William Barr’s Testimony May Not Sit Well With Donald Trump

The attorney general vowed to protect Robert Mueller and uphold the rule of law.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Based on Tuesday’s testimony by William Barr, Donald Trump’s attorney general pick, the president may already regret the nomination.

Trump has spent nearly two years raging against the Justice Department for allowing special counsel Robert Mueller to investigate the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. But Barr said in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that he will protect Mueller’s investigation from political interference. “On my watch, Bob will be allowed to finish his work,” he said.

Barr, 68, who served as attorney general under former President George H.W. Bush, said his age and experience puts him “in a position to be independent” and “do the right thing and not really care about the consequences.” Barr proclaimed that he won’t “be bullied into doing anything wrong” by Trump or anyone else and asserted that he gave Trump “no assurances, promises, or commitments of any kind” about what he would do as head of the DOJ.

Trump has suggested that the attorney general should represent him legally and “protect” him from investigation. Barr said Tuesday that the attorney general is not the president’s lawyer. Trump repeatedly decried former Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ decision to recuse himself from the department’s investigation into Russian interference. Barr testified that Sessions “did the right thing recusing himself.” Trump calls the Russia probe a witch hunt. “I don’t believe Mr. Mueller would be involved in a witch hunt,” Barr said.

Trump has demanded an end or quick conclusion to Mueller’s probe, a demand some congressional Republicans have echoed. Barr testified that he will not interfere with Mueller’s investigation and will give the special counsel the time and resources to do his job.

Trump has claimed that Mueller has conflicts of interest that should disqualify him from the Russia probe, asserting, among other things, that Mueller and former FBI Director James Comey, who Trump fired, are “best friends.” That claim is false according to Comey, who says he is not close personally with Mueller. Who is close with Mueller? Barr, who called Mueller’s family his “good friends” and said they will remain so after Mueller’s probe ends.

When asked Tuesday to pledge not to fire Mueller without cause, Barr not only did so, but said it is “unimaginable to me” that Mueller would do anything that warrants dismissal.

So why would Trump nominate Barr as his attorney general? For one thing, Barr’s promises may be less ironclad than they appear. Barr’s written testimony included the qualification that his power to block Trump’s whims are limited. “Where judgments are to be made by me, I will make those judgments based solely on the law and will let no personal, political, or other improper interests influence my decision,” he wrote.

This is significant because Barr has previously advocated an expansive view of executive authority, suggesting he might deem the president as exercising decision-making power over many DOJ issues. Barr’s broad view of executive power was on display in the unsolicited memo he sent to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein last year that criticized Mueller’s investigation into whether Trump obstructed justice.

Democrats said the 18-page memo appeared to be a way for Barr to audition for the attorney general nomination—a claim Barr denied on Tuesday, arguing he would not have sent a lengthy memo to the DOJ, rather than to the White House, if he were seeking Trump’s attention. But Barr in fact said in a letter to Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) that he also sent copies of his memo to White House special counsel Emmet Flood; White House counsel Pat Cipollonel; Trump lawyers Jay Sekulow and Marty and Jane Raskin; and attorney Abbe Lowell, who represents Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. Whatever Barr intended, it seems likely that Trump selected him based partly on the views outlined in his memo.

Barr also testified Tuesday that he met personally with Trump in June 2017 to discuss working as one of Trump’s lawyers. Barr didn’t detail what legal advice he may have offered, but he said he told Trump he didn’t want the job. It’s possible Trump got a different impression.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate