Barr’s critics should reconsider
He follows the law and pre-established procedure and the evidence to the truthful conclusion
Everyone who ever called Attorney General William Bar a partisan hack who put President Trump’s personal and political interests ahead of the law, please line up to make a very public apology. The Wall Street Journal reports:
Attorney General William Barr has known about a disparate set of investigations involving Hunter Biden’s business and financial dealings since at least this spring, a person familiar with the matter said, and worked to avoid their public disclosure during the heated election campaign.
Republicans and President Trump have pressed Mr. Barr for months to pursue Mr. Biden, especially as his father, Joe Biden, gained momentum in his ultimately successful bid for president. Mr. Barr has staved off pressure from Republicans in Congress for information into the investigations, the person said, without elaborating on his actions.
Think about how often you heard allegedly well-informed, allegedly astute political talking heads insist that Mr. Barr was a “ruthless, relentless political hack and a thug,” “the most dangerous member of the Trump administration,” and accusations that Mr. Barr was “interfering in the election” and “weaponizing law enforcement.” Or the number of times you heard Mr. Barr was “aiding Mr. Trump’s collusion with Putin,” “turning America into a dictatorship,” and “a danger to democracy.” Remember Eric Holder insisting Mr. Barr was “unfit to lead the Justice Department”?
Does any of that fit a man who knew that his department was in the early stages of a criminal investigation of the son of the Democratic nominee, and kept it out of the newspapers?
This come after Mr. Barr publicly declared that he has “not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election,” infuriating every Trump fan who thinks the election was stolen and undermining the arguments of Mr. Trump’s legal team. Now we know Mr. Barr kept quiet about the Hunter Biden investigation — even when the Trump campaign was metaphorically screaming at the top of its lungs about Hunter Biden. Mr. Barr kept quiet because the Department of Justice is not supposed to influence the outcome of the election — even if that denies a potential advantage to the attorney general’s boss. Mr. Barr could have “pulled a Jim Comey” and shaken up the race with a dramatic revelation as Americans were casting their ballots. He chose not to do so.
William Barr is the guy who follows the law and pre-established procedure and the evidence to the truthful conclusion, whether it is good for his side or not, and whether it is what he wants to see or not. Of course, Mr. Barr is a conservative Republican, he has a clear viewpoint on what constitutes justice and how law enforcement should operate, and he’s going to have fierce disagreements with liberals. But William Barr is largely the same man, with the same viewpoints, as he was when he was attorney general under George H. W. Bush. He’s always believed in extensive powers of the executive branch. He’s always been comfortable taking an unpopular stance. He didn’t develop these views because of Mr. Trump.
Since Mr. Barr was appointed, we’ve seen furious Trump critics repeatedly yearn for a figure in Washington who would prioritize truth and justice over a partisan agenda and the whims of the president. They’ve wished for a figure in law enforcement who would publicly contradict the president when he’s factually wrong, and who didn’t see himself as an adjunct member of the president’s re- election campaign. Guess what: They’ve had that guy there all along!
Why did Mr. Barr’s critics misjudge him so badly? Because despite their proclamations of openmindedness, they have a very limited worldview. Despite their confidence in their ability to see a complicated world of nuance and shades of gray, they’re actually pretty Manichaean in their worldview — you’re either a progressive Democratic good guy or you’re aligned with one of history’s greatest monsters. No one is allowed to be merely mistaken or wrong; all of the opposition’s arguments must be made in bad faith and they must be driven by malevolent motives.
Most Democrats and progressive commentators couldn’t accept that Mr. Barr could have good-faith disagreements with them on matters of law. Also, “Barr Is Mistaken, But It Is a Good-Faith Mistake” makes for a less dramatic headline than “Bill Barr is setting the stage to interfere in the election” or “Bill Barr, Trump henchman, is sending armed agents to ballot-counting locations.”
Every phenomenon on the right that I have criticized in recent weeks still exists on the left in great supply. The desire to tell a dramatic narrative of heroes and villains, to stir up fear and paranoia, to demonize those who disagree, to contend that in every disagreement the very soul and future of the country is at stake, the willingness to leave out inconvenient facts, the inclination to mislead or lie ...
The Kraken’s not coming, but few people who put their faith in Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani and Lin Wood are going to rethink their decisions and views. Bill Barr wasn’t a partisan hack who prioritized the president’s desires over the law and the truth, but few people who spent the past two years demonizing the attorney general are going to rethink their decisions and views.