William Barr nominated to replace Sessions as AG
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/us/politics/william-barr-attorney-general.html
Summary: After firing Jeff Sessions the day after the midterms, Trump has finally settled on someone to be his permanent replacement. William Barr is a 68 year old Lawyer who has long been entrenched in the republican establishment. He served as AG from 1991-1993 under the H.W. Bush administration. He will very likely breeze past the now 53 member majority in the senate and will be confirmed. However while he is qualified for the job, some of his statements of current events are very concerning for people who want to protect the integrity of the Mueller investigation. He has criticized Muller for hiring too many Democratic Prosecutors and Lawyers, stated he does not believe the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government and has a broad view of executive power. Perhaps most concerning he has expressed support for a DOJ investigation into the Clinton uranium one deal, a baseless conspiracy theory that holds that Hillary Clinton accepted bribes in the form of donations to the Clinton Foundation in exchange for selling US uranium to Russians. These are statements are very concerning because they indicate Barr will not hold a line on some of Trump's worst and most dangerous impulses, prosecuting political rivals (which he unsuccessfully tried to do) and fire Robert Muller (which he also tried and failed at). All of these issues deal with things like executive power, Judicial independence and overall health of our democracy, which we have all studied in class.
Questions:
1- Do you think that trump chose Barr because he is considered by qualified by congress and unlikely to be a an embarrassment to the administration or is it because Barr may be willing to allow Trump to end the Mueller investigation? Both?
2- As Trump’s legal challenges grow larger and the public learns more every day, would an Anti-Mueller AG even be enough to save Trump from possible impeachment or a grand jury indictment?
3- Congressional republicans are caught in the tricky situation of (mostly) voicing support for Muller’s investigation but also refusing to take any action to try and reign in Trump's power to damage it. If Barr tries to limit the Muller investigation and Muller is still able to show criminal wrongdoing by the Trump campaign, how do you think history will view these congress members who were complicit in the efforts to stop an independent investigation?
Nicolas Nejadnik
ReplyDelete1. ) This issue brings up three important elements of a Presidential Cabinet Appointment. First is the issue of choosing someone qualified, who has experience and a reputation that are worthy of the office. This requirement is made even more significant given the importance of the Attorney General in our present political climate. The second is the issue of someone who reflects the President’s own political beliefs. It is clear that choosing a political opponent would be counterproductive to the administration’s goals, and cause important problems for the President himself. The last of these is the confirmation of the nominee, which entails that the nominee must be someone of good standing with the majority of the Senate, which determines the practibility of the nominee’s candidature. Since Barr is well liked among the Republican Senate majority, has considerably experience, and has expressed belief in the integrity of the Trump administration, I believe that he has been chosen for both the credibility he brings to the administration and to at least expedite the end of the Mueller investigation.
2.) Although impeachment seems unlikely in any scenario resembling what has already taken place, even a pro-Trump Attorney General such as Barr probably will not affect the outcome of an impeachment trial, firstly because he would not have a direct say in the matter, and secondly, because it seems as though the bulk of what the Mueller investigation will uncover is either already known, or will most likely be known very soon, making Barr’s impact minimal.
3.) History’s view is often shaped by the media and public perception of the time being portrayed. For that reason, the indifference of Republican members of Congress will most likely neither be remembered as the cause or the effect of whatever outcome the Trump Presidency will have. As a result, it will be Barr’s appointment, or Mueller’s indictment, that will be the headline of the day, should the special prosecutor find significant criminal wrongdoing.