During Wednesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Attorney General William Barr slipped up in a number of ways, perhaps the biggest slip of all came when he attempted to draw the distinction between a conversation and a “substantive” conversation, as he may have inadvertently informed us as to how many crimes he has helped Donald Trump commit.
When Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal asked Barr whether or not the fourteen ongoing federal criminal cases spun off from the Mueller investigation had been discussed with the White House, Barr took a pause before carefully replying that he hadn’t had any “substantive conversations” regarding them.
In other words, he didn’t want to admit publicly and on the record that he had in fact discussed one or more of the cases with the White House. Had he done so, he practically would have admitted to conspiring to obstruct justice while the whole point of his hearing was to prove the exact opposite in a roundabout way. So instead, in a panic, he elected to say that no substantive conversations were had. Quite frankly, that was perhaps because phrasing it any other way could lead to possible perjury charges if any conversations were in fact had.
Wow. What a mess this whole thing has become. First, his four page summary of the Mueller report wasn’t a “summary.” Now this. What is he trying to hide here exactly, and why? And why is he so intent on cloaking it with verbiage meant to confuse?