May 2, 2019
by Doug “Uncola” Lynn:
During Attorney General William Barr’s testimony yesterday on live TV, we witnessed Congressional Democrats obstructing justice by demanding Barr’s resignation in spite of his admitted investigation into FISA-abuse and Hillary Clinton’s dirty dossier.
It’s clear the only option the Democrats have now is to discredit Barr. Communications between Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the attorney general were mysteriously leaked on the eve of Barr’s hearing which, very conveniently, allowed Democratic Senators to administer their same old tactics as was used against Judge Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court hearings.
It has become very clear the Democrats care not for the law, the U.S. Constitution, or justice. Their motives are completely political.
Accordingly, May 1, 2019 presented as a very bizarre day throughout the American Corporate Media.
Hillary Clinton appeared on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow whereupon the former presidential candidate looked into the camera and pleaded with Americans to uphold the nation’s system of law by impeaching President Donald Trump. She also said Trump’s persistent tweeting about her crimes made her “sad for the country”.
Additionally, the former FBI Director, James Comey, who prematurely pardoned the aforementioned Hillary Clinton’s crimes using terminology such as ““no reasonable prosecutor” and “extremely careless” (changed from “grossly negligent”) wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times regarding Attorney General William Barr’s refusal to prosecute the president:
How could Mr. Barr, a bright and accomplished lawyer, start channeling the president in using words like “no collusion” and F.B.I. “spying”? And downplaying acts of obstruction of justice as products of the president’s being “frustrated and angry,” something he would never say to justify the thousands of crimes prosecuted every day that are the product of frustration and anger?
Oh, the irony. Especially given the fact Trump was not indicted by Comey’s old boss, Robert Mueller.
Therefore, it is perhaps appropriate for Comey to have poetically opined in his opinion piece about Trump eating the souls of those around him “in small bites”.
Furthermore, in another New York Times opinion piece, Obama’s former solicitor general who helped draft the special counsel regulations under which Robert Mueller was appointed – first acknowledged how those regulations gave Attorney General Barr the power to close the case against the president and then, in the same paragraph, lamented how the U.S. Constitution allowed “no easy way to remove the attorney general from the process”:
Some commentators have attacked the special counsel regulations as giving the attorney general the power to close a case against the president, as Mr. Barr did with the obstruction of justice investigation into Donald Trump. But the critics’ complaint here is not with the regulations but with the Constitution itself. Article II gives the executive branch control over prosecutions, so there isn’t an easy way to remove the attorney general from the process.
But wait. There’s more.
On May 2, 2019, after Attorney General Barr refused to appear before the House Judiciary Committee, Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y) called the meeting to order and dramatically stated the following:
We will have no choice but to move quickly to hold the attorney general in contempt if he stalls or fails to negotiate in good faith.
… If he does not provide this committee with the information it demands and the respect it deserves, Mr. Barr’s moment of accountability will come soon enough.
… but I am certain that there is no way forward for this country that does not include a reckoning with this clear and present danger to our constitutional order…
And, finally, the U.S. Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, also blatantly slandered William Barr on May 2, 2019 in her attempts to obstruct the attorney general’s stated investigation into how Robert Mueller’s investigation began in the first place.
As reported by CNBC, the House Speaker said:
He [Barr] lied to Congress. If anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime. Nobody is above the law.
Which, in turn, brought about a quick response from U.S. Department of Justice spokeswoman Kerri Kupec who said Pelosi’s “baseless attack on the Attorney General is reckless, irresponsible and false.”
When asked whether Barr should go to jail, Pelosi added: “there’s a process involved here.”
Indeed. A process to obstruct justice.
Insanity? Signs of desperation? Theater?
7 thoughts on “Democrats are Obstructing Justice by Defaming Barr, Demanding his Resignation, & in Seeking Trump’s Impeachment”
good recap,senor cola–
the dems better watch themselves–according to rasmussen,trump is back at 50% approval,the highest % since his 1st month in office–
assuming the economy doesn’t implode,trump is a near certainity for re election–
(Doug / Uncola)
More commentary at this link:
(Doug / Uncola)
the voting machines are being fixed to allow and encourage the filthy aliens votes,in California ,worse than Texas, and set up to chase whites away when they even try to vote.
FYI- My last reply to Tom Foolery (about a crap piece of video I had posted) took me 35 minutes to type a couple short sentences. I can click on any other article at TBP and not have any problem. I have noticed the comment count has remained at 113……..maybe the Chinese are already helping the clintonista demonrats ?
NobodysaysBOO is talking about voting machines. I saw, and copy/pasted a couple of paragraphs about a court ruling concerning ‘unconstitutional’ gerrymandering in Ohio…….beneficial to the demonrats and placing blame on the republicants.
annuit coeptis novus ordo seclorum- next up on the NWO agenda looks like it may be destroying the ‘credibility’ of U.S. elections…
Thanks Ordo. Regarding the video, it takes a stand up person to acknowledge when errors are made and I just said so over on the TBP thread. I’m glad to have your back. Thanks for reading and for your commentary
(Doug / Uncola)
Also – as an addendum, and for the record, regarding this paragraph in my above piece:
Technically, Hilda didn’t look squarely into the camera. The camera was facing her directly but she was looking at Madcow. And the Harpy didn’t exactly say Trump’s “persistent tweeting” (about her crimes) – but that was what I extrapolated. In truth, she could have been referring to his interviews or both tweets and public statements.
I was right in spirit, if not technically because this piece grew out of a comment I made on my “Dear Peggy” thread and I forgot to make those adjustments for accuracy.
And while I’m at it – another clarification. The “movies in the mind” theme of which I’ve referred to in past articles was, obviously, not something I invented on my own. It’s a common concept that increasingly formulated in my ideology after reading articles by Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams. In many of my previous comments, I actually gave Adams attribution for that concept, but, after a while, it became such a common theme that I neglected to give him any credit in my articles. Maybe that was wrong on my part. Even if I read/heard/conceptualized similarly prior to reading Adam’s thoughts on the matter, it was his articles that gave me clarity.
There, that’s better.
Ripples in the pond and the power of ideas that ignite revolutions, and all that good stuff…
(Doug / Uncola)