William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

This is an Admin / Moderator NO GO ZONE. You're on your own.

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
j-c-c
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4269
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:03 pm

William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by j-c-c » Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:53 pm

This guy should fit in well with DT crowd.

Thinks Patriot Act is just a start.

Supports enhanced Gov Civil Forfeitures.

Probably thinks Congress is just window dressing for the masses. ( Ok this is just hyperbole :mrgreen: )

j-c-c
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4269
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:03 pm

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by j-c-c » Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:09 am

"Like Jaworski, Barr was also apparently interviewed earlier to be Trump's personal lawyer. According to Yahoo News, the two met privately in 2017 to discuss Barr coming on as Trump's personal defense attorney and Barr turned him down, citing other obligations. Trump's team circled back around to Barr came back to him after John Dowd, another Trump lawyer, resigned in 2018. Barr put hem off again. It seems that Trump truly believes this man is someone he wants on his team. Since the president is entirely self-centered it's likely he thinks he's finally found his "Roy Cohn." Salon


Roy Cohn:
"n 1971, businessman Donald Trump moved to Manhattan, where he became involved in large construction projects.[27] In 1973 the Justice Department accused him of violating the Fair Housing Act in his operation of 39 buildings.[28] The government alleged that Trump's corporation quoted different rental terms and conditions and made false "no vacancy" statements to African Americans for apartments it managed in Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island.[29]

Representing Trump, Cohn filed a countersuit against the government for $100 million, asserting that the charges were irresponsible and baseless.[28][30] The countersuit was unsuccessful.[31] Trump settled the charges out of court in 1975, saying he was satisfied that the agreement did not "compel the Trump organization to accept persons on welfare as tenants unless as qualified as any other tenant."[32] The corporation was required to send a bi-weekly list of vacancies to the New York Urban League, a civil rights group, and give the league priority for certain locations.[33] In 1978 the Trump Organization was again in court for violating terms of the 1975 settlement; Cohn called the new charges "nothing more than a rehash of complaints by a couple of planted malcontents." Trump denied the charges.[28][31][34]

Cohn also counted Rupert Murdoch among his clients, pressuring President Ronald Reagan repeatedly in furtherance of Murdoch's interests. Cohn is credited with introducing Trump and Murdoch in the mid-1970s, marking the beginning of what was to be a deep and pivotal association between the two." Wiki

David Redszus
Guru
Guru
Posts: 6644
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by David Redszus » Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:02 pm

OK, so what's the problem?

1989TransAm
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9383
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: Cypress, California

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by 1989TransAm » Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:17 pm

If j-c-c is against him that is good enough for me to support him. :D

GRTfast
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1366
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:26 am

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by GRTfast » Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:19 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:02 pm
OK, so what's the problem?
The guy supports unfettered secret surveillance of US citizens with NO probable cause, and supports increased civil forfeiture scope. The existing civil forfeiture laws allow confiscation based on someone being accused (not convicted). It's government sanctioned theft and this guy wants to increase it.

You support this kind of thing?

GRTfast
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1366
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:26 am

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by GRTfast » Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:21 pm

1989TransAm wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:17 pm
If j-c-c is against him that is good enough for me to support him. :D
I hope you're joking. This Barr guy is outspokenly vocal about his support for removing individual rights and liberty. You support that?

1989TransAm
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9383
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: Cypress, California

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by 1989TransAm » Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:23 pm

GRTfast wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:21 pm
1989TransAm wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:17 pm
If j-c-c is against him that is good enough for me to support him. :D
I hope you're joking. This Barr guy is outspokenly vocal about his support for removing individual rights and liberty. You support that?
I have not seen that. Any unbiased links?

GRTfast
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1366
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:26 am

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by GRTfast » Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:29 pm

1989TransAm wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:23 pm
GRTfast wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:21 pm
1989TransAm wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:17 pm
If j-c-c is against him that is good enough for me to support him. :D
I hope you're joking. This Barr guy is outspokenly vocal about his support for removing individual rights and liberty. You support that?
I have not seen that. Any unbiased links?
I'm not sure such a thing exists these days. :lol:

Let me know what sources you accept.

GRTfast
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1366
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:26 am

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by GRTfast » Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:33 pm

1989TransAm wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:23 pm
GRTfast wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:21 pm
1989TransAm wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:17 pm
If j-c-c is against him that is good enough for me to support him. :D
I hope you're joking. This Barr guy is outspokenly vocal about his support for removing individual rights and liberty. You support that?
I have not seen that. Any unbiased links?
Here is one from a site that is labeled as "extreme right wing biased propaganda". I'm guessing that's considered "real news" in your book.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/me ... atriot-act

j-c-c
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4269
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:03 pm

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by j-c-c » Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:41 pm

GRTfast wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:29 pm
1989TransAm wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:23 pm
GRTfast wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:21 pm


I hope you're joking. This Barr guy is outspokenly vocal about his support for removing individual rights and liberty. You support that?
I have not seen that. Any unbiased links?
I'm not sure such a thing exists these days. :lol:

Let me know what sources you accept.
So far, anything that I don't agree with it appears. :lol: :lol:

David Redszus
Guru
Guru
Posts: 6644
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by David Redszus » Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:44 pm

The guy supports unfettered secret surveillance of US citizens with NO probable cause, and supports increased civil forfeiture scope. The existing civil forfeiture laws allow confiscation based on someone being accused (not convicted). It's government sanctioned theft and this guy wants to increase it.

You support this kind of thing?
I do not support the policies listed above.

However, I can find no evidence to suggest that he does support those policies. In any event, the laws must be followed whether he likes them or not.

Barr's major involvement as AG was with regard to incarceration practices (a Clinton initative). They did not work out very well and that policy has changed at the federal level but not at the state level.

j-c-c
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4269
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:03 pm

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by j-c-c » Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:09 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:44 pm
The guy supports unfettered secret surveillance of US citizens with NO probable cause, and supports increased civil forfeiture scope. The existing civil forfeiture laws allow confiscation based on someone being accused (not convicted). It's government sanctioned theft and this guy wants to increase it.

You support this kind of thing?
I do not support the policies listed above.

However, I can find no evidence to suggest that he does support those policies. In any event, the laws must be followed whether he likes them or not.

Barr's major involvement as AG was with regard to incarceration practices (a Clinton initative). They did not work out very well and that policy has changed at the federal level but not at the state level.
Well, I'm sure if he is so opposed to the above positions, its only a matter of time before before he objects to them in the media, or Not. :D

David Redszus
Guru
Guru
Posts: 6644
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by David Redszus » Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:38 pm

j-c-c wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:09 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:44 pm
The guy supports unfettered secret surveillance of US citizens with NO probable cause, and supports increased civil forfeiture scope. The existing civil forfeiture laws allow confiscation based on someone being accused (not convicted). It's government sanctioned theft and this guy wants to increase it.

You support this kind of thing?
I do not support the policies listed above.

However, I can find no evidence to suggest that he does support those policies. In any event, the laws must be followed whether he likes them or not.

Barr's major involvement as AG was with regard to incarceration practices (a Clinton initative). They did not work out very well and that policy has changed at the federal level but not at the state level.
Well, I'm sure if he is so opposed to the above positions, its only a matter of time before before he objects to them in the media, or Not. :D
I do not expect an AG to make laws or to change them. Neither do I expect the courts to do so either.
The media has shown itself to be a vast wasteland of intellectual thought.

exhaustgases
Guru
Guru
Posts: 4247
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:03 pm

Re: William Barr DT's prospective AG Nominee

Post by exhaustgases » Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:58 pm

GRTfast wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:19 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:02 pm
OK, so what's the problem?
The guy supports unfettered secret surveillance of US citizens with NO probable cause, and supports increased civil forfeiture scope. The existing civil forfeiture laws allow confiscation based on someone being accused (not convicted). It's government sanctioned theft and this guy wants to increase it.

You support this kind of thing?
From that description he sounds like a demonrat. The better and best choices would be Gregg Jarret, or Janine Pirro.

Post Reply