{"id":36983,"date":"2019-07-06T09:59:02","date_gmt":"2019-07-06T16:59:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=36983"},"modified":"2019-07-06T09:59:02","modified_gmt":"2019-07-06T16:59:02","slug":"barrf-barking-for-his-fuhrer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2019\/07\/06\/barrf-barking-for-his-fuhrer\/","title":{"rendered":"Barrf Barking for His Fuhrer"},"content":{"rendered":"

Once upon a time Resident Donald Trump, aka Diaper Don, acted out in Twitter tantrums over and  over again, because there were people in the Out House (formerly White House), who wouldn’t commit his crimes.  They committed the crimes that involved their own power, profit, and perversion, but not crimes to take the blame for him.  For example, when told to kill the Russia investigation, even KKK Beauregard refused and recused himself.  But that was before Barrf started barking on command.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\"0706Barrf\" <\/p>\n

From his very first day in office, President Trump has had a strange and, at times, strained relationship with the U.S. intelligence community. The president and his political aides have often challenged the honesty and integrity of the community, damaging morale, undercutting its mission and making the already difficult challenge of uncovering threats to our nation even harder. <\/p>\n

But, by putting the CIA\u2019s analytic judgment (that one of Russia\u2019s objectives in interfering in the 2016 election was to help then-candidate Trump) into the crosshairs of the Justice Department, as reported by several news organizations<\/a> , the president and Attorney General William P. Barr are crossing another line<\/strong>. <\/p>\n

I see no problem with a Justice Department review of whether the CIA and other intelligence agencies lived up to their legal and regulatory responsibilities as to how they handled any information related to U.S. persons \u2014 U.S. citizens and U.S. nationals. There are strict rules in this regard \u2014 the most important promulgated by multiple attorneys general over time \u2014 and, in our divisive political environment, it would be beneficial to our democracy for the country to know whether the rules were followed or not. <\/p>\n

Nor am I arguing that CIA analytic judgments should be beyond review, but that has already happened in this case. Both the Senate<\/a> and the House intelligence committees have done reviews of the analysis, with the bipartisan Senate committee calling the overall analysis a \u201csound intelligence product<\/a>.\u201d The partisan House committee split on the question of the specific judgment about Russian President Vladi­mir Putin\u2019s intent to help Trump. <\/p>\n

What I am arguing is that the Justice Department has no standing to review the CIA\u2019s analytic judgment<\/strong>. The whole idea is inappropriate and dangerous<\/a>. It is certainly unprecedented, and there are good reasons it has never been done before….<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <Washington Post<\/a>><\/font><\/p>\n

Rachel Maddow<\/a> explained how Barrf is acting as Trump’s attack dog in detail.<\/font><\/p>\n