While the left screams over Barr’s ’48-hour rush decision,’ real journos at Fox report he had 3-week heads up


(Video screenshots)

After Attorney General Bill Barr announced Sunday that neither he nor Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein would be pursuing obstruction of justice charges against President Donald Trump because the evidence laid out in special counsel Robert Mueller’s report doesn’t warrant such action, Democrats and their media allies cried foul, accusing him of being the president’s crony.

As evidence, they noted that Barr rendered this judgment less than 48 hours after Mueller completed his investigation and submitted his report to the Department of Justice. But that’s a lie — one of perhaps millions that have been told by Democrats and the media.

“Fox News has learned that Mueller told Barr and Rosenstein three weeks ago that he would not be able to reach a conclusion on obstruction of justice,” Fox News confirmed Monday.

This means that Barr and Rosenstein had been reviewing the evidence for nearly a month before they announced Sunday that the evidence doesn’t warrant obstruction of justice charges.

“In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that ‘the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,’ and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction,” Barr wrote in his public letter Sunday.

He explained that since Trump didn’t collude with Russian operatives to affect the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, that means there was nothing for him to hide/obstruct.

CNN might want to consider fact-checking the litany of hacks who’ve been falsely claiming that Barr (versus Barr and Rosenstein) reached a decision in under 48 hours:

Included among the hacks is House Judiciary Committee chair Jerry Nadler.

Both Democrats and their media allies have refused to accept Barr and Rosenstein’s judgment.

Speaking Monday on MSNBC, former Attorney General Eric Holder called for both Barr and Mueller to testify before the Democrat-controlled House and claimed that the Mueller he knows wouldn’t have approved of the attorney general making a determination vis-à-vis obstruction of justice.

“It seems hard for me to imagine that Bob Mueller asked Bill Barr to do this,” he said. “Because that would be Bob Mueller shifting the responsibility from making the call to the attorney general. That’s just not the way in which Bob Mueller is wound. That’s just not the way he is wound.”

“With regard to obstruction, I think we’re really at the beginning, maybe the middle of this whole process. We need to see exactly what was the nature of the interaction between Bob Mueller and Bill Barr. And then we also need to understand how was it that Bill Barr reached these conclusions.”

Bill Barr and Rod Rosenstein, the latter of whom Democrats have been defensive of in the past. Except for some odd reason Democrats are now acting as if their hero had nothing to do with the ruling to not pursue obstruction of justice charges. But that too is a lie.

Listen to some of Holder’s remarks below:


The media have been just as critical of Barr, with the folks at CNN going so far as to suggest that he’s nothing but a “political appointee” whose words and actions can’t be trusted.

The letter “was still written by a political appointee, and it is still true that none of us have seen the full report or really have any idea what it might contain,” CNN Business managing editor Alex Koppelman said Monday in an emailed statement to CNN chief media correspondent Brian Stelter.

Koppelman added that what “the media have learned from” the bungled Russian collusion nonsense “is that we have to fact-check everything Donald Trump says ” and “that we need to be skeptical of all sources, no matter how official.”

It appears that the media have learned all the wrong lessons. Instead of erroneously fact-checking the president, his attorney general and his deputy attorney general, perhaps CNN should fact-check its own anonymous sources and its own continually flawed reporting.

Not to mention Jerry Nadler:

But no, neither CNN or its peers have any intention of fact-checking themselves. Instead, they plan to double, triple and quadruple down on the virulently anti-Trump “journalism” that already blew up in their faces once and is destined to blow up in their faces yet again.



Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Vivek Saxena


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.


Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!

Latest Articles