Friday William Barr spoke in front of the Federalist Society. It is now clear that if Democrats do not find a way to destroy William Barr, he will destroy them. The following article is from Bloomberg:
“Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they called the Resistance,” Barr said. “They essentially see themselves as engaged in a war, to cripple by any means necessary, a duly elected government.”
The sheer volume of what we see today – the pursuit of scores of parallel investigations through an avalanche of subpoenas – is plainly designed to incapacitate the executive branch and, indeed, is touted as such,” Barr said. “While the president has certainly thrown out the traditional Beltway playbook and punctilio, he was upfront about what he was going to do and the people decided they wanted him to serve as president.”
“One of the ironies of today is that those who oppose this president constantly accuse this administration of shredding constitutional norms and waging a war on the rule of law,” he said. “Of course there is no substance to these claims.”
“In waging a scorched earth, no-holds-barred war of resistance against this administration, it is the left that has engaged in the systematic shredding of norms and undermining the rule of law,” Barr said.
The full statement, reported below on the Gateway Pundit, is even stronger:
As I said the framers fully expected intense pulling between Congress and the Executive. Unfortunately just in the past few years we’ve seen these conflicts take on an entirely new character. Immediately after President Trump won election opponents inaugurated what they called ‘the resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the Executive Branch and his administration. The language used to describe insurgency against rule imposed by an occupying military power. It obviously connotes, it obviously connotes, that the government is not legitimate. This is a very dangerous and indeed incendiary notion to import into the politics of a democratic republic.
William Barr is uniquely positioned to take this on. He had the advantage that the law, the constitution and the facts are on his side. While Trump’s opponents have been throwing silly arguments against the wall desperately hoping that something will stick, William Barr appears to have been preparing for war. The night before he gave this speech, William Barr met with Donald Trump in the Oval Office. Following this meeting, Trump sat down with Grisham, Gidley, Mulvaney and White House Counsel Pat Cipollone. He did not meet with his personal legal counsel. He delayed his trip to Louisiana and did not take any questions as he departed the White House.
In short, Democrats rushed to the TV’s with their best evidence against Trump and it exploded in their face. While the MSM was gushing over the honesty and integrity of these people, none of them could identify a single crime committed by the President of the United States. All of them backed off when asked if they supported his impeachment and removal from office.
Barr turned over this critical investigation to John Durham. No one, in either party, has dared criticize John Durham. That means it is going to be hard to criticize Barr for appointing someone highly respected on both sides of the aisle.
It sure looks like William Barr is about to go on offense and he will have no difficulty in explaining what crimes have been committed. Unlike Adam Schiff, he can obtain indictments, arrest people and prosecute them. If this speech is any indication of his real feelings about this, that is exactly what is going to happen.
I really believe this week is going to be explosive. It is hard to imagine Barr meeting with Trump and then giving that speech unless he is about to drop the hammer. There are many reports in the media that both the IG report and actions by John Durham are imminent. While many of us are used to disappointment when it comes to holding people accountable, and one must caution against irrational optimism, it would be naïve to ignore some pretty serious whether warnings.