Bill Barr Calls out Trump and his "Crap"

[jusplay4fun]

Bill Barr called Trump's charges of Election Fraud "Bullshit" something I have already said in a post elsewhere here in this Forum.

Former AG Barr said Trump became enraged after being told election fraud claims were nonsense
"I told him that all this stuff was bulls---," Barr told NBC News's Lester Holt in his first TV interview since resigning as attorney general.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/former-ag-barr-said-trump-became-enraged-told-election-fraud-claims-no-rcna17750

William Barr uses new book to outline case against Trump White House run
Former attorney general also describes tempestuous Oval Office meeting in which he rejected electoral fraud claims

In a new memoir, the former US attorney general William Barr says Donald Trump must not be the Republican candidate for president in 2024.

The man he served between 2019 and 2020, Barr writes, has “shown he has neither the temperament nor persuasive powers to provide the kind of positive leadership that is needed”.

Trump, Barr says, has surrounded himself with “sycophants” and “whack jobs from outside the government, who fed him a steady diet of comforting but unsupported conspiracy theories”.

Trump hinted again on Saturday that he intends to run in 2024. He did not immediately comment on Barr’s analysis.

Barr’s book, One Damn Thing After Another: Memoirs of an Attorney General, will be published on 8 March, its title taken from a description of the job by Ed Levi, appointed by Gerald Ford after the Watergate scandal.

The Wall Street Journal, like publisher Harper Collins owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, first reported Barr’s book on Sunday. The New York Times and Washington Post followed suit.

A strong conservative, Barr was seen by most as a loyal servant to Trump, the second president he worked for after George HW Bush. The Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren was among those who thought Barr way too loyal, calling him “a disgrace” and “not a credible head of federal law enforcement”.

In his book, Barr rejects such accusations, prominently over the investigation of Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/feb/28/william-barr-book-trump-electoral-fraud-lie-michael-flynn-russia

[jusplay4fun]

The statements that then AG William Barr made about the RIDICULOUS claims by Trump of election fraud was the last confirmation that I needed. I did not believe such allegations from the start. Such claims were never supported by ANY CREDIBLE evidence. There were many charges of fraud in this state or this large city. NONE were proven.

Trump is a sore loser, among his many other faults. If he was not so convinced that he lost due to fraud and cheating, January 6 would have never happened.

I think the events of January 6 make him unelectable in 2024, and that is EVEN without news from the current Congressional investigation. There are too many Americans who cannot vote for Trump for MANY reasons, despite the staunch commitment of his rabid followers, like saxi.

Trump was not going to lose the support of his rabid "base" but one of his big mistakes in 2020 was to NOT TRY to expand the base of his support. He did not reach out to the more moderate Americans who had doubts about his leadership (or lack of it) and did not like his abrasive style. Trump let the big crowds at his rallies convince him that his support was larger that it was. He assumed that the situation was similar to 2016 when he beat another equally questionable political figure (and hated by many) person in Hillary.

[thegreekdog]

Trump should not win in 2024. However, there are a whole lot of people across the political spectrum who have benefited financially and otherwise from Trump's 2016 candidacy, presidency, and continued "relevance" subsequent to his presidency. This gives me pause on 2024 because, while someone like Bill Barr or Jim Acosta may publicly not want a Trump presidency, they certainly benefited financially from a Trump presidency.

tl;dr - If people stopped paying attention to Trump for selfish reasons, perhaps he'd go away.

[mookiemcgee]

Trump should not win in 2024. However, there are a whole lot of people across the political spectrum who have benefited financially and otherwise from Trump's 2016 candidacy, presidency, and continued "relevance" subsequent to his presidency. This gives me pause on 2024 because, while someone like Bill Barr or Jim Acosta may publicly not want a Trump presidency, they certainly benefited financially from a Trump presidency.

tl;dr - If people stopped paying attention to Trump for selfish reasons, perhaps he'd go away.

It's tough, I think the #1 reason there is more than a snowballs chance in hell is that there is no clear democrat candidate. Biden is looking like a mummy recently unwrapped after 3000 years in a pyramid and seems unlikely to run again, the current VP who might be the front runner thanks to identity politics and her current position doesn't seem to have proved she 'has what it takes' not to make her own public gaffs. Bernie is in better health than Biden, but is just as old and let's face it America probably isn't ready to elect anyone who embraces the moniker of socialst. Elizabeth Warren is old too, and probably can't win if Bernie is also running (dilutes her base completely). Mayor Pete and Amy Klobuchar seem like the most rational choices that have any national name recognition but I'm not sure they would enter the race near the top 3. Then there is another rung of people no one has ever heard or got less than 1% in the last primary season.

I could totally understand republicans taking the position that they are probably gonna win whoever they nominate, and if a global recession is indeed coming most candidates may be happy to let Trump adopt a country in the shitter rather than try and run against him.

It will be interesting to see how both sides play out... summoning my best powers of prediction based on todays info... it's gonna be Trump defeating Kamala by a narrow margin in 2024. (America surrenders to Russia in May 2025 and annexes NY to Putins control. San Francisco is then sold to China in 2026 in exchange for 50,000 Bitcoin)

[jusplay4fun]

Please see my comments in:
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=237819

[mookiemcgee]

Hillary won't get the dem nomination. That ship sailed, she already lost to trump once.

BTW, if you want an alternate view on Bill Barr (rather than just bill barr writing a book about himself) you should read Hatchet Man... While he did get end his tenure saving some shred of respect he will still likely go down as the worst AG in the last 1/2 century.

[saxitoxin]

BTW, if you want an alternate view on Bill Barr (rather than just bill barr writing a book about himself) you should read Hatched Man... While he did get end his tenure saving some shred of respect he will still likely go down as the worst AG in the last 1/2 century.

I'm sure Elie Honig is as credible in 2022 as Michael Avenatti was in 2019, as Chris Cuomo was in 2020, as ...

It's only a matter of time. When the Rats dump someone they dump them hard and move on to the next tell-all savior. If you're a Rat soothsayer your best hope is to cash in as quick as possible before the pack turns on you Secret of Nimh style.

[jusplay4fun]

Hillary won't get the dem nomination. That ship sailed, she already lost to trump once.

BTW, if you want an alternate view on Bill Barr (rather than just bill barr writing a book about himself) you should read Hatched Man... While he did get end his tenure saving some shred of respect he will still likely go down as the worst AG in the last 1/2 century.

NO, wrong. You forgot about John Mitchell:

John Newton Mitchell (September 15, 1913 – November 9, 1988) was an American convicted criminal, lawyer, the 67th Attorney General of the United States under President Richard Nixon and chairman of Nixon's 1968 and 1972 presidential campaigns. Prior to that, he had been a municipal bond lawyer and one of Nixon's closest personal friends.

After his tenure as U.S. Attorney General, he served as chairman of Nixon's 1972 presidential campaign. Due to multiple crimes he committed in the Watergate affair, Mitchell was sentenced to prison in 1977 and served 19 months. As Attorney General, he was noted for personifying the "law-and-order" positions of the Nixon Administration, amid several high-profile anti-war demonstrations.

[mookiemcgee]

Hillary won't get the dem nomination. That ship sailed, she already lost to trump once.

BTW, if you want an alternate view on Bill Barr (rather than just bill barr writing a book about himself) you should read Hatched Man... While he did get end his tenure saving some shred of respect he will still likely go down as the worst AG in the last 1/2 century.

NO, wrong. You forgot about John Mitchell:

John Newton Mitchell (September 15, 1913 – November 9, 1988) was an American convicted criminal, lawyer, the 67th Attorney General of the United States under President Richard Nixon and chairman of Nixon's 1968 and 1972 presidential campaigns. Prior to that, he had been a municipal bond lawyer and one of Nixon's closest personal friends.

After his tenure as U.S. Attorney General, he served as chairman of Nixon's 1972 presidential campaign. Due to multiple crimes he committed in the Watergate affair, Mitchell was sentenced to prison in 1977 and served 19 months. As Attorney General, he was noted for personifying the "law-and-order" positions of the Nixon Administration, amid several high-profile anti-war demonstrations.

Sir... the year is 2022, and I said a half century and he served as AG prior to 1972 so technically he is now excluded. You have permission to feel old for making this mistake.

[jusplay4fun]

Hillary won't get the dem nomination. That ship sailed, she already lost to trump once.

BTW, if you want an alternate view on Bill Barr (rather than just bill barr writing a book about himself) you should read Hatched Man... While he did get end his tenure saving some shred of respect he will still likely go down as the worst AG in the last 1/2 century.

NO, wrong. You forgot about John Mitchell:

John Newton Mitchell (September 15, 1913 – November 9, 1988) was an American convicted criminal, lawyer, the 67th Attorney General of the United States under President Richard Nixon and chairman of Nixon's 1968 and 1972 presidential campaigns. Prior to that, he had been a municipal bond lawyer and one of Nixon's closest personal friends.

After his tenure as U.S. Attorney General, he served as chairman of Nixon's 1972 presidential campaign. Due to multiple crimes he committed in the Watergate affair, Mitchell was sentenced to prison in 1977 and served 19 months. As Attorney General, he was noted for personifying the "law-and-order" positions of the Nixon Administration, amid several high-profile anti-war demonstrations.

Sir... the year is 2022, and I said a half century and he served as AG prior to 1972 so technically he is now excluded. You have permission to feel old for making this mistake.

Attorney General
After Nixon became president in January 1969, he appointed Mitchell as Attorney General of the United States while making an unprecedented direct appeal to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover that the usual background investigation not be conducted.[33] Mitchell remained in office from 1969 until he resigned in 1972 to manage President Nixon's reelection campaign.

Sir, I count THREE mistakes that you made:

1) Let me do MATH: 2022-1972 = 50. Sorry, Mookie, your Calculation is off. This guy's math is still winning and you argument is weak. ""the last 1/2 century" is year 50, as in 2022. And Barr was AG before 2022, further bolstering my argument.

2) Barr became attorney general for the second time in 2019. ......(Skip to...)

(In November 2020, Barr stated FBI and Justice Department investigations found no evidence of irregularities that would have changed the outcome of the presidential election.)....<<< for saxi and other Trump supporters who still Claim a stolen election.

3) Mitchell served as US AG until 1972, so that is mistake #3. See the above quote.

4) JUST for good measure, I do NOT FEEL, ACT, OR THINK "old." You can CALL that #4.

[mookiemcgee]

Hillary won't get the dem nomination. That ship sailed, she already lost to trump once.

BTW, if you want an alternate view on Bill Barr (rather than just bill barr writing a book about himself) you should read Hatched Man... While he did get end his tenure saving some shred of respect he will still likely go down as the worst AG in the last 1/2 century.

NO, wrong. You forgot about John Mitchell:

John Newton Mitchell (September 15, 1913 – November 9, 1988) was an American convicted criminal, lawyer, the 67th Attorney General of the United States under President Richard Nixon and chairman of Nixon's 1968 and 1972 presidential campaigns. Prior to that, he had been a municipal bond lawyer and one of Nixon's closest personal friends.

After his tenure as U.S. Attorney General, he served as chairman of Nixon's 1972 presidential campaign. Due to multiple crimes he committed in the Watergate affair, Mitchell was sentenced to prison in 1977 and served 19 months. As Attorney General, he was noted for personifying the "law-and-order" positions of the Nixon Administration, amid several high-profile anti-war demonstrations.

Sir... the year is 2022, and I said a half century and he served as AG prior to 1972 so technically he is now excluded. You have permission to feel old for making this mistake.

Attorney General
After Nixon became president in January 1969, he appointed Mitchell as Attorney General of the United States while making an unprecedented direct appeal to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover that the usual background investigation not be conducted.[33] Mitchell remained in office from 1969 until he resigned in 1972 to manage President Nixon's reelection campaign.

Sir, I count THREE mistakes that you made:

1) Let me do MATH: 2022-1972 = 50. Sorry, Mookie, your Calculation is off. This guy's math is still winning and you argument is weak. ""the last 1/2 century" is year 50, as in 2022. And Barr was AG before 2022, further bolstering my argument.

2) Barr became attorney general for the second time in 2019. ......(Skip to...)

(In November 2020, Barr stated FBI and Justice Department investigations found no evidence of irregularities that would have changed the outcome of the presidential election.)....<<< for saxi and other Trump supporters who still Claim a stolen election.

3) Mitchell served as US AG until 1972, so that is mistake #3. See the above quote.

4) JUST for good measure, I do NOT FEEL, ACT, OR THINK "old." You can CALL that #4.

Sir, My comment was made this week. So when I said worst in a half century I meant from the date of my writing it, and I'm allowed to define it because it's my words and I wrote them. What I wrote would include the current AG, but wouldn't include anyone prior to April 1972 (sorry, not sorry).

"Nixon appointed Mitchell Attorney General of the United States on January 21, 1969. He served in that capacity until February 15, 1972, when he resigned to head the committee for the reelection of President Nixon."

https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/mitchell ... %2C%201988.

[jusplay4fun]

Your opinion of Barr still STINKS, no matter how you spin it.

And your half-century timeline is still incorrect. If you want to split it between April of 2022 and Feb. 2022, so be it. But ultimately, when talking a half-century, a few weeks does not matter significantly. It does not really matter if it is about 50 years (51-49 years). It does not matter if it is 50.0 years or 50.00000 years or about 50 Years, that is 51-49 or even 54-46 years.

If I were to say event X happened "3 minutes ago" does it mean it happened (A) 3 minutes ago and Zero seconds (so almost exactly 3 minutes ago)? Or (B) does it mean it happened between 2:31 and 3:29 (3 minutes and 29 seconds) ago? I did not specify and did not use significant digits (AKA significant figures) so the precise meaning of "3 minutes ago" is somewhat ambiguous, somewhat open to interpretation, and THUS not lucid. ERGO, QED.

What are significant figures?
Significant figures are the digits of a number that are meaningful in terms of accuracy or precision. They include: Any non-zero digit. Zeros between non-zero digits as in 3003 or 45.60009.

Significant Digits
https://www.etownschools.org
Significant numbers are always measurements and thus should always be accompanied by the measurement's unit.

I teach the concepts of significant digits (AKA significant figures) and the precise meaning of a measurement can be more carefully documented by the use of that concept. In Chemistry, their use can matter in some situations. For example, the density of water is 1.00000 g/mL at 4 (or 3.98) degrees Celsius. Does it really Matter? It DEPENDS on the context. I teach THAT lesson, too. Sometimes, using the density of water as 1.00 g/mL is good enough; at other times, an estimation of the density of water as "about 1" at 25.0 degrees C is also good enough. (It is actually 0.9970 g/mL at 25.0 degrees Celsius, assuming, of course, that we are discussion PURE H2O.)

So for Mookie to try to split hairs when talking about "half century" seems to me disingenuous.

NOTE further, that Mookie provides NO RATIONAL why he thinks Bill Barr was such a terrible AG. I contend that he kept President Trump on a relatively narrow path, BEFORE 1/6/21 as AG. I doubt many men or women would have been as effective. For that reason alone, Barr does not rank as a BAD AG. Allow Mookie to offer better rationale and do not let Mookie merely say ONLY that Barr was AG for Trump. That is not good enough.

Just as a debate point, I will assert that William Bart Saxbe (1974 to 1975) was worse than Bill Barr or Michael B. Mukasey (2007 to 2009).

[mookiemcgee]

Happy Birthday JP! Since months are no longer 'significant digits' in calculating how old you are (per your rational above), I can say that anytime and it's right!


Rational for BB being a horrible AG (I already cited a whole entire book previously as 'rationale', and doubt you will take the time to read it but maybe if you did you could understand my perspective better):

Lied to congress and the american people and a federal judge about the contents of the Mueller report (setting up trolls like Saxi to go around falsely claiming no evidence of collusion)
- https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/0 ... arr-122449
- https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sh ... cv0810-111

Barr tried to manipulate the law to squash a whistleblower’s complaint about Trump’s dealings with Ukraine
- https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumps- ... d=65849857

Barr refused to release full unredacted Mueller report, for which he was held in contempt.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/deadlin ... d=62848213

Barr believes the POTUS is 'above the law' while in office.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... er/592951/
https://www.justsecurity.org/71230/bill ... e-top-dog/

Barr undermined his own DOJ prosecutors on the cases of Michael Flynn and Roger Stone
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/11/michael ... -aide.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 424112002/

Barr fired the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York under false pretenses
https://www.vox.com/2020/6/22/21298917/ ... fired-barr

Barr amplified baseless theories about massive mail-in ballot fraud, then turned around and acknoledge it was BS after leaving office and after Jan attacks on the capital.
https://abovethelaw.com/2021/01/bill-ba ... -the-door/

[saxitoxin]

FINALLY, Donald Trump and mookiemcgee agree on something.

horrible AG

... Bill Barr was not one of my better picks. He crumbled under the pressure ...

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... -trumpholt

[mookiemcgee]

FINALLY, Donald Trump and mookiemcgee agree on something.

horrible AG

... Bill Barr was not one of my better picks. He crumbled under the pressure ...

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... -trumpholt

It's true once they were both out of office they turned on each other... like just about everyone in Trumps orbit does (James Mattis, Richard V. Spencer, John Bolton, John Kelly, H.R. McMaster, Tom Bossert, Cliff Sims, Omarosa Manigault Newman, Anthony Scaramucci, Gary Cohn, Ty Cobb,Rex Tillerson, Kurt Volker, Jeff Sessions, Michael Cohen)

[saxitoxin]

FINALLY, Donald Trump and mookiemcgee agree on something.

horrible AG

... Bill Barr was not one of my better picks. He crumbled under the pressure ...

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... -trumpholt

It's true once they were both out of office they turned on each other... like just about everyone in Trumps orbit does (James Mattis, Richard V. Spencer, John Bolton, John Kelly, H.R. McMaster, Tom Bossert, Cliff Sims, Omarosa Manigault Newman, Anthony Scaramucci, Gary Cohn, Ty Cobb,Rex Tillerson, Kurt Volker, Jeff Sessions, Michael Cohen)

That's like saying George Washington and Benedict Arnold "turned on each other."

[mookiemcgee]

FINALLY, Donald Trump and mookiemcgee agree on something.

horrible AG

... Bill Barr was not one of my better picks. He crumbled under the pressure ...

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... -trumpholt

It's true once they were both out of office they turned on each other... like just about everyone in Trumps orbit does (James Mattis, Richard V. Spencer, John Bolton, John Kelly, H.R. McMaster, Tom Bossert, Cliff Sims, Omarosa Manigault Newman, Anthony Scaramucci, Gary Cohn, Ty Cobb,Rex Tillerson, Kurt Volker, Jeff Sessions, Michael Cohen)

That's like saying George Washington and Benedict Arnold "turned on each other."

More accurately, it's like saying Putin and Khodorkovsky "turned on each other"

[saxitoxin]

More accurately, it's like saying Spiderman and Green Goblin "turned on each other"

[mookiemcgee]

More accurately, it's like saying Spiderman and Green Goblin "turned on each other"

More accurately, it's like saying Saxitoxin and Mrsdyk "turned on each other"

[jusplay4fun]

Happy Birthday JP! Since months are no longer 'significant digits' in calculating how old you are (per your rational above), I can say that anytime and it's right!


Rational for BB being a horrible AG (I already cited a whole entire book previously as 'rationale', and doubt you will take the time to read it but maybe if you did you could understand my perspective better):

Lied to congress and the american people and a federal judge about the contents of the Mueller report (setting up trolls like Saxi to go around falsely claiming no evidence of collusion)
- https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/0 ... arr-122449
- https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sh ... cv0810-111

Barr tried to manipulate the law to squash a whistleblower’s complaint about Trump’s dealings with Ukraine
- https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumps- ... d=65849857

Barr refused to release full unredacted Mueller report, for which he was held in contempt.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/deadlin ... d=62848213

Barr believes the POTUS is 'above the law' while in office.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... er/592951/
https://www.justsecurity.org/71230/bill ... e-top-dog/

Barr undermined his own DOJ prosecutors on the cases of Michael Flynn and Roger Stone
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/11/michael ... -aide.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 424112002/

Barr fired the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York under false pretenses
https://www.vox.com/2020/6/22/21298917/ ... fired-barr

Barr amplified baseless theories about massive mail-in ballot fraud, then turned around and acknoledge it was BS after leaving office and after Jan attacks on the capital.
https://abovethelaw.com/2021/01/bill-ba ... -the-door/

You, Sir, are FULL OF SHIT and clearly do not understand the point about significant digits. You bent the definition of half a century to keep from admitting your error. And now you want to claim something invalid, because you do not understand the concept that I bring up about significant digits (aka significant figures). To use a birthday to make your false point shows the extent of your ignorance of the topic. A birthday is a precise date for MOST of us in this modern age. Apparently, that may NOT be true in your case, based on your lack of comprehension of the topic I raised.

I will not read a BOOK that is from one perspective; it is another attempt to denigrate Trump by smearing those around him. NOTHING NEW there. Trump is doing a fine job of demeaning his own character himself and needs NO help to do so. Those who do not like Trump already see and read it in the news almost daily. Hillary is doing so, too, but not as frequently. AND there is already sufficient polarization and reading that book does not change any of that for me.

Barr already told Trump there was no evidence of widespread election fraud before he resigned. That is one big reason for his resignation. Read the BOOK by him, if you dare. Barr resigned before Jan. 6, 2021. That is one convenient fact you omitted.

On December 14, 2020, Trump announced via Twitter that Barr would be resigning from his post as attorney general, effective December 23.[275] Barr further confirmed his resignation in a letter to Trump on the same day

As for Flynn, he was trapped by the FBI, based on what I know.

btw: That is ONE book, that I will NOT bother to read, because there is NO VALUE TO IT FOR ME. Why read it when

1) I got you to FINALLY give me a 5 minute synopsis, and that
2) clearly shows your bias.
3) I need NOT waste my money or my time on the book.
4) Rather than expect others to read the book by Barr, I already gave the courtesy of giving you a synopsis (summary).
5) You would not do the same for me until I challenged your previously unsubstantiated claims.

Further:
6) Two individuals intimately involved in a situation can look at its set of circumstances and draw two different conclusions, based on biases and perspectives.
7) Barr's role under Trump is still in Flux; i.e., has not been definitively determined.
8 ) The same cannot be said about Mitchell. Tell me one person who NOW defends John Mitchell within 50 years of his resignation as AG to run CREEP.
9) And your math is still wrong.
10) Trump is still an egotist.
11) Trump is still a JERK and still bombastic.
12) You are still wrong.

[Dukasaur]

That's quite the magnum opus.

[jusplay4fun]

That's quite the magnum opus.

Thanks, Duk, BUT.......

I have better (and longer) ones. That is one small OPUS for (THIS) man.

[saxitoxin]

More accurately, it's like saying Spiderman and Green Goblin "turned on each other"

More accurately, it's like saying Saxitoxin and Mrsdyk "turned on each other"

Only one of us got turned on

[jusplay4fun]

More accurately, it's like saying Spiderman and Green Goblin "turned on each other"

More accurately, it's like saying Saxitoxin and Mrsdyk "turned on each other"

Only one of us got turned on

When quoting me, please ALWAYS use larger font size, saxi. I do not want those old and struggling to read to miss something important.

[mookiemcgee]

Happy Birthday JP! Since months are no longer 'significant digits' in calculating how old you are (per your rational above), I can say that anytime and it's right!


Rational for BB being a horrible AG (I already cited a whole entire book previously as 'rationale', and doubt you will take the time to read it but maybe if you did you could understand my perspective better):

Lied to congress and the american people and a federal judge about the contents of the Mueller report (setting up trolls like Saxi to go around falsely claiming no evidence of collusion)
- https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/0 ... arr-122449
- https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sh ... cv0810-111

Barr tried to manipulate the law to squash a whistleblower’s complaint about Trump’s dealings with Ukraine
- https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumps- ... d=65849857

Barr refused to release full unredacted Mueller report, for which he was held in contempt.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/deadlin ... d=62848213

Barr believes the POTUS is 'above the law' while in office.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... er/592951/
https://www.justsecurity.org/71230/bill ... e-top-dog/

Barr undermined his own DOJ prosecutors on the cases of Michael Flynn and Roger Stone
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/11/michael ... -aide.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 424112002/

Barr fired the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York under false pretenses
https://www.vox.com/2020/6/22/21298917/ ... fired-barr

Barr amplified baseless theories about massive mail-in ballot fraud, then turned around and acknoledge it was BS after leaving office and after Jan attacks on the capital.
https://abovethelaw.com/2021/01/bill-ba ... -the-door/

You, Sir, are FULL OF SHIT and clearly do not understand the point about significant digits. You bent the definition of half a century to keep from admitting your error. And now you want to claim something invalid, because you do not understand the concept that I bring up about significant digits (aka significant figures). To use a birthday to make your false point shows the extent of your ignorance of the topic. A birthday is a precise date for MOST of us in this modern age. Apparently, that may NOT be true in your case, based on your lack of comprehension of the topic I raised.

I will not read a BOOK that is from one perspective; it is another attempt to denigrate Trump by smearing those around him. NOTHING NEW there. Trump is doing a fine job of demeaning his own character himself and needs NO help to do so. Those who do not like Trump already see and read it in the news almost daily. Hillary is doing so, too, but not as frequently. AND there is already sufficient polarization and reading that book does not change any of that for me.

Barr already told Trump there was no evidence of widespread election fraud before he resigned. That is one big reason for his resignation. Read the BOOK by him, if you dare. Barr resigned before Jan. 6, 2021. That is one convenient fact you omitted.

On December 14, 2020, Trump announced via Twitter that Barr would be resigning from his post as attorney general, effective December 23.[275] Barr further confirmed his resignation in a letter to Trump on the same day

As for Flynn, he was trapped by the FBI, based on what I know.

btw: That is ONE book, that I will NOT bother to read, because there is NO VALUE TO IT FOR ME. Why read it when

1) I got you to FINALLY give me a 5 minute synopsis, and that
2) clearly shows your bias.
3) I need NOT waste my money or my time on the book.
4) Rather than expect others to read the book by Barr, I already gave the courtesy of giving you a synopsis (summary).
5) You would not do the same for me until I challenged your previously unsubstantiated claims.

Further:
6) Two individuals intimately involved in a situation can look at its set of circumstances and draw two different conclusions, based on biases and perspectives.
7) Barr's role under Trump is still in Flux; i.e., has not been definitively determined.
8 ) The same cannot be said about Mitchell. Tell me one person who NOW defends John Mitchell within 50 years of his resignation as AG to run CREEP.
9) And your math is still wrong.
10) Trump is still an egotist.
11) Trump is still a JERK and still bombastic.
12) You are still wrong.

Sir, I didn't bend the definition of half a century. You are trying to redefine it to suit your needs, but a half century equals fifty years equals 600 months equals 18250 days. No amount of saying 'Mookie is full of shit', or saying 'I just don't understand your point' is gonna change that you were wrong.

You seem to have a book judged before you read it, is that the approach you teach your students? You dismiss it, without bothering to know whats inside... seems like a lazy cop out to me. You asked me to provide my own rational, I did, then you dismiss it as 'from the book by the bad man'. I cited numerous articles from a wide variety of (mostly) reputable news sources, but clearly I'm the one with the bias because I provided a number of reasons (at your behest) why he was a horrible AG.