Legal analyst Daniel Goldman noticed that Attorney General Bill Barr seemed "triggered" by questions about Roger Stone and the questions that surrounded the Justice Department's behavior around the Stone case.
Reporter Matt Miller explained that Barr failed to cite any other examples in which he has seen an attorney general intervene in a case involving a president's friend the way that Barr did.
Speaking on a panel of legal experts Tuesday between breaks in the Congressional Judiciary Hearing, former U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg explained that whether one likes Barr or not, he's a smart man and cornering him is difficult. As an example, Barr was shown a video of a Navy veteran being beaten and tear-gassed and the attorney general explained he couldn't tell if the veteran was the one getting gassed.
"What Barr misses over and over again is the perception of his conduct, the way that it is perceived by many of us as favoring allies of the president over others or intervening only when the president wants him to intervene," said Rosenberg. "He can't even seem to acknowledge that the perception is so far off. And I think that's what makes this whole hearing unfortunate -- the questioning has been scattered, Barr has largely held his own formalistically and legally but he's completely missing the perception. And perception is so important to the rule of law on how the department of justice does its business, and I wish Barr could see that. That is his blind spot."
Goldman, who served as part of the House's legal counsel during the impeachment trial, explained that Democrats excel when they were able to pin-point Barr on specific cases.
"It's clear that Bill Barr is a little bit triggered by the whole Roger Stone sentencing," said Goldman. "I do agree that Rep. Eric Swalwell did a nice job questioning him. But the thing I would want to hear a little bit more of, and you raised the issue of voter fraud, is a follow-up question. Mr. Barr, what is your evidence that there is potential voter fraud from widespread mail-in voting? What is your evidence that there are Antifa representatives? Are the ones who are leading the riots in various cities? Ask him what his evidence is and what the data is that he is relying on because what ends up happening here is Barr makes a statement without explaining the backup and all too often the congressmen are responding with statements of their own. But what we're really here to hear is Bill Barr. And I think that's something that's important to remember."
See the discussion below:
