Radio Recap – Report: AG Barr Disagrees with IG Findings

There’s a breaking report that Attorney General William Barr has told associates at the Department of Justice that he disagrees with the Inspector General on one key finding in the upcoming report next week, that the FBI had enough information to justify launching an investigation into members of the Trump Campaign. He, reportedly, strongly disagrees.

On today’s Jay Sekulow Live we discussed the reports on Attorney General Barr’s disagreement with the findings of the IG report and previewed the witnesses for tomorrow’s impeachment hearing.

The Washington Post broke the story last night. Attorney General Barr is reportedly disputing key Inspector General findings about the FBI’s Russia investigation.

There’s criminal investigations ongoing by U.S. Attorney John Durham. Secondly, the Inspector General can’t prosecute anyone. He can just write a report. He’s not the Attorney General of the United States. There is one; it’s Attorney General Barr. Oftentimes the Attorney General adds in their own notes, like a couple of pages of disagreements they have in the report.

Guess who gets to decide whether to instruct the U.S. Attorneys to move forward with investigations that could lead to grand jury subpoenas, even prosecutions, and indictments? The Attorney General, not the Inspector General makes those decisions.

Attorney General Barr, according to the Washington Post has told associates that he disagrees on one of the key findings, that the FBI had enough information in July of 2016, based off the George Papadopoulos information to justify launching an investigation into the Trump Campaign. The Attorney General, apparently, strongly disagrees with that.

This doesn’t mean the whole report won’t shed light on FBI wrongdoing.

We also discussed tomorrow’s biased impeachment inquiry witnesses.

ACLJ Senior Counsel and Director of Policy Harry Hutchison made the following point:

I think it’s important to note at the outset that Adam Schiff has asserted that he will continue his investigation even after this report has been submitted. The real question becomes: What’s the basis of the report? What’s the basis of a continuing investigation?

So far all we have adduced is hearsay. The transcript of the disputed phone call has been released. Tomorrow we will have four so-called witnesses. You could argue that they could be compared to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse because they don’t have any factual information with regard to the President and the phone call that is at issue.

Law professors, I would assert, are absolutely fantastic human beings, but they do not necessarily have any first-hand information about the facts in this particular case. Therefore they have zero relevant factual information to add to the public record.

Three of the four witnesses that have been called by Chairman Nadler have clear bias against the President.

We’ll be covering the hearing tomorrow and keep you updated as it develops.

You can listen to the entire episode here.