Bill Barr says he’s willing to testify against Trump at Jan. 6 trial

[Guno צְבִי]

Former Attorney General Bill Barr said he is willing to testify against former President Trump at his Jan. 6 trial.

Barr, who was appointed by Trump, responded “of course” when asked on CBS’s “Face the Nation” if he would be willing to appear as a witness in Trump’s trial over federal charges related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He declined to answer whether he was interviewed by the special counsel in connection to the federal investigation.

Barr has been a staunch critic of the former president since he resigned from his post shortly after the 2020 election. He noted that the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith was a “challenging” one, but that he does not think it “runs afoul of the First Amendment.”

When asked about his interactions with Trump and how he told the former president there was no evidence of election fraud, Barr said that his investigations into the fraud “satisfied” the conclusions.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-barr-says-willing-testify-151735410.html

 

[Nordberg]

Barr is trying to save himself from being one of the evil ones in American history. He is nuts if he thinks he can salvage his reputation.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

I didn't realize that witnesses had a choice on whether or not to testify.

But Barr probably wouldn't be a good witness as he is on record as being against Trump.

In my opinion.

Frankly if this is how Smith wants to take on Trump, by claiming people told him he lost and Trump acting anyway, it's a losing one.

Plenty of people also told Trump the election results were tainted and the defense will be calling them up.

It turns into a he said she said thing with not enough evidence either way to warrant a conviction.

I don't think Barr is required. Seems like more of a risk than anything since the defense will just bring up Barr's statements against Trump.

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

Americans have been contesting elections for 230 years. Hillary sure contested 2016. But now it's a crime!

 

[floridafan]

I didn't realize that witnesses had a choice on whether or not to testify.

But Barr probably wouldn't be a good witness as he is on record as being against Trump.

In my opinion.

Frankly if this is how Smith wants to take on Trump, by claiming people told him he lost and Trump acting anyway, it's a losing one.

Plenty of people also told Trump the election results were tainted and the defense will be calling them up.

It turns into a he said she said thing with not enough evidence either way to warrant a conviction.

I don't think Barr is required. Seems like more of a risk than anything since the defense will just bring up Barr's statements against Trump.

Trump actually admitted that he lost. It will be an easy prosecution for the government.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Trump actually admitted that he lost. It will be an easy prosecution for the government.

He's admitted he didn't far more times.

I don't recall him ever admitting he lost. He may have said he lost because the election was rigged however.

 

[floridafan]

He's admitted he didn't far more times.

I don't recall him ever admitting he lost. He may have said he lost because the election was rigged however.

No my dear, he flat out admitted that he lost and a number of his closest people will testify to that.

 

[Cypress]

Former Attorney General Bill Barr said he is willing to testify against former President Trump at his Jan. 6 trial.

Barr, who was appointed by Trump, responded “of course” when asked on CBS’s “Face the Nation” if he would be willing to appear as a witness in Trump’s trial over federal charges related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He declined to answer whether he was interviewed by the special counsel in connection to the federal investigation.

Barr has been a staunch critic of the former president since he resigned from his post shortly after the 2020 election. He noted that the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith was a “challenging” one, but that he does not think it “runs afoul of the First Amendment.”

When asked about his interactions with Trump and how he told the former president there was no evidence of election fraud, Barr said that his investigations into the fraud “satisfied” the conclusions.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-barr-says-willing-testify-151735410.html

That's a good witness, Trump's very own hand picked Attorney General.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

No my dear, he flat out admitted that he lost and a number of his closest people will testify to that.

Your link doesn't have Trump admitting anything.

Now look at this one where he says he did win.

 

[floridafan]

Your link doesn't have Trump admitting anything.

Now look at this one where he says he did win.

A criminal does not have to admit that he murdered someone, but witness will testify that they heard him say so, or saw him do it. Its more than enough to wind up in jail.

 

[Noking]

I didn't realize that witnesses had a choice on whether or not to testify.

But Barr probably wouldn't be a good witness as he is on record as being against Trump.

In my opinion.

Frankly if this is how Smith wants to take on Trump, by claiming people told him he lost and Trump acting anyway, it's a losing one.

Plenty of people also told Trump the election results were tainted and the defense will be calling them up.

It turns into a he said she said thing with not enough evidence either way to warrant a conviction.

I don't think Barr is required. Seems like more of a risk than anything since the defense will just bring up Barr's statements against Trump.

The real truth is that Bill Barr is a rat that has jumped ship. During the time that Trump was president Barr was a Trump lackey that was willing to do all of Trump's scummy dealings; like sanitizing the Mueller report. Today Barr wants to distance himself from the Trump scum.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Former Attorney General Bill Barr said he is willing to testify against former President Trump at his Jan. 6 trial.

Barr, who was appointed by Trump, responded “of course” when asked on CBS’s “Face the Nation” if he would be willing to appear as a witness in Trump’s trial over federal charges related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He declined to answer whether he was interviewed by the special counsel in connection to the federal investigation.

Barr has been a staunch critic of the former president since he resigned from his post shortly after the 2020 election. He noted that the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith was a “challenging” one, but that he does not think it “runs afoul of the First Amendment.”

When asked about his interactions with Trump and how he told the former president there was no evidence of election fraud, Barr said that his investigations into the fraud “satisfied” the conclusions.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-barr-says-willing-testify-151735410.html

Pence danced around it a bit, but also said he'd testify.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v..._against_trump_well_just_tell_the_truth.html#!
Mike Pence Says He Would Testify Against Trump: "We'll Just Tell The Truth"

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I didn't realize that witnesses had a choice on whether or not to testify.

Americans watch Perry Mason and know the difference between testifying for the prosecution and testifying for the defense, comrade Tink.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

I never liked him too much either--or Roseanne.

 

[Noking]

Former Attorney General Bill Barr said he is willing to testify against former President Trump at his Jan. 6 trial.

Barr, who was appointed by Trump, responded “of course” when asked on CBS’s “Face the Nation” if he would be willing to appear as a witness in Trump’s trial over federal charges related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He declined to answer whether he was interviewed by the special counsel in connection to the federal investigation.

Barr has been a staunch critic of the former president since he resigned from his post shortly after the 2020 election. He noted that the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith was a “challenging” one, but that he does not think it “runs afoul of the First Amendment.”

When asked about his interactions with Trump and how he told the former president there was no evidence of election fraud, Barr said that his investigations into the fraud “satisfied” the conclusions.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-barr-says-willing-testify-151735410.html

Bill Barr who slept with a pig, now wants to cleanse the reeking Trump stench off himself.

 

[Tranquillus in Exile]

He may have said he lost because the election was rigged however.

If Trump's defenders can show that he really believed the election was rigged and that's why he lost, does that mean he was entitled to make up fake slates of electors
and urge the Vice President to reject the real ones on Jan 6?

I hope not - because if he could do it, so can any loser. What's the legal position?

 

[Yakuda]

Former Attorney General Bill Barr said he is willing to testify against former President Trump at his Jan. 6 trial.

Barr, who was appointed by Trump, responded “of course” when asked on CBS’s “Face the Nation” if he would be willing to appear as a witness in Trump’s trial over federal charges related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He declined to answer whether he was interviewed by the special counsel in connection to the federal investigation.

Barr has been a staunch critic of the former president since he resigned from his post shortly after the 2020 election. He noted that the case brought by special counsel Jack Smith was a “challenging” one, but that he does not think it “runs afoul of the First Amendment.”

When asked about his interactions with Trump and how he told the former president there was no evidence of election fraud, Barr said that his investigations into the fraud “satisfied” the conclusions.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-barr-says-willing-testify-151735410.html

Want to bet he never does?

 

[QP!]

it is likely that not only every witness called with be a Republican, but also come from Trumps own administration to make the point clear this is not Democrats saying Trump did these and broke these laws.

That will not stop derps acting like this is a Dem witch hunt. They did the same with Mueller investigation which was started by Trumps hand picked Republi'can' AG and run by his hand picked republi'can' Special prosecutor.

 

[Yakuda]

If Trump's defenders can show that he really believed the election was rigged and that's why he lost, does that mean he was entitled to make up fake slates of electors
and urge the Vice President to reject the real ones on Jan 6?

I hope not - because if he could do it, so can any loser. What's the legal position?

No he isn't entitled to do those things but you just have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did them.

Let me ask you a question, do you REALLY think trump can get a fair trial?

 

[Tinkerpeach]

If Trump's defenders can show that he really believed the election was rigged and that's why he lost, does that mean he was entitled to make up fake slates of electors
and urge the Vice President to reject the real ones on Jan 6?

I hope not - because if he could do it, so can any loser. What's the legal position?

Smith needs to prove that Trump did that.

Trump had no direct connection with the electors, he never told anyone to do that.

Unless Smith has some information we don't know about then Trump wasn't connected to it.

Not legally.