated because of the dossier, then the allegations of collusion would have been entirely baseless. You could try to argue papadop...though you wouldn’t get far at all, because we knew very quickly what that was about. I think that was resolved even before the mueller probe started.

We have the Hillary campaign that actually did what they accused trump of doing. They just did it through a middleman in Steele. Steele contacted Russian “sources” (definitely wasn’t contacting grocery store clerks, he was contacting Russian ops), and he paid 6 million (reimbursed by the Clinton campaign) to these sources to get dirt on trump. So if you do it through a middleman, that’s better? This what I’m hearing from the left. The left who can’t even think their way through a paper bag when it comes to this issue.

Matt Taibi from Vox said it best, y’all were so blindsided and devastated by trumps win you needed the collusion to be true to help explain it. Taibi was one of the biggest Trump/Russia collusion punch drinkers out there btw. At least he’s being mature about being wrong and can actually think his way out of a paper bag. I get why y’all wanted this to be true, but y’all are clearly stuck in echo chambers as evidenced by the fact you’re all still in denial about Trump being exonerated from collusion by mueller. It’s one of the most bizzare things I’ve seen.

So, instead of you getting informed, we get informed that you are actually capable of a more elaborate version of your stash of stupid and wrong. Splendid. You know, there's a FISA application out there. You could try to read it, determine what portion thereof is dedicated to the Steele dossier, and inform yourself instead of being, and remaining, befuddled, delusional, and wrong.

And no, Hillary did not what Trump is accused of doing - there were no illicit contacts between the Hillary campaign and Russian intelligence officials so as to establish at least the appearance of collusion. And no, Trump was not, so far as we know, exonerated by Mueller.

But then, you don't read, except for careful study of your talking points, and are fully invested in being, and remaining, befuddled, delusional, and wrong. So be it.

From my recollection on the FISA app, there were 4 sources. 1 the dossier. 2 and 3 sources that were laundered sources that still stemmed from the dossier and didn’t do the best job of being disclosed as such. 4 I believe was popadop. Popadop, who we know did something legal, what he did illegal was lie about it to the FBI. Shady but still perfectly legal, and is pretty much standard operating procedure during presidential campaigns. The whole Obama birther thing started with the Clinton campaign during the primary’s, which is different, but just illustrating how campaigns get down and dirty with oppo-research. It should also be noted nothing actionable came from popadop. You cannot link popadop to trump-Russia collusion. The ONLY link to Trump and Russia is the dossier. This is where the FISA abuse claims stem from. The application used definitely appears to be misleading for the judge. It’s certainly questionable to run surveillance on an entire campaign based solely on rumors from oppo research (dossier is basically a fancy term for rumors), and rumors coming from an Aussie diplomat who overheard a inebriated 30 year old bragging at the bar. No one on planet earth wants these same standards of running surveillance on someone based on rumors. Especially rumors coming from a state that’s infamous for misinformation and stirring up conflict, and is also ran by a dick head. The FBI has in their possession the dossier long before they got word from the Aussie on popadop. They applied for and got the FISA warrant within a couple of weeks of getting word from the Aussie, which is rare as hell, and suggests they were waiting for the slightest sniff of anything Trump and Russia. What the FBI should’ve done instead is try to corroborate the dossier first, then apply for the FISA warrant if they were able to do so. This is what the mueller probe was mainly trying to do, corroborate the dossier. They clearly didn’t.

We also found out from Lisa page (the horses mouth) that yes indeed the Russia-Trump collusion angle was in fact what her and Storzk were referring to as a “backup plan” in case trump won in their texts back and forth. So that there subtracts plenty of credibility to the claim that everything with the FISA app was on the up and up. Main point here, is this was political, and highly questionable since the only thing linking drop to Russia was based on the dossier

 

[Sandy Shanks]

For the first time since the end of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, Attorney General William Barr faced questions on Capitol Hill regarding his handling of Mueller's findings, when he plans to release the report and how he will handle the issue of redacted information.

From a justice point of view, it was not pretty.

The Mueller Report was tasked with finding out if the Trump campaign and/or Trump himself were collaborating with the Russian government concerning their interference in the 2016 Presidential election on Trump's behalf. A fair amount of evidence is known to the public that collaboration did take place.

We know five close associates to Trump are now convicted felons, and each had a connection to the Russian government. These close associates included a campaign manager, deputy campaign manager, a national security advisor, and Trump's personal lawyer. We know Trump's son, son-in-law, and campaign manager met with Russian operatives at Trump's home, Trump Tower. We know from Trump's lawyer that during the entire 2016 Presidential campaign Trump was negotiating with the Russian government for a Trump Tower in Moscow. That is simply a tiny tip of the iceberg as far as the evidence is concerned.

We can gather from that evidence that Trump definitely had a relationship with the Russian government, and his foreign policy indicates that as well.

Thus it is unfortunate, but not a shock, to learn that Barr insists on protecting Trump.

Barr repeatedly refused to answer a direct question as to whether the White House has seen -- or will see -- the full Mueller report prior to its release.

"I don't intend at this stage to send the full unredacted report to the committee," Barr stated. In other words, he wishes to hide portions of the Mueller Report from Congress. Selected members of Congress see the most sensitive intelligence generated by our intell agencies, but, according to Barr, they will not see all of the Mueller Report, only what Barr decides they will see. This in accordance with the four rules Barr himself created.

Barr refused to discuss Trump's alleged obstruction with the committee.

Put a different way, Trump's hit man is doing exactly what he was hired to do.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Barr said four types of information, as defined by Barr, would be redacted from the report he submits to Congress: grand jury material, classified information, material tied to ongoing investigation, and information that could harm "peripheral third parties."

Grand jury material and classified information? Because only Congress can declare war and, according to the War Powers Resolution, Congress can end a war started by the President, Congress receives the most up-to-date intelligence produced by our intell agencies. However, according to Trump's hired gun, parts of the Mueller Report are too sensitive for Congressional ears.

Does that make sense to anyone?

Material tied to ongoing investigation? Barr is telling Congress he will withhold from Congress any evidence of Trump's involvement with hush money payoffs to a porn star and a playboy bunny, money laundering, tax fraud, and campaign fraud because those are matters of "ongoing investigations."

Gotta admit, Barr has balls.

Information that could harm "peripheral third parties?" This creative rule from Barr is of far more concern than the others, and that is saying something. This rule allows Barr to withhold any or all evidence regarding Trump. He does not define "third parties." He does not define second parties, or first parties. Is Trump a "third party" by Barr's own definition of a third party? We do not know. Barr never mentions Trump.

That, in and of itself, is problematic. The DOJ has two rules. The first rule is, the DOJ will not indict a sitting President. The second rule is, they will not make public incriminating evidence of a person if they are not going to indict that person. Barr has never mentioned Trump.

Does that mean Trump could be that "person." Even though nearly the entire focus of the Mueller investigation was on the President, Barr has never made the distinction between some mythical "person" and the President of the United States.

There is one thing we know from Barr's testimony today. Because he regarded the Mueller Report as "fatally misconceived" and his belief of the "unitary executive," Barr is doing his level best to protect Trump.

This could backfire on Trump. By nature, Americans are suspicious. They immediately become suspicious when a politician hides behind a lawyer and legal hocus-pocus.

 

[Lesh]

The only thing papadopulous did wrong was lie to the FBI about meeting with ONE Russian national in Britain who claimed to have dirt on Hillary.

Yea that's all.

Huh?

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Barr said four types of information, as defined by Barr, would be redacted from the report he submits to Congress: grand jury material, classified information, material tied to ongoing investigation, and information that could harm "peripheral third parties."

Grand jury material and classified information? Because only Congress can declare war and, according to the War Powers Resolution, Congress can end a war started by the President, Congress receives the most up-to-date intelligence produced by our intell agencies. However, according to Trump's hired gun, parts of the Mueller Report are too sensitive for Congressional ears.

Does that make sense to anyone?

Material tied to ongoing investigation? Barr is telling Congress he will withhold from Congress any evidence of Trump's involvement with hush money payoffs to a porn star and a playboy bunny, money laundering, tax fraud, and campaign fraud because those are matters of "ongoing investigations."

Gotta admit, Barr has balls.

Information that could harm "peripheral third parties?" This creative rule from Barr is of far more concern than the others, and that is saying something. This rule allows Barr to withhold any or all evidence regarding Trump. He does not define "third parties." He does not define second parties, or first parties. Is Trump a "third party" by Barr's own definition of a third party? We do not know. Barr never mentions Trump.

That, in and of itself, is problematic. The DOJ has two rules. The first rule is, the DOJ will not indict a sitting President. The second rule is, they will not make public incriminating evidence of a person if they are not going to indict that person. Barr has never mentioned Trump.

Does that mean Trump could be that "person." Even though nearly the entire focus of the Mueller investigation was on the President, Barr has never made the distinction between some mythical "person" and the President of the United States.

There is one thing we know from Barr's testimony today. Because he regarded the Mueller Report as "fatally misconceived" and his belief of the "unitary executive," Barr is doing his level best to protect Trump.

This could backfire on Trump. By nature, Americans are suspicious. They immediately become suspicious when a politician hides behind a lawyer and legal hocus-pocus.

The above may have changed, emphasis on "may."

Barr says won't redact information from Mueller's Report just because it would damage Trump's reputation, he told Congress on Wednesday.

The Week reports, "During his testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee, Barr was asked about the reasons he has provided for redacting the report. One type of information he's concealing is content that would "unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of of peripheral third parties," and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) asked if this means Barr will redact information to protect Trump's reputational interests."

"No," Barr responded. "I'm talking about people in private life, not public office holders."

Barr says he won't redact Mueller report to protect Trump's reputation

So, Barr says he will provide all the evidence pertaining Trump that is contained in the Mueller Report. Based on what Barr has already said and done, most will believe it when they see it.

For the second day in a row in hearings before Congress, Barr refused to discuss whether he has given the entire Mueller Report to Trump. That is significant because Mouth said two weeks ago that he wanted the report to go public because he had nothing to fear.

Now he says, “This was an attempted coup. This was an attempted takedown of a president, and we beat them. We beat them. We fight back, and you know why we fight back? Because I knew how illegal this whole thing was. It was a scam.”

To the FBI that began the investigation, Trump added, “They knew it, too. And they got caught, and what they did was treason. What they did was terrible. What they did was against our Constitution and everything we stand for. So, hopefully, that will happen,” referring to Barr's investigation of the origins of the inquiry which Barr regarded as "spying."

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Trump called on Barr to investigate the origins of the probe, which he has repeatedly claimed was a “hoax” and “Witch Hunt!” cooked up by Hillary Clinton and her supposed “deep state” supporters in the Justice Department — saying there was “a hunger” in the country to pursue that probe.

“What I’m most interested in is getting started hopefully, the attorney general, he mentioned it yesterday. He is doing a great job getting started on going back to the origins of exactly where this all started because this was an illegal witch hunt, and everybody knew it,” he asserted, before apparently accusing Mueller and his team of treason.

“They knew it, too. And they got caught, and what they did was treason. What they did was terrible. What they did was against our Constitution and everything we stand for. So, hopefully, that will happen,” Trump said.

Barr, appearing before Congress for a second straight day on Wednesday, said the government spied on the Trump campaign and said he would look into whether any rules were violated.

Barr said he was preparing to review “both the genesis and the conduct of intelligence activities directed at the Trump campaign,” including possible improper “spying” by American intelligence agencies.

"I think spying did occur, yes," Barr said.

Under heated questioning from both Democrats and Republicans, Barr tried to back down, probably thinking he went to far accusing our FBI and intelligence services of spying.

"I'm not suggesting that those rules were violated, but I think it's important to look at that. And I'm not just talking about the FBI necessarily, but intelligence agencies more broadly."

"I am not saying that improper surveillance occurred. I'm saying that I am concerned about it and looking into it, that's all."

"I just want to satisfy myself that there were no abuse of law enforcement or intelligence powers."

Yeah, right. Trump has to be jumping with glee. Barr is going to investigate the investigators, complying entirely with his client's wishes, his client being Trump.

Nancy Pelosi said it best. “He is not the attorney general of Donald Trump. He is the attorney general of the United States.”

That is not the way Barr sees it.

This will come back to haunt Trump, and by 2020 he will be a crippled candidate, if he is the candidate. It is more important than ever that Congress sees the complete, un-redacted Mueller Report and the underlying evidence. At stake now is the very security of our country and our Constitution.