Anonymous ID: b39daa Feb. 17, 2019, 8:54 p.m. No.5236632   🗄️.is đź”—kun

Full text of WSJ article (1 of 2) tweeted by POTUS:

 

It’s fitting that William Barr’s confirmation as attorney general happened just as two powerful law-enforcement figures were trading accusations involving President Trump. Mr. Barr’s greatest challenge isn’t antitrust deals, immigration policy or even handling special counsel Robert Mueller. His overriding challenge is to reboot a Justice Department that has shredded its reputation and lost the confidence of Congress and the public.

It’s hard to feel confident in law enforcement when a former deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Andrew McCabe, reveals that a small cabal of unelected senior law-enforcement officers held meetings in May 2017 to plot Mr. Trump’s removal from office. In an interview with “60 Minutes” that aired Thursday and a forthcoming book, Mr. McCabe says he and other officials, including Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, did head-counts of which cabinet officials might vote to declare the president “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office” under the 25th Amendment. Mr. McCabe claims Mr. Rosenstein repeatedly offered to wear a wire when meeting with Mr. Trump.

Mr. Rosenstein, who’s expected to resign soon, responded Thursday with a Justice Department statement blasting the claims as “factually incorrect” and highlighting that Mr. McCabe was fired for lying to the department’s inspector general. The rest of the statement was pure spin, in which Mr. Rosenstein never denied the McCabe claims.

That’s the Justice Department Mr. Barr arrives to lead—a hot mess of finger-pointing, leaks, planted press narratives, obstruction and extraordinary self-righteousness. Since the FBI presumed to investigate two active presidential campaigns, more than two dozen Justice and FBI officials have been fired, demoted or resigned. Yet no one in authority has acknowledged the mistakes that led to this bloodbath, explained how these institutions failed so spectacularly, or offered a plan for ending the dysfunction.

That’s Mr. Barr’s opening. For the first time in this presidency, the Justice Department will have a leader who is apart from the Russia stink—neither accused of “collusion” nor obsessed with finding it. He’s also uniquely suited to understand the importance of credibility and accountability, having worked in the 1970s at the Central Intelligence Agency, then under intense fire. The first measure of the “independence” Mr. Barr promised in his confirmation hearings will be his ability to assess ruthlessly the institution he’s about to join and come clean with the public on two key questions—the “whether” and the “how” of 2016.

. . .

Anonymous ID: b39daa Feb. 17, 2019, 8:54 p.m. No.5236651   🗄️.is đź”—kun

WSJ article (2 of 2):

 

Whether the Justice Department’s and FBI’s most controversial actions were appropriate. Is it acceptable for the FBI to use opposition research as an excuse to surveil a political campaign? To use back channels to stay in touch with sources it fired? To open counterintelligence investigations (as opposed to criminal ones) into political figures? To actively hide those investigations from congressional overseers? To hold meetings about removing presidents? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, Americans deserve to know that this is the brave new world they live in.

If not, how did it happen, and how can leaders make sure it never happens again? What protections are there against the clear bias that permeated law enforcement’s upper ranks (Peter Strzok), or insubordination (Jim Comey) or obsessive media cultivation (Mr. McCabe)? What are the lines of authority, and what are the consequences for breaking the rules? How is it (as we learned this week from newly revealed emails) that Hillary Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, was able to reach the FBI’s general counsel on the phone? How many Americans get that courtesy? The public will never trust a law-enforcement agency that has different standards for the powerful, or appears to prosecute only in one political direction, or operates as a law unto itself.

This accounting is important for the country, but also for the Justice Department and FBI themselves—and their ability to protect the country. Lawmakers, for instance, remain furious about the abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It’s a bedrock tool for combating terrorism, yet it was stretched for use against American citizens involved in political campaigns. Top Republicans have made clear they will refuse to reauthorize parts of FISA until the Justice Department acknowledges that it overstepped its bounds and explains what reforms it will take.

Mr. Barr may be tempted to fob all this off on the investigations by the U.S. attorney for Utah, John Huber, or the Justice Department inspector general. But Mr. Huber appears to have done little by way of investigation, the inspector general’s report could still be a long way out, and in any event these questions merit answers from the nation’s top legal officer. Mr. Barr needs this job like he needs a hole in the head. But if he spends the next years rebuilding trust in federal law enforcement, he’ll have performed an immense public service.

Write to kim@wsj.com.

 

From <https://www.wsj.com/articles/bill-barrs-hot-mess-11550188935?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=2>