I was once at a dinner attended by Attorney General William Barr. A conservative journalist who was also there pressed him in a voice heavy with frustration to pursue conspiratorial lines of inquiry against President Trump’s perceived enemies. Barr is polite and low-key almost to a fault, but he eventually tired of this sniping, looked his interlocutor in the eye, and asked, "Do you think I'm stupid?"
His unusually withering dismissal of an intemperate right-winger comes to mind now that Washington is in ferment over accusations that Barr is Trump's sock puppet — “wingman” is how Eric Holder described his own relationship with President Barack Obama — and is thereby undermining the Department of Justice.
More than 1,100 former DOJ staff recently demanded Barr’s departure for deciding that the treatment of Roger Stone, a onetime adviser to Trump, was too harsh. Trump tweeted — when doesn’t he? — about the injustice of Stone’s recommended sentence of seven to nine years behind bars. Barr complained, reasonably enough, that the president’s tweets made it “impossible for me to do my job.” In short, Barr made a principled intervention, and then the president made his ablest lieutenant look bad by incontinent tweeting.
The abundantly clear truth is that Barr is the opposite of a political hack. Though obviously and properly a supporter of the president, he does not allow his loyalty to undermine his probity and consummate professionalism.
That’s actually why he’s under attack. It’s what makes him so dangerous to Trump’s most active critics. He will follow evidence where it leads without fear or favor. He won’t prosecute cases he deems weak, nor will he shy away from others where he believes he can secure a conviction. He’s the kind of attorney general who makes wrongdoers tremble.
If Barr were to leave the administration, it would be a disaster, whether he resigned or was fired. Trump has no one as capable. Barr demonstrated a mastery of his subject at his confirmation hearing and has demonstrated a massive competence and dignified imperturbability ever since.
His departure would crush the spirits of conservatives because they know, just as the trembling wrongdoers know, that Barr is the last best hope that justice will be delivered to the deep state shysters who invented the Russia collusion hoax and used it for years to undermine a president they did not like and whose fair election they refuse to acknowledge.
If Barr ceased to be attorney general, it would be said to cast a shadow over the credibility of John Durham’s much-needed criminal investigation into the origins of the Russia fable and its various offshoots. Inspector General Michael Horowitz could investigate only what went on in the DOJ, but Durham’s reach is much wider.
He can look into the activities of such dark partisans as former CIA Director John Brennan. And he should. He can probe the decidedly odd case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who was prosecuted for lying despite the fact that FBI officials had concluded he didn’t do so, which was confirmed to Congress by former FBI Director James Comey.
Perhaps none of this will produce prosecutions, although tough prosecutors such as Durham tend to find cases once they’re put on to a scent. But even if there are no indictments, it’s vital to get to the bottom of the falsely predicated scandal that has plagued the Trump presidency. The public needs to know what happened. A thorough investigation is required to disinfect our democracy. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s wildly successful efforts to sow mistrust in American government cannot be reversed unless and until the public is confident that ugly facts are not being swept under the carpet.
The linchpin of this effort is Barr. If he were to be ousted, there would be a storm on Capitol Hill. Senate Justice Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, among others, would be apoplectic, and the president would squander the backing of his staunchest and most powerful supporters. It would be one clumsily self-inflicted wound too many. It’s quite possible that if Barr left the Cabinet, Trump would be unable to get his replacement confirmed by the Senate. He could arrive at Election Day (now less than nine months away) with only an acting attorney general and with voters no clearer about how the monumental fiasco of the past four years was perpetrated and by whom.
Barr does not need his current job; he’s done it ably before. But both the country and the president need him to do it.
Cows block traffic along CT roadway
Environmentalists have accused U.S. land managers of failing to keep livestock and wild horses out of streams and other wetlands in Arizona's White Mountains, resulting in damage to habitat required by a rare mouse species found only in the Southwest.
The lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Tucson said the U.S. Forest Service is violating the Endangered Species Act and damaging the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse's habitat by failing to maintain fences, round up feral animals and enforce grazing regulations on forest land in southeastern Arizona.
With tails that make up most of their length, the rodents are called jumping mice because they can leap more than 2 feet (0.6 meters) into the air when frightened. Long tails help the mice keep their balance, especially when they scale plant stems to reach ripening seeds, one their main food sources.
The mice live near streams and depend on tall grass to hide from predators. They hibernate for about nine months, emerging in the late spring to gorge themselves before mating, giving birth and going back into hibernation. They normally live about three years.
“We entrust the care and protection of these publicly owned treasures to the Forest Service, but it’s completely abdicated its responsibility. And the adorable jumping mouse is being pushed closer to extinction,” said Robin Silver, a cofounder of the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the groups that is suing.
Staff members from the center and the Maricopa Audubon Society said they have documented extensive damage from horses and cows to the habitat of the mouse.
Officials in the Forest Service's Southwest region disputed the allegations in the lawsuit, saying the agency has been working since the mouse was listed as an endangered species in 2014 to use new and existing fencing to control livestock access to riverbank and wetland areas all while balancing water rights.
The battle over the meadow jumping mouse has lasted years. The listing of the mouse as endangered prompted the Forest Service to fence off streams and watering holes in some national forests to protect habitat thought to be ideal.
Ranchers and others then complained that the federal government was trampling private access to public lands by cordoning off areas important for livestock and other animals that call the arid region home.
In 2016, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated nearly 22 square miles (57 square kilometers) along about 170 miles (274 kilometers) of streams, ditches and canals as critical habitat in parts of New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona.
Silver said by not protecting these upper-elevation meadows and streams, the loss of the mouse in eastern Arizona and the Sacramento Mountains in southeastern New Mexico is likely.
Forest Service spokesman Shayne Martin said the mouse will benefit from work being done to protect stream-side habitats.
The agency in 2018 partnered with Trout Unlimited and volunteers on planting willows along Arizona's Centerfire Creek. Another project with the National Forest Foundation focused on preserving characteristics of portions of the Wildcat, Centerfire and Stinky Creek drainages by reestablishing plants along the streams.
Martin said some of the areas were fenced to keep elk and cattle out so newly planted vegetation could become established.
Biologists have blamed drought, wildfires, flooding and grazing in the habitat of the jumping mouse for the rodent's declining numbers.
The Forest Service has been working with researchers at Northern Arizona University on surveying and monitoring the mice — analyzing what the mice are eating and using radio collars to better track the rodents.
Aside from asking the court to force the Forest Service to develop stronger protections for the mouse, the lawsuit asks for the Fish and Wildlife Service to promptly prepare a required recovery plan for the species.
Sources:
Environmentalists have accused U.S. land managers of failing to keep livestock and wild horses out of streams and other wetlands in Arizona's White Mountains, resulting in damage to habitat required by a rare mouse species found only in the Southwest.
The lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Tucson said the U.S. Forest Service is violating the Endangered Species Act and damaging the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse's habitat by failing to maintain fences, round up feral animals and enforce grazing regulations on forest land in southeastern Arizona.
With tails that make up most of their length, the rodents are called jumping mice because they can leap more than 2 feet (0.6 meters) into the air when frightened. Long tails help the mice keep their balance, especially when they scale plant stems to reach ripening seeds, one their main food sources.
The mice live near streams and depend on tall grass to hide from predators. They hibernate for about nine months, emerging in the late spring to gorge themselves before mating, giving birth and going back into hibernation. They normally live about three years.
“We entrust the care and protection of these publicly owned treasures to the Forest Service, but it’s completely abdicated its responsibility. And the adorable jumping mouse is being pushed closer to extinction,” said Robin Silver, a cofounder of the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the groups that is suing.
Staff members from the center and the Maricopa Audubon Society said they have documented extensive damage from horses and cows to the habitat of the mouse.
Officials in the Forest Service's Southwest region disputed the allegations in the lawsuit, saying the agency has been working since the mouse was listed as an endangered species in 2014 to use new and existing fencing to control livestock access to riverbank and wetland areas all while balancing water rights.
The battle over the meadow jumping mouse has lasted years. The listing of the mouse as endangered prompted the Forest Service to fence off streams and watering holes in some national forests to protect habitat thought to be ideal.
Ranchers and others then complained that the federal government was trampling private access to public lands by cordoning off areas important for livestock and other animals that call the arid region home.
In 2016, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated nearly 22 square miles (57 square kilometers) along about 170 miles (274 kilometers) of streams, ditches and canals as critical habitat in parts of New Mexico, Colorado and Arizona.
Silver said by not protecting these upper-elevation meadows and streams, the loss of the mouse in eastern Arizona and the Sacramento Mountains in southeastern New Mexico is likely.
Forest Service spokesman Shayne Martin said the mouse will benefit from work being done to protect stream-side habitats.
The agency in 2018 partnered with Trout Unlimited and volunteers on planting willows along Arizona's Centerfire Creek. Another project with the National Forest Foundation focused on preserving characteristics of portions of the Wildcat, Centerfire and Stinky Creek drainages by reestablishing plants along the streams.
Martin said some of the areas were fenced to keep elk and cattle out so newly planted vegetation could become established.
Biologists have blamed drought, wildfires, flooding and grazing in the habitat of the jumping mouse for the rodent's declining numbers.
The Forest Service has been working with researchers at Northern Arizona University on surveying and monitoring the mice — analyzing what the mice are eating and using radio collars to better track the rodents.
Aside from asking the court to force the Forest Service to develop stronger protections for the mouse, the lawsuit asks for the Fish and Wildlife Service to promptly prepare a required recovery plan for the species.
Sources:
Comments
Post a Comment