I’d buy that for a dollar!
Yeah, I’d chip in. That needs to be real.
vyshka
5348
I wish it had been a softer feeling shirt. Mine feel somewhat uncomfortable.
Banzai
5349
In American Russia, phone watches you!
That article is absolutely horrid to think about. Barr really did Trump’s bidding and I’m sure we’ll never get all the facts about just HOW MUCH he did in the name of Trump, not that of justice.
Thrag
5352
That’s wonderful news. Also a chance to break this one out again.
Record scratch
Yeah, that’s me. I bet you’re wondering how I ended up here.
magnet
5353
Remember, Sondland was a government employee. When government employees are sued over something done in their official capacity, they are typically defended by a legion of government lawyers.
In this case, there was very likely some discussion over whether Sondland would likewise get a government lawyer, since he was testifying in his official capacity. It looks like the answer was “We’ll just reimburse your expenses”. That doesn’t strike me as unusual. And Pompeo reneging on a promise should also come as no surprise.
Sharpe
5354
This is way beyond my area of expertise, but this whole situation sounds questionable and full of potential conflicts of interest. I think Sondland got thrown to the wolves in this situation but I’m also pretty skeptical of his chances at this lawsuit unless he has good evidence of some kind of contractual agreement.
Timex
5355
This SOUNDS unusual to me, but I’m not an expert in that area… but it seems like, since the government has an army of lawyers, it’d be weird not to assign any of them, and just say, “Ya, go find your own and we’ll reimburse you.”
Maybe I’m the only one puzzled why Garland’s DOJ is appealing the order to release a DOJ memo under Barr.
Details on the initial ruling:
At issue is a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking, among other things, a Justice Department memo that Barr said helped guide his decision to declare that the evidence described in special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on his investigation into Trump did not support a charge of obstruction, even leaving aside the policy against indicting a sitting president.
The DOJ had refused to give the March 24, 2019, memorandum to a government transparency group, saying the document represented the private advice of lawyers — before any formal decision had been made — and was therefore exempt from disclosure.
In a ruling issued this week, U.S. District for the District of Columbia Judge Amy Berman Jackson said the memo should be released because it did not fit the exemption for “deliberative” documents under the law.
In so doing, she called Barr’s credibility into question, and criticized the process under which he quickly issued a summary of the Mueller report that plaintiffs said appeared designed to “create a narrative to counter the special counsel’s findings and cast the President in the most positive light possible.”
The only possible reason I can think of that isn’t completely bad is that Garland may want to reserve the right to assert privilege in some future case? I don’t know. This seems closer to the truth but maybe that’s just anger talking (tl,dr: trump will never be held accountable for his actions.)
Edit: More analysis from emptywheel.
The DoJ is normally pretty protective of OLC memos, no? Admittedly it’s usually the same administration claiming privilege, but I can’t say it’s prima facie surprising.
I suppose. It just seems nothing ever changes: A Republican gets elected, they shit up the joint followed by Democrats who just sweep it under the rug until we’re left with nothing but a giant pile of shit.
Sharpe
5361
Here’s quote from that Digby article that I think is an effective explanation:
I never thought the DOJ would do anything at all to pursue what went on in the Barr regime. These “institutionalists” always think the best way to restore their credibility is to sweep the past under the rug and just do a good job going forward. And that always ends up just normalizing the pathological behavior of the Republican Party.
Institutionalists are terrified of being further politicized. The right is shameless and couldn’t care less if people accuse them of being rank partisans but anyone with integrity is deeply uncomfortable with that.
Sharpe
5362
It’s basically the DOJ version of the “hack gap” that has been analyzed on a number of center-left websites.
There are some relatively important “precedent” issues here that might make the DoJ reluctant to give up the information.
First - and arguably most importantly - the DoJ is supposed to be incredibly neutral in terms of party politics. That Barr was demonstrably not neutral was troublesome, but the hope is that Barr’s ridiculous partisanship did not do irreversible harm to the neutrality of Justice. Part of repairing that harm is to treat requests for the release of information on the Trump administration with the same degree of care and reluctance as they would/should on the Biden, Obama, or Bush administrations.
Second, releasing this information would weaken the ability of the DoJ to refuse the release of similar information in the future. Trump is/was ridiculously corrupt, but unless there is a pressing societal/legal need for internal DoJ conversations and memos on him to be released, then doing so would allow partisan operatives in the future to demand memos on the Biden administration going forward, using the same justification.
In other words, if the DoJ were to release the Trump memos today, then GOP fishing expeditions would demand (and get) any memos on, say, Hunter Biden tomorrow.
unless there is a pressing societal/legal need for internal DoJ conversations and memos on him to be released
Yes
E: everything scumbag did while in office should be subject to public scrutiny, especially potentially criminal behavior/conduct
