A depressing reflection on the state of norms and institutions.
Latest in William Barr
While certain aspects of Attorney General Bill Barr’s behavior could be defensible if they stood alone, taken as a whole his course of conduct shows that Barr is defending not merely the presidency, but this particular president.
Sometimes Justice Department independence means standing up to the president. And sometimes it means taking unpopular positions in defense of the presidency.
Reading the report carefully and writing my thoughts as I go.
The attorney general’s comments on supposed FBI “spying on a political campaign” were reckless and will feed gross conspiracy theories.
The press screwed up bigly on the Barr letter. Here are nine ideas for doing better the second time around.
I was pleased to host this discussion at the Brookings Institution yesterday with Susan Hennessey, Margaret Taylor, both of Brookings, and former National Security Division chief Mary McCord, now at Georgetown law. It's a very good discussion of where we are with the Mueller Report and the congressional politics surrounding it.
In his confirmation hearings, Barr committed himself to transparency that is consistent with strict adherence to relevant law, which contemplates little transparency.
The nominee to serve as attorney general promised to seek the advice of ethics officials on recusal from the Mueller investigation—but not to heed that advice. Is that enough?
Barr's nomination poses the same problem for the Senate as the House faces in weighing impeachment: What are the risks in selecting a course meant only to minimize or contain the institutional damage that President Trump is causing?