Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo pressed House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Sunday about the lack of headway in House Republicans’
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 29, 2024 9:23 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (1 comments) [32 views]

Former GOP congressman David Jolley: even among Republicans puppies have a high favorability rating
Pets by Curt_Anderson     April 29, 2024 9:38 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [3 views]

"Let me start off with two words:" I support Biden. I support Biden.
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 29, 2024 7:36 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [26 views]

Another dire 2024 poll for Joe Biden: Trump widens his lead over the President to 6% with just six months left to Election Day
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 29, 2024 3:49 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [18 views]

Anonymous comments regarding the Presidential Candidate Selector
President by Curt_Anderson     March 19, 2024 10:10 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (26 comments) [1319 views]

The silent Trump voter
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 28, 2024 7:28 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (3 comments) [106 views]

Republicans: Do you know where your political donations are?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 6:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (13 comments) [456 views]

James Comer hopes for divine intervention to save him from embarrassing impeachment fiasco.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:05 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (5 comments) [144 views]

pb's Legal Goobers #s 2 & 3: The NY v Trump case is collapsing
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 3:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [56 views]

The Oval Office Oaf calls for "Four more years. Pause."
Entertainment by HatetheSwamp     April 24, 2024 2:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [112 views]

Crime selectors, pages, etc.
Bill Barr: Presenting Trump as victim after indictment is ridiculous
By Curt_Anderson
June 11, 2023 10:01 am
Category: Crime

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

Former Attorney General Bill Barr said Sunday that presenting former President Trump as a victim of a “witch hunt” is “ridiculous” in reaction to the narrative presented by most in the GOP that the charges are politically motivated.

“It’s a very detailed indictment. And it’s very, very damning,” Barr told Shannon Bream on “Fox News Sunday. “And this idea of presenting Trump as a victim here, a victim of a witch hunt is ridiculous.”

“Yes, he’s been a victim in the past. Yes, his adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims, and I’ve been at his side defending against them when he is a victim,” he added. “But this is much different. He’s not a victim here.”

Cited and related links:

  1. thehill.com

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Bill Barr: Presenting Trump as victim after indictment is ridiculous":

  1. by HatetheSwamp on June 11, 2023 10:12 am

    My guess is that you didn't actually watch Barr on Fox News Sunday. BTW, if you watched, you saw that gay Guy you've never heard of. He was in the "group" i.e., the panel.

    Barr and Jonathan Turley both were interviewed by Bream. They both said the same two things. 1. This is serious. 2. If the indictment, one side of the story, is to be believed. Turley specifically said indictments don't always turn out to be what they originally seemed to be.

    The other commonly held opinion today, among the legalists, is that what the indictment describes is on the level of what Hillary Clinton did. And, we know how prosecutorial discretion operated there.

    Being the pessimist I am, I can only see this being a huuuuuuuuuge win for Trump. Honestly, I can't see it going any other way.

  2. by oldedude on June 11, 2023 10:43 am
    I'm waiting for the trial to end before I make any kind of statement of innocence or guilt.

    Did he egg them on? yeah. Was this a political stunt. maybe. Can he control his mouth? no. I think he dared them. Is that a crime? No. Is he a total PITA? Absolutely. Do people think he got away with other crimes. Yes. The problem is that you can't take these things into this trial.

    Some of these things can be part of a trial, but in sentencing phase. And of those, ONLY things he's been convicted of.

    This is why I've said over and over. I only want equal justice under the law. It seems the biggest issue between the libbings and the conservatives is about that. Can he use the mrclit defenses? dunno. I'm sure he'll try. Could it be he'll "win" on that point and the courts will overturn the clit decision, saying it was too broad (which isn't out of the question).

    I do agree that like many in our country, he plays up the victim card. And I don't care. I'm looking for how the state organized the crimes, and how the present that. I'm also looking at how the defense counters the charges. Did someone in DOJ do something unethical? Not like that hasn't happened before with this defendant. How did they get the information and the pictures? Was it initiated by an illegal wiretap? If so, all of that is out of the case.

    Too many times, I saw shiftless come out of a classified briefing saying they had "irrefutable evidence he's going to jail." And the libs bought off on it. Hook. Line. And sinker. And it was all a lie created by hilclit, and the dims.
    used illegally by DOJ/FBI/IC and they got caught.

  3. by Curt_Anderson on June 11, 2023 10:47 am
    No, I didn’t watch Fox. Did anybody disagree with Barr’s statement below? Especially the bread reference.

    “If even half of it is true, he is toast,” Barr said. “I mean, it’s a very detailed indictment, and it’s very, very damning.”
    forbes.com

  4. by Curt_Anderson on June 11, 2023 11:15 am
    "I think he dared them. Is that a crime? No." ---OD

    Is the "them" the FBI, DOJ and National Archives who requested that Trump return classified documents he took to Mar-a-Lago? "Dared" isn't the word for that. That's flouting the law, and yes it is crime to deliberately disobey the law.

    "I only want equal justice under the law." ---OD

    Why do you and other conservatives insist on making unequal comparisons with Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and/or Hunter Biden? None of them played hide & seek with classified documents. None of them had classified documents piled up and spilling over in bathrooms and public places.

    There are many people--mostly military and intelligence workers---who mishandled classified documents in a similar fashion has Trump who are in prison. Jack Teixeira was recently charged with (not convicted of) violating of the Espionage Act of 1917, and he's already cooling his heels in jail right now. I'd be happy if Trump got that sort of equal justice.

  5. by HatetheSwamp on June 11, 2023 11:24 am

    I love Shannon Bream. She's the best of the Sunday Morning moderators, in my opinion.

    This may have been her best show yet. She had a Trump attorney whose name I don't recall. And, Barr's always a good interview. As is Turley. She also had Trey Gowdy. And, Brit Hume. None of them are Trump supporters.

    No one disagreed with the "toast" assessment. As I said, Barr and Turley both offered the proviso that all we have now is Jack Smith's words on it. One of them said that if even half of it's true, he's toast. Then, of course, the discussions veered toward politics. They all agreed that Trump's strongest card is to compare Smith's treatment of him to Comey's of Hillary who, among other crimes, DESTROYED documents.

    They all agreed that this will help Trump win the nomination. After that? Hume's said all along that Trump can't win a general election. The others were not certain.

  6. by Curt_Anderson on June 11, 2023 11:40 am
    "As I said, Barr and Turley both offered the proviso that all we have now is Jack Smith's words on it." --HtS

    I doubt they said that. It's not just "Jack Smith's words on it." There are photographs taken by Trump's own staff. Recordings of Trump's own voice admitting secret documents were not classified. There are the written statements of Trump's attorneys. Not to mention there are Trump's own self-incriminating public statements.

  7. by HatetheSwamp on June 11, 2023 11:55 am

    Turley specifically noted that the indictment doesn't look as good the day after it's presented.

    Both Barr and Turley were careful to point out that Trump's team has had no opportunity to offer a defense against these charges and that we have no idea how they'll defend Trump when the time comes.

    The "if even half of it's true" part should encourage you. All the lawyers, though, acknowledged that an important part of the story is how long the case will take. Trump may end up pardoning himself.

  8. by oldedude on June 11, 2023 1:01 pm
    curt-Why do you and other conservatives insist on making unequal comparisons with Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and/or Hunter Biden? None of them played hide & seek with classified documents. None of them had classified documents piled up and spilling over in bathrooms and public places.

    First, I never mentioned pedojr in this sequence. He has no effect on this whatsoever. pedojoe. Classified documents were in his garage without being under any other security at all. They were also in his "office" at his non-profit, without any security. hilclit, classified was stored in her bathroom without any security. She dodged this and when her electronic storage devices were under subpoena, she destroyed them with a ball peen hammer. Her government phones (government property), etc. Her "server that was not up to code to be used for classified, was wiped with bleachbit and the guy who ran her computer behind her toilet. The computer was managed by a boulder-based company Platte River Networks. The House Science, Space, and Technology Committee accused Colorado-based Platte River Networks and its chief executive, Treve Suazo, of withholding documents demanded under subpoena and obstructing the committee’s investigation “at every turn.”

    As part of his investigation of Weiner’s communications with a 15-year-old girl, Robertson was searching the laptop computer when he discovered about 600,000 emails from Abedin, including many directed to or coming from Clinton. Weiner was later convicted on charges of transmitting sexual material to a minor but at the time of Robertson’s investigation in September 2016, the discovery of the Clinton emails set off a tense and confusing period of silence from the agent’s supervisors, which alarmed him.

    “The crickets I was hearing was really making me uncomfortable because something was going to come down,” Robertson reportedly told internal investigators later, according to the book.

    The FBI agent who set off the reopening of the Hillary Clinton email investigation in 2016 revealed he had “deep misgivings” about how the agency was handling his discovery of thousands of new messages.

    An FBI sex crimes investigator’s search of disgraced former Rep. Anthony Weiner’s laptop led to the discovery of hundreds of thousands of emails between his wife at the time, Huma Abedin, and her boss, then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. A newly published book revealed that Special Agent John Robertson was worried when he heard “crickets” from his supervisors after he flagged the find just two months before the election.

    There are many people--mostly military and intelligence workers---who mishandled classified documents in a similar fashion has Trump who are in prison. Jack Teixeira was recently charged with (not convicted of) violating of the Espionage Act of 1917, and he's already cooling his heels in jail right now. I'd be happy if Trump got that sort of equal justice.

    Didn't I mention that already, (I think this is the third time)? I believe in that also. AND if our DOJ/FBI was (as their charge says) everyone is equal under the law, pedojoe and hilclit would both be in jail with the others that have violated the law in this regard. But that's not true and the only "thought" you can get to the counter is the guy that "retired" from FBI in lieu of being prosecuted for his felonious crimes.
    pbs.org
    bizpacreview.com

  9. by Donna on June 11, 2023 3:38 pm

    Puzzled why you're talking about Hillary's e-mails, olde dude, considering that Trump's State Dept exonerated her.

    politico.com

  10. by HatetheSwamp on June 11, 2023 3:54 pm
    Donna,

    We're discussing the happenings on Fox News Sunday. The point was made there that the only case in which behavior as egregious as what Jack Smith alleges was Hillary's...and that the DOJ chose not to prosecute...which is pretty much proof that Trump is being persecuted, not prosecuted. The point was made two times that I remember.

  11. by oldedude on June 11, 2023 8:10 pm
    AND the state dept under the trumpster hated him (I'm guessing they knew he was going to bleachbit them and their hierarchy). That has kinda been the point here. Those knowing of pedojoe's schemes were covered. trumpster wasn't one of those.

  12. by Donna on June 11, 2023 11:34 pm

    Fox News resorted to comparing Trump's actions with Hillary because she's the GOP's go-to politician whenever they want to distract their viewers from the real crimes Trump committed.

  13. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 2:55 am

    I don't think so, Donna. Fox dumped Trump a while back...except for the Hannity and, I'm guessing, Laura Ingraham. But, that Bill Barr, Trey Gowdy and Brit Hume panel on Fox News Sunday? They ain't MAGAs. What's true is that Hillary is a crook.

  14. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 3:40 am

    Just a note about Fox for Donna and all y'all. I only began my Fox News Channel and Fox News Radio boycott about a month ago. I'm still up to date. Fox ain't CNN and MSNBC. It actually does report some news...it's not a pure preachin channel, like you progressives have.

    The program, FOX NEWS SUNDAY, is a Fox Network show, not a Fox News Channel show, and it's moderator is sumpthin CNN and MSNBC does employ, an actual, as po'd say, EFFIN journalist.

    On CNN and MSNBC, they would do the progressive version of taking a cheap shot at Hillary. But. FOX NEWS SUNDAY ain't that. It's, by far the closest thing to Tim Russert's version of MEET THE PRESS that there is today....by a looooooooong shot. That's why pb watches.

    And, Donna! Bill Barr?, take a cheap shot at Hillary? C'mon man, as the Former Truck Driver would say, gimme a break! Jonathan Turley? Trey Gowdy? Brit Hume? C'mon man! Gimme me, as po'd say, an EFFIN break.

    The point, as blinded to truth as even you are?, Hillary's actions were, genuinely, truly, egregious.

    Get used to it.

    Among non MAGA Republicans...and informed independents...Hillary will be Trump's ace in the hole. She's why this will be a political victory for Trump and the antiSwamp.

    So, get real.

  15. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 4:01 am

    Donna and all y'all,

    Megyn Kelly's close to being in the Shannon Bream class, being a journalist, not a pundit. See link.

    Kelly's not a GOP. She's politically conservative but, gang, she ain't MAGA, not even a little bit. Her opinions touch on what independents think. So, get real. Notice how animated she is...

    youtube.com

  16. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 4:14 am

    I went here to provide the SS community with an example of what a MAGA rant is like, as opposed to Bill Barr, Jonathan Turley, Trey Gowdy and Britt Hume from Fox News Sunday.

    Mark Levin. A serious MAGA hot-head.

    Surprisingly. It's pretty intelligent. Radical MAGA. But, actually, sensical.

    Watch a few minutes,...if you care about truth.
    View Video

  17. by oldedude on June 12, 2023 5:06 am
    Lead- Hillary's actions were, genuinely, truly, egregious.

    Sorry to jump into that above. Although Fox did talk about hilclit, the comparison started elsewhere during the fiasco. I realize Fox is the only conservative station OTC (other than conservatives) know exists. It's the NRA of news.

    Lead- great synopsis' of Fox. They're not by any means totally in agreement with the trumpster. Why do you think Tucker left?

    On one side you have Lavin. I do listen to him because I think he has a good thought process and is very much a constitutionalist. And, he is a trumpster without a doubt. The other side was Tucker, Brit Hume. Neither could really hide their disdain for trumpster. Dana, as usual, brings her view of working closely with GWB and gives some insight to the political game. Some I either fast forward through, or just don't watch.

  18. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 6:01 am

    OD,

    Good stuff on Fox.

    Why do I think Tucker left? Dunno. As you know, I consume the Megyn Kelly podcast. Often, it's worth nuthin and I turn it off. Other times, it's as good a source of news as I've found.

    Being a former employee of Fox, she brings understanding of the machinations there that no one else, really, has...and she claims to be close to Tucker. My guess is that the Murdocks threw the Tucker firing in in an unwritten addendum to the Dominion deal.

    Whatever the case, my guess is that Fox didn't realize how much firing him would hurt.

    Incidentally, Megyn Kelly sometimes calls Fox, "Foxweiser."

    What's your theory?

  19. by Ponderer on June 12, 2023 6:18 am

    "The point, as blinded to truth as even you are?, Hillary's actions were, genuinely, truly, egregious." -Hate


    Perhaps careless, irresponsible, imprudent, thoughtless, outrageous, and yes maybe even egregious.

    But her actions were never found to be illegal. She committed no crimes warranting an indictment. If she had, why didn't any of the Republican investigations into her result in indictments after years of their most intense trying? If there was any evidence that she committed a crime, why didn't the Republicans ever use it to "lock her up"?

    You desperately flailing morons got nothing on Hillary, Bill. Your words of outrage against her are nothing but hot, fetid, extremely stale air. She committed no crimes. All the GOP's horses and all the GOP's men couldn't find a single thing to charge her for, let alone find her guilty of.


    "Hillary will be Trump's ace in the hole. She's why this will be a political victory for Trump and the antiSwamp." -Hate

    Fer WHAT?!?! She didn't do anything illegal. No Republicans could find anything illegal that she did after years of trying. Nothing she did warranted even the mildest indictment. Because she didn't do anything illegal. Trump coulda gone after her like nobody's business. But he didn't. Because in actuality, she didn't commit any crimes that she could be charged with. You clowns have beaten that poor dead horse into a puddle of bloody hamburger and you still won't stop.

    You blithering idiots will simply never get any of this through your thick, solidly bone-filled skulls. Will you. 'Cuz it's all you got. And now you're trying to use the same old played out bullshit tactics on Biden. You MAGA Republicans so totally wallow in lameness.



    I am so sick to death of you fuckingasshole MAGA Republicans constantly fuckingup this country with your self-serving lies and flaming bullshit if your party can't control it. Attacking and slandering innocent people. Brainwashing people into believing any baseless, asinine crap you need them to, tricking them into voting against their best interests using baseless fear and bigoted paranoia. Because you empty-handed, sociopathic assholes have got nothing else!

    One thing is clear out of all this: If you MAGA Republicans have got to destroy this country in order to rule over it, then you're apparently perfectly content doing so and making everyone live in the hellscape of authoritarian rubble you reduced the country to doing it. Fuckyou assholes. You are the worst excuse for Americans that ever lived.

    Who needs enemies when we've got "citizens" like you MAGA Republicans.






  20. by Ponderer on June 12, 2023 6:26 am

    "Why do I think Tucker left? Dunno." -Hate

    Um, I think it may have had something to do with him getting his libelous ass fired.

    Plus he was losing the company money (besides the three quarter billion in the lawsuit). They couldn't even get any decent sponsors to put commercials on in the hour he filled. No top level advertisers would touch his show with a ten foot pole.

    So what if a show has the highest viewership on the network if you can't even sell decent commercial time during it?


  21. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 7:27 am

    po,

    Has Tucker been found guilty of libel?

    I think that you're exaggerating. Fox certainly didn't lose money off of his show. And, Fox News ratings are down all day long since he's gone. In the end, Fox'll lose money because he's gone.

  22. by Indy! on June 12, 2023 8:03 am
    Got a lot of violins playing while Rome burns. Ds would be making better use of their time doing something for the country because putting Trump away (as if) just means DeSantis will be the next prez if Biden doesn't make something major happen soon. He could start by sending me the $600 he still owes me.

  23. by Ponderer on June 12, 2023 8:07 am

    "Has Tucker been found guilty of libel?" -hate

    No. The company that was paying him to libel people was.

    Oh his show had great ratings. It's just that the network couldn't capitalize on his popularity by selling decent ad time because it was popular with the wrong sort of people.

  24. by oldedude on June 12, 2023 8:23 am
    So you're saying the pundits can't voice their own views? mmmmm.......

    Tucker filled that "conservative not trumpster" viewership. Did I watch him? Maybe for one segment. Wasn't a huge fan.

  25. by Ponderer on June 12, 2023 8:26 am

    "So you're saying the pundits can't voice their own views? mmmmm......." -olde dude

    No I'm not. Obviously. Again, you are wrong.


    Are you actually getting off on being wrong so all the time, od? Do you have some form of Masochism where you get some sort of pleasure from being so wrong all the time...?

  26. by Indy! on June 12, 2023 8:34 am
    Pretty sure I saw something that said Tucker had the best ratings on Fox when he was canned. Of course that doesn't mean much in today's cable news world - a couple million viewers or so. Cable is dyng for Trump to stay in the race because his campaign could keep them alive for another couple years.

  27. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 9:55 am

    No. The company that was paying him to libel people was.

    po,

    Apparently you did watch Tucker. As you know, I didn't. So, how did he commit libel? Hmmmm?

  28. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 9:59 am

    Indy!

    Tucker had the second highest rated show on cable when he was fired. He averaged slightly more than 3,000,000 viewers. Only Fox's THE FIVE had higher ratings.

    And, you're right. I (pb) have been quoting you say that cable is dead.

  29. by Ponderer on June 12, 2023 1:49 pm

    "Pretty sure I saw something that said Tucker had the best ratings on Fox when he was canned." -Indy!

    Indeed he did. And yet no decent sponsors wanted to touch his show with a ten foot focus group. Most likely mainly because he was such a propagandizing liar and insurrection supporter.


  30. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 1:55 pm

    Tucker didn't have the highest ratings on Fox. Period.

  31. by Ponderer on June 12, 2023 2:10 pm

    So you don't watch Fox. You just study their ratings. I see.

  32. by HatetheSwamp on June 12, 2023 2:45 pm

    I no longer watch Fox but I do study TV ratings. Megyn Kelly is, aptly, calling Fox, "Foxweiser."

    forbes.com
    adweek.com

Go To Top

Comment on: "Bill Barr: Presenting Trump as victim after indictment is ridiculous"


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
 SelectSmart.com home page