HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why is Barr SEEMINGLY cho...

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:12 AM

Why is Barr SEEMINGLY choosing TREASON over PATRIOTISM?

His family and descendants will be subjected to this far-more-egregious-than-Benedict-Arnold legacy for as long as recorded history still exists.


The way these lifelong elites make their career decisions is beyond my comprehension.

And it's way to late for me to "go sociopath". I could not bring myself to do what they do. I'm cursed with this basic sense of human decency.

Why take a lifetime bullet for such a loathsome crime family?

-90% Jimmy

53 replies, 2136 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 53 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why is Barr SEEMINGLY choosing TREASON over PATRIOTISM? (Original post)
90-percent Apr 2019 OP
redstatebluegirl Apr 2019 #1
sarabelle Apr 2019 #48
democratisphere Apr 2019 #2
zipplewrath Apr 2019 #3
edhopper Apr 2019 #5
zipplewrath Apr 2019 #7
edhopper Apr 2019 #14
zipplewrath Apr 2019 #17
lagomorph777 Apr 2019 #27
zipplewrath Apr 2019 #31
lagomorph777 Apr 2019 #41
zipplewrath Apr 2019 #42
lagomorph777 Apr 2019 #43
zipplewrath Apr 2019 #44
lagomorph777 Apr 2019 #45
zipplewrath Apr 2019 #47
former9thward Apr 2019 #50
lagomorph777 Apr 2019 #53
Fiendish Thingy Apr 2019 #4
edhopper Apr 2019 #6
onenote Apr 2019 #9
edhopper Apr 2019 #12
Clarity2 Apr 2019 #16
triron Apr 2019 #29
onenote Apr 2019 #35
zipplewrath Apr 2019 #10
edhopper Apr 2019 #13
FiveGoodMen Apr 2019 #25
Butterflylady Apr 2019 #8
Bettie Apr 2019 #11
TheBlackAdder Apr 2019 #15
smirkymonkey Apr 2019 #22
Me. Apr 2019 #18
Thomas Hurt Apr 2019 #19
FiveGoodMen Apr 2019 #26
90-percent Apr 2019 #20
OnDoutside Apr 2019 #21
donkeypoofed Apr 2019 #51
ScratchCat Apr 2019 #23
LineReply $
snort Apr 2019 #24
PeeJ52 Apr 2019 #28
Baltimike Apr 2019 #30
qazplm135 Apr 2019 #32
Grasswire2 Apr 2019 #33
Kablooie Apr 2019 #34
awesomerwb1 Apr 2019 #36
hatrack Apr 2019 #37
JHB Apr 2019 #38
duforsure Apr 2019 #39
AncientGeezer Apr 2019 #40
Blue_Tires Apr 2019 #46
area51 Apr 2019 #49
Guy Whitey Corngood Apr 2019 #52

Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:16 AM

1. This isn't his first time serving as the GOP "fixer".

He did it first from GHW Bush, saving him from impeachment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redstatebluegirl (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 04:16 PM

48. There is something out in the media about Barr having worked for Russian interests

 

I will look for the link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:18 AM

2. Barr is inherently a traitor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:19 AM

3. What enemy?

To what enemy did he give aid and comfort?

He may be impeachable if he misleads congress. But I'm not sure the charge would be treason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:21 AM

5. I think the idea is

he has chosen to protect a traitor (Trump working for Russia) rather than defend his country.

Abetting a man who continues to serve a foreign power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #5)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:24 AM

7. Mueller disagrees

The problem is, Mueller concluded (presumably) that Trump DIDN'T "serve a foreign power" (probably because he was too incompetent to do so). Treason is VERY narrowly defined in the constitution for a reason. Barr may be a traitor, but he didn't commit treason. (Nixon on the other hand...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #7)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:30 AM

14. We don't really know what Mueller found

I hope someday we will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:36 AM

17. Sorta agree

Unless Barr literally said the opposite of what Mueller did, apparently Mueller didn't find anything that met his personal high standard for definition of what cooperation was. I am a bit suspicious that there is still plenty of "smoke" there that is going to be quite interesting to the democrats in the House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #7)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:52 AM

27. You mean Barr claims that Mueller says that Barr is OK?

WTF?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #27)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:26 AM

31. No

Mueller said there was no treason or coordination. Of course Mueller had a very high standard for such a charge. It will be interesting to see what level the evidence suggests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #31)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 12:28 PM

41. Barr said that Mueller said there was no conspiracy with Russian Government OFFICIALS.

We have no idea what Mueller said. We only know what the cover-up guy claims about what Mueller said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #41)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 12:54 PM

42. Yup

Like I said, he had a very narrow criteria for some reason that wasn't met. One wonders what criteria could have been met.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #42)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 03:49 PM

43. We have no idea what Mueller's criteria may or may not have been, nor his real conclusions.

It's all the words of Cover-up Guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #43)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 04:02 PM

44. Actually we do

Some time back he established the high degree for what constituted "cooperation" and evidence thereof. Basically if he couldn't establish that Trump, or someone on the immediate staff, actually made AND EXECUTED an agreement to interfere in the elections, he wouldn't bring charges. Trying and failing apparently wasn't going to be good enough for him. It might be for congress and the American people however.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #44)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 04:04 PM

45. You seem stuck on the idea that Barr isn't lying.

I can't quite figure out why.

As far as I'm concerned, we have no idea what Mueller actually says in the report.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #45)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 04:12 PM

47. Not exactly

I'm fairly sure Mueller didn't recommend charging Trump with cooperation with Russia. Everything else is wide open.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lagomorph777 (Reply #45)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 05:53 PM

50. You are stuck on the idea he is lying.

Even though you admit "we have no idea what Mueller actually says in the report."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #50)

Wed Apr 17, 2019, 10:46 AM

53. Barr is demonstrably evasive, at the very least.

If you've watched his recent hearings on C-Span, or if you have followed his career of being the dishonest cleanup crew for dishonest Republicans, you will understand my skepticism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:20 AM

4. *sigh* this isn't treason as defined by the Constitution

Certainly obstruction and abuse of power, but treason is very narrowly defined, and this ain't it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:22 AM

6. But he is protecting

a traitor by obstructing the evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:24 AM

9. We have diplomatic relations with Russia

We have billions of dollars in bilateral trade with Russia. American citizens can freely travel to Russia.

Does that sound like a country we're in a state of war with?

Russia is an adversary, but that doesn't make them an "enemy" for purposes of the very narrow treason clause of the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:28 AM

12. true enough

but sometimes legal definitions are not the same as general definitions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:32 AM

16. I wouldnt

not define russia as an enemy. They hacked our elections. They changed the course of our election. How is that not an enemy? Difference is, because of who we have in the WH, nobody can act on that or strongly voice that in a public way in this administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:20 AM

29. You are attached to the outmoded idea of a shooting war witha declaration.

I think this mode (that you refer to) is essentially obsolete.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Reply #29)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:36 AM

35. I'm confident that the courts will not consider Russia an enemy for purposes of the treason clause

Treason was intended to be construed very narrowly. If what Russia did was an act of war, it would have all sorts of legal ramifications (such as requiring NATO members to take action). Since none of those things have happened, the courts will not find a state of war exists between Russia and the US. Hell, they didn't find such a thing during the Cold War either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:26 AM

10. Traitor isn't defined

So it can mean whatever you want. But treason is very narrowly defined.
Lying to congress is also defined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #10)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:28 AM

13. point taken

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:50 AM

25. Any of these okay?

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/treason

Synonyms for treason
crime
mutiny
sedition
subversion
treachery
deceit
deceitfulness
deception
disaffection
dishonesty
duplicity
faithlessness
perfidy
revolt
revolutionary
traitorousness
breach of faith
lèse majesté
seditious act
seditiousness

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:24 AM

8. Two words - power and money

It's what drives civilization.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:26 AM

11. He's always been this guy

and he's being well-paid to do it.

That phrase, "the rich are different"...they are, because their wealth generally (not always, but more often than not) insulates them from pesky consequences for their actions, so they believe that they don't have to adhere to societal and legal norms.

So, in his mind, he's doing "the right thing" because it benefits him and those who will give him more money/favors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:31 AM

15. Simple: He's a dick!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #15)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:18 AM

22. I'm going with that answer.



I will never understand why so many people willing destroy their lives, careers and reputations for this vile ignoramus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:42 AM

18. HOw Did He Get Sush A Sterling Reputation In The First Place?

This isn't the first time he has done this type of thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 09:42 AM

19. Please stop calling it treason...

He is a traitor to the rule of law in this country, a traitor to principles of American democracy but he is not waging war against the US anymore than the toddlers and mothers at the border are invaders. He is a partisan hack and hypocrite, he may even be breaking the law, but he is not giving aid comfort to the enemies of the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thomas Hurt (Reply #19)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:50 AM

26. Betrayal, then

Miss the point much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:07 AM

20. My understanding of the STRICT DEFINITION of "treason" is wrong

So I looked up synonyms that I hope better match the meaning of my original intent. And picked out a few that could replace "treason" in my original post.


sedition
subversion
treachery
perfidy
traitorousness
seditiousness


Subsititute any of the above for "treason".


My point is: These guys take oaths. Destroying hundreds of years of American values so as to support a president hell bent on becoming a Dictator is a very despicable thing to do. Up there with helping terrorists nuke the US. And it's happening right in front of us in real time and our Institutions seem too hopeless and corrupt to turn this fascist police state tide!

-90% Jimmy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:10 AM

21. No. This is about protecting the Republican Party. What he is doing is not TREASON. It is highly

disreputable, but I'll bet it is not illegal, because that's how lowlife like him survive. To many Republicans, this is a game.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnDoutside (Reply #21)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 05:56 PM

51. It's at least Sedition, harming his country by covering up for a criminal

He meets THAT definition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:27 AM

23. The report is clearly as bad for the GOP

As it is for Trump, as this cover-up was orchestrated probably a year ago and it clearly involves Lindsay Graham and other GOPers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:39 AM

24. $

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:06 AM

28. Because they always get away with every government scandal...

 

Haven't you noticed? Doesn't it seem like all the secret stuff is sealed and never to be released until 50 years later? We only learned about some of the deepest Watergate secrets lately, and most people didn't even care. The only ones that did were the true legal scholars. Who knows what all they really found out about Iran/Contra. People went to jail over that, or should have. All the hearings about 9-11 won't be published until most of us are dead and gone. All we have is conspiracy theories to go on. Why should this be any different?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:22 AM

30. Because he got away with it for Iran Contra, so he figures he'll do it again. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:28 AM

32. from his POV

 

being patriotic means protecting republicans.

Not defending it, just understanding it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:32 AM

33. And now we know he has Russian ties.

I believe he's compromised. His tax returns should be requested when it's time to impeach HIM.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:35 AM

34. He expects to go down in history as

The greatest defender of the greatest president in history, dictator for life , Donald trump.

Many Republicans are anticipating a successful coup and want to be on the right side of history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:39 AM

36. They are banking on getting away with it by remaining in power

and riding it out over time. If that's the case, Barr will only be a villain to Dems and those paying attention.

The trump base may be enough to keep them in power and that's why the trump demon kids may be future candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:39 AM

37. Because he's a Dominionist who denounces separation of church and state



From Barr’s 1995 essay Legal Issues in a New Political Order:

We live in an increasingly militant, secular age. We see an emerging philosophy that government is expected to play an ever greater role in addressing social problems in our society. It is also expected to over-ride various private interests as it goes about this work. As part of this philosophy, we see a growing hostility toward religion, particularly Catholicism. This form of bigotry has always been fashionable in the United States. There are, today, even greater efforts to marginalize or"ghettoize" orthodox religion.

Okay, wow. And Barr gets even more extreme in his essay. A few of the highlights:

America should not be secular, but instead should enforce “a transcendent moral order with objective standards of right and wrong that flows from God’s eternal law.”

He blames crime, poverty, and even sexually transmitted diseases, on a nebulous Federal government attack on what he believes are American “traditional values.”

He outright calls for the Federal government to pay for religious education through subsidies

He calls for the creation of laws which “restrain sexual immorality” which will target homosexuals and transgenders

He complains about “laws which treat a cohabitating couple as a married couple,” and goes on to suggests housing discrimination against unmarried couples, gay or straight, should be perfectly legal

The essay goes on and on in this fashion, clearly demonstrating the depth and commitment Barr advocated to removing the wall between church and state.


EDIT

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/4/15/1850225/-Barr-Is-No-Mystery-He-Is-Simply-A-Zealot

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 11:53 AM

38. "People like you are still living in what we call the reality-based community...

"People like you are still living in what we call the reality-based community. You believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That’s not the way the world really works anymore. We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you are studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors, and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." -- anonymous Bush adviser later identified to be Karl Rove


That's been the conservative standard operating procedure a few decades now: Push hard, grab with both hands, brazen it out, and you'll get what you want and leave everyone else stumbling to pick up the pieces. And what they want is to be the ones unequivocally on top, the people who call all the shots and can brush off or squash anyone who thinks different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 12:04 PM

39. Well, maybe many

Like his son in law and daughter working in the House, and he was involved with Alfa Bank , which has ties to putin. So , he's very likely compromised , and putin and trump are using it against him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 12:07 PM

40. It's not treason....simple answer.

He's overseeing a U.S. issue...not 1 that has to do with a declared foreign enemy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 04:05 PM

46. Because he owes his paycheck and career to treason...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 05:23 PM

49. Money?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 90-percent (Original post)

Tue Apr 16, 2019, 06:00 PM

52. Because he's a professional scumbag?




.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread