After Attorney General William Barr said Thursday that there was “no correlation” between the much-criticized clearing out of protestors in Lafayette Square and the president’s ensuing photo op with a Bible on Monday in front of St. John’s Church, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) challenged Barr to say that under oath.
I invite Bill Barr to say this in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee—under oath. https://t.co/TpTG659XxV — Kamala Harris (@SenKamalaHarris) June 4, 2020
“I invite Bill Barr to say this in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee—under oath,” Harris said.
The invitation from Harris, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, comes two days after House Judiciary Committee Democrats announced plans to hear testimony from several DOJ whistleblowers and made a threat to cut the budget of the attorney general’s personal office. This was their counter to Barr’s “refusal” to testify before the panel.
Barr claimed Thursday that there was “no correlation between our tactical plan of moving the perimeter out by one block and the President’s going over to the church.” The administration continues to say one thing about the use of force that day, while the press and evidence from the scene say another. For instance, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Wednesday that “No tear gas was used, and no rubber bullets were used.” President Trump also said no tear gas was used. But evidence showed otherwise.
Barr, who was among the gaggle of cabinet members and Trump advisors who joined the president in front of St. John’s Church on Monday, said the photo op with the Bible was not necessarily a “political act.” Barr also said the action to “move the perimeter” was planned before he heard about the walk to St. John’s Church.
“I think the president is the head of the executive branch and the chief executive of the nation and should be able to walk outside the White House and walk across the street to the ‘church of presidents.’ I don’t necessarily view that as a political act,” he said. “I think it was entirely appropriate for him to do. I did not know that he was going to do that until later in the day after our plans were well underway to move the perimeter.”
“It was our hope to be able to do that relatively quickly before many demonstrators appeared that day. Unfortunately, because of the difficulty in getting appropriate forces — units — into place, by the time they were able to move a perimeter up to us there had been a large number of protesters had assembled,” Barr added.
Some suggested that Barr’s “no correlation” remark was a verbal sleight of hand.
Old: Correlation does not imply causation.
New: Causation does not imply correlation. https://t.co/5TGhNisK4g — Orin Kerr (@OrinKerr) June 4, 2020
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
SkyKing36 on June 5th, 2020 at 00:57 UTC »
I’m sorry for anyone who’s seen my other posts on this, I’ve been ranting on other threads too...
All the focus is on clearing the protestors from the square, and yet some actually more serious felonies were committed right after that are under-reported. What happened that day is worse than it seems.
When they got to the church, the Priest, Rev. Gini Gerbasi, in identifiable religious garb, and her seminarian were forced from the church lawn and fired upon with tear gas and rubber bullets.
Let that sink in.
An American citizen was tear gassed and forcefully removed from their private property for a campaign appearance the president wanted to hold on their private property against the owner’s will. And not one republican sees any constitutional problem here.
This does not fall into any of the grey constitutional areas used to gas the protestors on the square. In the square, it’s easy to imagine some convoluted justification about disorderly assembly, public property, curfew, blah blah blah.
But not once they got to the church. Firing weapons at the law abiding priest and seminarian, on private property; forcing them to leave their private property without due process, and occupying their private property are all serious aggravated felonies, and they’re being treated like just “the usual trump antics.”
Each of these are serious violent crimes. Each agent could literally be facing 10-25 years if they were convicted, they’re THAT serious. The president may try to do some immunity razzle dazzle, and stall being charged until after he leaves office. But the individual secret service agents (edit: may actually be mostly US Park Police) have no such immunity, none, and need to each be identified and charged just as surely as the police officers in Minnesota. Again, this was a serious crime. There need to be indictments. (Edit typos)
Weaselfacedmonkey on June 4th, 2020 at 21:33 UTC »
Uh huh. So taking a short walk to stand in front of a church, hold a bible up and then leave was what, exactly? And why such a large media production of it? Seriously, they've stopped even trying to sound believable.
BillHubbard on June 4th, 2020 at 21:27 UTC »
The lack of integrity is complete with these people, I can't imagine he would hestitate for a moment to lie under oath.