At yesterday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing, chairman Jerry Nadler stated:
In this Justice Department, the President’s enemies will be punished and his friends will be protected, no matter the cost, no matter the cost to liberty, no matter the cost to justice.
Attorney General Barr responded with this challenge:
I’m supposedly punishing the president’s enemies and helping his friends. What enemies have I indicted? Who — could you point to one indictment that has been under the department that you feel is unmerited?
No Democrat could. Nadler was lying.
As for “protecting” the president’s friends, Barr noted that, far from protecting Roger Stone, the Justice Department prosecuted him, with Barr calling the prosecution “righteous.” As for Stone’s sentence, Barr explained that “this is a 67 year-old man, first-time offender, no violence and they were trying to put him in jail for seven to nine years.” Barr concluded that this sentence was unjust, and “the judge agreed with me.”
He might have added that the judge is a liberal Democrat who consistently demonstrated her distaste (justified in my view) for Stone. The fact that this judge agreed with the Barr Justice Department’s sentencing recommendation demolishes any claim that the DOJ was protecting Roger Stone.
Nadler has claimed that violence in Portland, Oregon by Antifa is a “myth.” But during the hearing, Republicans showed videos in which police officers and federal agents, under siege from the mob in Portland, were hit with projectiles.
The Democrats showed videos with protesters singing and chanting peacefully. As Nadler well knows, no one is denying that peaceful protests take place in Portland and elsewhere.
However, Nadler has denied the violence that’s the the basis for Justice Department intervention. Playing a video of a peaceful protest no more condemns that intervention than showing Muslims praying in Syria would condemn our intervention against ISIS there.
Perhaps the best evidence that the Democrats disgraced themselves yesterday is this article in the Washington Post. Four Post writers were unable to spin the proceedings as any better than a draw, if even that, for the committee Dems. That’s when you know the Democrats came up empty.