Apr 18, 2025
William Barr
seen from Vietnam
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from Canada
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Japan
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
William Barr
William Barr
Physique: Average Build Height: 6′ 1″ (1.85 m)
William Pelham Barr (born May 23, 1950) is an American attorney who served as the United States attorney general in the administration of President George H. W. Bush from 1991 to 1993 and again in the administration of President Donald Trump from 2019 to 2020. Barr was the second person in U.S. history to serve twice as attorney general (the first was John J. Crittenden).
Bill looks like a human Droopy. Then I see him smile and I go aww… want some dick? What? I’m not voting for or marrying him. I’m just using him as a cum dumpster then kicking him to the streets. And something tells me, he would be good in bed.
Born and raised in New York City, Barr was educated at the Horace Mann School, Columbia University, and George Washington University Law School. From 1971 to 1977, Barr was employed by the Central Intelligence Agency. He then served as a law clerk to judge Malcolm Richard Wilkey of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Before becoming attorney general in 1991, Barr held numerous other posts within the Department of Justice, including leading the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) and serving as deputy attorney general.
Barr has been married to Christine Moynihan Barr since 1973, and together they have three daughters. Lets see what else I can find out about him. Hmm… Barr is an avid bagpiper having played competitively in Scotland with a major American pipe band.
OK that one is WAY too easy.
Devin Nunes sued the award-winning MSNBC host in 2021, when he was still a member of Congress.
Christopher Wiggins at The Advocate:
A federal judge has dismissed former Republican California U.S. Rep. Devin Nunes’s defamation lawsuit against MSNBC host Rachel Maddow and NBCUniversal, ruling the network did not act with “actual malice” in reporting that Nunes refused to turn over a package from a sanctioned Russian agent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In a 24-page opinion issued Friday, U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel granted summary judgment to NBCUniversal, writing that “no reasonable jury could find that NBCU made the statement with constitutionally-defined actual malice.” Nunes, a longtime ally of President Donald Trump and chief executive officer of his social media company, filed the lawsuit in 2021 after an episode of The Rachel Maddow Show aired a segment about a package addressed to Nunes from Ukrainian legislator Andrii Derkach. Derkach was sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2020 for acting as a Russian agent and attempting to interfere in the 2020 presidential election.
Maddow told viewers that Nunes “has refused to hand [the package] over to the FBI, which is what you should do if you get something from somebody who is sanctioned by the U.S. as a Russian agent,” relying on a news story by Politico. According to court documents, Nunes and members of his staff testified that the package was turned over to the FBI on the same day it was received. Nunes also sent a letter to then-Attorney General William Barr advising him of the package’s arrival. [...] Castel rejected Nunes’s arguments that Maddow and MSNBC distorted the Politico reporting and ignored other news stories that stated the package had been appropriately handled. According to the ruling, Maddow and Gnazzo said they were not aware of a follow-up article quoting a fellow Republican lawmaker saying the package had been turned over to the FBI. Nunes also argued that Maddow’s long history of criticizing him, identifying 36 episodes in which she discussed him by name, proved personal bias. But Castel wrote that “bare assertions of bias are insufficient” and found no evidence that the statement at issue was published with a “high degree of awareness of ... probable falsity.” “In context, Maddow’s reference to Nunes as an ‘easier hit’ refers to Maloney’s information that there was a package receipt for the delivery to Nunes from Derkach, which provided ready support for part of the claim,” Castel wrote, referencing Rep. Sean Maloney’s comments during a prior MSNBC interview.
Judge Kevin Castel dismisses Truth Social CEO Devin Nunes’s frivolous lawsuit against MSNBC host Rachel Maddow and NBCUniversal. MSNBC is currently owned by NBCU, but is set to be part of the Versant spinoff.
Epstien File Updates 9/23/2025
🔍 Updates
New Documents Released by Oversight Committee The House Oversight Committee, under Chairman James Comer, released additional estate records from Jeffrey Epstein. These include information about Epstein’s bank accounts, plus other financial documents. The Committee also explicitly said they'll pursue more banking records based on what they found. Oversight Committee
Transcript / Interview from Former AG William Barr Among the newly released docs is a transcript of an interview with former U.S. Attorney General William Barr. In it, Barr discusses why certain Epstein materials still remain unpublished. He stated that he had informed Donald Trump of Epstein’s death and claimed Trump had publicly distanced himself from Epstein. Politico
No Big New Signatures on the Discharge Petition Yet No credible reports today of additional Republican signatures for the Massie-Khanna discharge petition. The petition still appears just short of the 218 required. Reports suggest some GOP members who were potential flip candidates remain on the sidelines. Axios
FBI Director to Appear Before Lawmakers Again FBI Director Kash Patel is scheduled to appear again before the House Judiciary Committee, where lawmakers will press for more detail and transparency around what his office knows/did about Epstein’s network and what materials remain undisclosed. Reuters
60 seconds · Clipped by Caleigh Fisher · Original video ""Epstein COVERUP Began in 1981!" - DARPA Docs Expert Exposes Truth | Mike Benz • 32
Bill Barr's father, (ex OSS > became CIA) placed Epstein at Dalton School. This is huge and far reaching. CIA/HYDRA is being exposed.
Harper's Bazaar October, 1974
Cristina Ferrare wears a loose coat in very fine wool tweed in earth tones of taupe and gray, worn over a matching sweater with embroidered flowers in needlepoint on the front, a gray striped crepe de chine blouse, and taupe wool pants. By Geoffrey Beene. (Coat and sweater, in William Barr tweed.) Suzanne Daché bell top. Grandoe gloves. Beige suede boots by Herbert Levine. Hair and makeup by Benjamin.
Cristina Ferrare porte un manteau ample en tweed de laine très fin dans des tons de terre taupe et gris, porté sur un pull assorti avec des fleurs brodées au point de broderie sur le devant, un chemisier en crêpe de Chine rayé gris et un pantalon en laine couleur taupe. Par Geoffrey Beene. (Manteau et pull, en tweed William Barr.) Cloche Suzanne Daché. Gants Grandoe. Bottes en daim beige par Herbert Levine. Coiffure et maquillage. Benjamin.
Photo Rico Puhlmann
Michael de Adder :: @deAdder:: All the King's men
* * * *
LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN
April 28, 2024
HEATHER COX RICHARDSON
APR 29, 2024
On Friday, in an interview with CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins, Trump’s former attorney general William Barr brushed off the recent news that Trump, furious that the story he had taken refuge in a bunker during the Black Lives Matter protests in summer 2020 had leaked, called for the White House leaker to be executed.
“I remember him being very mad about that. I actually don’t remember him saying ‘executing,’ but I wouldn‘t dispute it, you know,” Barr said to Collins when she asked him about it. “The president would lose his temper and say things like that. I doubt he would’ve actually carried it out.”
Collins followed up, asking if Trump would call for executions on other occasions. “He would say things similar to that on occasions to blow off steam. But I wouldn’t take them literally every time he did it,” Barr answered.
Why not? Collins asked.
“Because at the end of the day, it wouldn’t be carried out and you could talk sense into him,” Barr said. “I don’t think he would actually go and kill political rivals and things like that.” Barr said he intends to vote for Trump.
“Just to be clear,” Collins said, “you’re voting for someone who you believe tried to subvert the peaceful transfer of power, that can’t even achieve his own policies, that lied about the election even after his attorney general told him that the election wasn’t stolen.… You’re going to vote for someone who is facing 88 criminal counts?”
“The answer to the question is yes,” Barr said. “I think the real threat to democracy is the progressive movement and the Biden administration.”
The contention of the former attorney general—who had been responsible for enforcing the rule of law in the United States of America—that a man who has demanded the execution of people he dislikes is a better candidate for the presidency than a man who is using the power of the federal government to create jobs for ordinary people, combat climate change, protect the environment, and promote health and education, illustrates that Republican leaders have abandoned democracy.
In November 2019, in a speech to the right-wing Federalist Society, Barr ignored the Declaration of Independence, which is a list of complaints against King George III, to argue that Americans had rebelled in 1776 not against the king, but rather against Parliament. In the modern world, Barr argued, Congress has grown far too strong. The president should be able to act on his own initiative and not be checked by either congressional or judicial oversight.
That theory is known as the theory of the “unitary executive,” and it says that because the president is the head of one of the three unique branches of government, any oversight of that office by Congress or the courts is unconstitutional, although in fact presidents since George Washington have accepted congressional oversight.
The theory took root in 1986, when Samuel Alito, then a 35-year-old lawyer for the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice, proposed the use of “signing statements” to take from Congress the sole power to make laws by giving the president the power to “interpret” them. In 1987, president Ronald Reagan issued a signing statement to a debt bill, declaring his right to interpret it as he wished and saying the president could not be forced “to follow the orders of a subordinate.”
In 2004, when Congress outlawed the newly-revealed U.S. torture program at remote sites around the world, President George W. Bush issued a signing statement rejecting any limitation on “the unitary executive branch.” In April 2020, to justify his demands for states to reopen in the face of the deadly pandemic, Trump told reporters, “When somebody is the president of the United States, the authority is total….” Now, in 2024, Trump’s lawyers are in court arguing that the president has criminal immunity for his behavior in the White House, possibly including his right to order the executions of those he sees as enemies.
As Republicans have embraced unlimited power for the president, they have also turned against the right of American citizens to have a say in their government. Beginning with so-called ballot integrity measures in 1986, they embraced methods to knock voters off the voting rolls. That policy intensified after Democrats passed the so-called Motor-Voter Law in 1993, making it easier to register to vote.
After voters nonetheless elected Democrat Barack Obama in 2008, the Supreme Court handed down the 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, permitting unlimited donations to political campaigns, and corporate money flowed into them. In that same year, Republican operatives launched Operation REDMAP to elect Republicans to state legislatures ahead of the redistricting required after the 2010 census. Operation REDMAP resulted in extreme partisan gerrymandering that would make it virtually impossible for Democrats to win elections even if they won a majority of the vote.
Then, in 2013, the Supreme Court decided Shelby County v. Holder, which gutted the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That law had required states with a history of racial discrimination to get clearance from the Department of Justice before they changed their voting laws. The court said that preclearance was no longer necessary. Within hours of the decision, Republican-dominated states proposed new laws that discriminate against voters of color.
In 2019, Barr explained to an audience at the University of Notre Dame the ideology behind the strong executive and weakened representation. Rejecting the clear words of the Constitution’s framers, Barr said that the U.S. was never meant to be a secular democracy. When the nation’s founders had spoken so extensively about self-government, he said, they had not meant the right to elect representatives of their own choosing. Instead, he said, the founders meant the ability of individuals to “restrain and govern themselves.” And, because people are willful, the only way to achieve self-government is through religion.
Those who believe the United States is a secular country, he said, are destroying the nation. It was imperative, he said, to reject those values and embrace religion as the basis for American government.
The idea that the United States must become a Christian nation has apparently led Barr to accept the idea that a man who has called for the execution of those he sees as enemies should be president, apparently because he is expected to usher in an authoritarian Christian state, in preference to a man who is using the power of the government to help ordinary Americans.
Saturday night, journalists, politicians, and celebrities gathered for the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, an annual fundraiser for the White House Correspondents’ Association, which protects press passes for journalists who regularly cover the White House, assigns seats in the briefing room, funds scholarships for aspiring journalists, and gives awards for outstanding journalism. It is traditionally an evening of comedy, but last night, after a humorous speech, President Joe Biden implored the press to take the threat of dictatorship seriously.
“I’m sincerely not asking of you to take sides but asking you to rise up to the seriousness of the moment; move past the horse race numbers and the gotcha moments and the distractions, the sideshows that have come to dominate and sensationalize our politics; and focus on what’s actually at stake,” he said. “Every single one of us has…a serious role to play in making sure democracy endures…. I have my role, but, with all due respect, so do you.”
George Stephanopoulos of ABC’s This Week apparently took this reminder to heart. “Until now,” he said in the show’s opener on Sunday, “[n]o American president had ever faced a criminal trial. No American president had ever faced a federal indictment for retaining and concealing classified documents. No American president had ever faced a federal indictment or a state indictment for trying to overturn an election, or been named an unindicted co-conspirator in two other states for the same crime. No American president ever faced hundreds of millions of dollars in judgments for business fraud, defamation, and sexual abuse….
“The scale of the abnormality is so staggering, that it can actually become numbing. It’s all too easy to fall into reflexive habits, to treat this as a normal campaign, where both sides embrace the rule of law, where both sides are dedicated to a debate based on facts and the peaceful transfer of power. But, that is not what’s happening this election year. Those bedrock tenets of our democracy are being tested in a way we haven’t seen since the Civil War. It’s a test for the candidates, for those of us in the media, and for all of us as citizens.”
LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN
HEATHER COX RICHARDSON
Legal experts are now weighing in on Thursday’s bombshell, massive and months-long reporting from The New York Times that reveals, among several previously unknown allegations, that then-Attorney General Bill Barr and his special counsel, John Durham were handed apparent evidence of suspicious financial acts by Donald Trump, and proceeded to create a false public narrative that …
From the January 27, 2023 article:
“On one of Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham’s trips to Europe,” The Times reveals, “according to people familiar with the matter, Italian officials — while denying any role in setting off the Russia investigation — unexpectedly offered a potentially explosive tip linking Mr. Trump to certain suspected financial crimes.”
...
“Mr. Durham never filed charges, and it remains unclear what level of an investigation it was, what steps he took, what he learned and whether anyone at the White House ever found out. The extraordinary fact that Mr. Durham opened a criminal investigation that included scrutinizing Mr. Trump has remained secret.”
Until now.
Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law expert who literally wrote the book on the U.S. Constitution, calls the Times’ report “jaw-dropping.”
“When Durham unexpectedly found evidence of crimes committed BY rather than AGAINST Trump, he and Barr deliberately deceived the nation into thinking the opposite!