We all remember this exchange:
A “lawyer’s truth” describes an answer that may be technically accurate but nevertheless misleading. After seeing an MSNBC program last week that featured a former Obama official describing the Obama WH procedures on how “call notes” or “transcripts” of conversations such as the Zelensky call would have been handled, I flashed on Barr’s excruciating attempt to not answer Harris’ question with an outright lie.
I don’t remember the former Obama official’s name or what MSNBC program he was on. I was at the gym on the treadmill so heard program in background. It may have been Ari Melbar or MTP Dailey. Hoping someone else who caught the program will provide link.
My Letter to Senator Harris this morning explains why I think this information provides an explanation of how Barr dodged the question without lying when he stated no one in the WH had “asked” “suggested” or “hinted” that he investigate anyone.
Dear Senator Harris —
Re AG Barr's attempt to dodge your question about whether anyone had "asked or suggested or hinted" that he investigate anyone.
HERE'S some relevant information that indicates how Barr would know what Trump wanted without anyone “asking, suggesting, or hinting":
A former Obama official appearing on one of the MSNBC programs last week was asked how that administration handled the “call notes” or full transcripts of calls like the one between Zelensky and Trump. (I don’t remember the official’s name — program might have been Ari Melbar's). The former official was asked who would receive copies of such notes or transcripts in the usual course.
He stated that the procedure in place at that time would have had the “call notes” “generally” distributed TO ANY OFFICIAL WHOSE NAME WAS MENTIONED IN THE CALL.
Assuming the same procedures apply here means that BARR WOULD HAVE RECEIVED AS A MATTER OF ROUTINE A COPY OF THE CALL NOTES WITH HIS NAME MENTIONED, which would have CLEARLY MADE HIM AWARE THAT TRUMP WANTED BARR TO PURSUE THE BIDEN INQUIRY WITH GIULIANI.
Trump would not have to “ask” “suggest” or “hint” — Trump wouldn’t have to do anything. JUST BY THE CALL NOTES BEING DISTRIBUTED TO PEOPLE MENTIONED IN THE CONVERSATION BARR WOULD HAVE RECEIVED HIS “ORDERS” SO TO SPEAK.
That scenario dovetails with Barr’s careful non answer — he didn’t lie when he said no one “asked” or “suggested” or “hinted” — BUT HE GOT THE MESSAGE LOUD AND CLEAR WHEN HE WAS PROVIDED A TRANSCRIPT OR THE CALL NOTES. And because such distribution was within the “normal” distribution chain, no one can accuse the parties of doing anything untoward — it gives them all plausible deniability.
Next time Barr comes up before Congress, ASK HIM WHETHER HE RECEIVED A COPY OF THE CALL NOTES/ TRANSCRIPT THAT CONTAINED THE CONVERSATION WHERE TRUMP REPEATEDLY SAYS GIULIANI AND BARR ARE TASKED BY THE PRESIDENT TO HANDLE THIS MATTER.
IF BARR GOT THE NOTES, HE “GOT THE MESSAGE”.
These guys will stop at nothing to destroy our country.
I don’t have much time this morning, which is why I’m simply providing a copy of my letter to Harris. I’m hoping someone will remember the MSNBC program (it may have been Ari Melbar) who had the Obama official on describing the process by which call notes and transcripts were distributed.
If anyone knows which program and which official and what was said please post in comments.
Next time Harris has the opportunity to question Barr she needs to ask whether he received a copy of the Call Notes which would have made Trump’s wishes clear without “anyone” from “the WH” needing to “ask” “suggest” or “hint”.