The Daily Beast Podcast - The Worst Things Bill Barr Did as AG

Episode Date: August 1, 2021

In this bonus episode of The New Abnormal Elie Honig, CNN legal analyst and author of the new book about Bill Barr called Hatchet Man, talks about all the ways that Barr failed as AG, how Merrick Garland is sitting on his ass and whether he thinks Donald Trump will go to jail. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hello and welcome to another bonus episode of The New Abnormal, and we thank you so much for being here. Today we have an extra special guest with Ellie Honig, who's a CNN senior legal analyst, an author of Hatchet Man, how Bill Barr broke the prosecutor's code and corrupted the Justice Department. Welcome to the new abnormal, Alley. Thank you for having me. What was the old abnormal? There was no old abnormal. This is like we're at part two, you know, we're the movie that starts in the sequel. Yeah, I'm thrilled to be with you, Molly. Thanks for having me.

So talk to us a little bit about your new book. Bill Barr, good guy, bad guy. Discuss. If I have to choose for one of those, I'm going to go with B, bad guy. I wrote this book as a bit of a passion project, I will say, because I was raised a very particular way as a DOJ prosecutor, and I talk about this in the book where I was taught a lot of lessons and learned a lot of lessons from doing things as a prosecutor. Like, don't do crimes. Right. I mean, let's start with.

Don't lie. Let's go next to don't play politics when it comes to prosecution, and we can go from there. And sitting there for two years, nearly two years, watching Bill Barr just trashed the institution was really more than I could take. And I felt it was imperative to write this thing. I hate to boil this down to the dumbest possible question, but, you know, I have a brand I have to protect. He's worse than Jefferson Beauregard Session. Oh, yes. I mean, look, I am no fan of Jeff Sessions. I dedicate about a half a chapter to talk. talking about what a terrible attorney general and public servant Jeff Sessions is and was, among other things, he has a history of racist comments, which one would think would keep him

from becoming attorney general, but apparently not. But that was how he got the job. Yeah, maybe. There is a quote that I laughed that I came across in researching the book, or he had just become AG, and he says something like, well, I never thought this would happen, but Donald Trump made it his business to make me attorney general of the United States. Who would ever thought that this would happen? I just, I couldn't help but be snarky. And I just wrote, indeed. But yeah, no, here's why Jeff Sessions has, I hate to say it, but an advantage over Bill Barr,

because at least Jeff Sessions did the right thing in the highest stakes circumstances. Yeah, he recused himself. He pulled himself off the Mueller investigation. Bill Barr's conflict of interest, by the way, were way more obvious than Jeff Sessions' conflict of interest. I mean, Bill Barr had said publicly beforehand, This investigation is, and I quote, fatally misconceived. We all remember that memo that Bill Barr wrote. He went out and did media.

He went to the media when he was a private citizen just months before he became AG auditioning for the job and said that Mueller's theory was, quote, assinine. I mean, and I talk about this in the book, how you don't recuse yourself, nobody has ever adequately explained. And that in itself, I think, sets Bill Barr apart. And the other thing is I was able to write a 280 page book about Bill Barr with, I don't know, 12 chapters or something, each chapter dedicated to a separate scandal, whether it was Flynn or Stone or Ukraine or alleged election front. I mean, you know, a book about Jeff Sessions would have

been much shorter and maybe had two or three chapters. So I think it's an issue of quality and degree as well. Yeah. Talk to me about what do you see as Bill Barr's kind of worst crime? Yeah. I mean, I start with Mueller. I think Bill Barr single-handedly saved Donald Trump from consequences on Mueller by lying to us all about the report. Then by withholding the report from the public, people forget this for nearly a month while his BS narrative took hold. But I guess I'm going to give the silver medal here, if I can, to the big lie. To Bill Barr, you know, he's reminding us now. He's on a public rehab tour where he's out there reminding people and doing softball interviews where he's reminding us that, oh, well, I came out against this idea of election front. Yeah. And

I mentioned that in the book in December, three weeks after the election when it was obvious that it was over. But what he's leaving out conveniently and somehow not being asked in these interviews he's doing is he spent six months leading up to the election pumping up the big lie. As attorney general, he lied to NPR. He lied to Wolf Blitzer. He lied to Congress. And every time he was called out and asked for evidence, he would just go, none. I don't have any, but it's just something I know. It's just common sense. He made up false facts. He gave to Wolf. They said they said that DOJ had a case involving 1,700 fraudulent ballots. It turned out the next day that it was not a DOJ case and it involved one fraudulent ballot.

DOJ had to issue an embarrassing correction walkback memo. So I blame Bill Barr as one of the main sort of instigators behind the big lie. I'll give that second place. Yeah. I mean, it just strikes me as he's like the Newt Gingrich of AG's. Huh. How so? He just went in and fucked everything.

even more than it had been fucked up before. Yeah, and the thing is, I don't even think Bill Barr much cared as he was doing it. And, you know, one of the common questions is why, right? And I take this on in the book in some detail. And I argue in the book that not only was Bill Barr a legal extremist, he had this sort of unsupportable view that the president should be entirely above the law. He also was a personal and religious extremist. And Molly, we dug in and found some really alarming things that Bill Barr had written

instead in the 1990s. And by the way, that's not when he was some kid like I was in the 90s. I mean, Bill Barr was AG of the United States from 91 to 93. He's actually one of two people ever to be AG twice. And after that, after he had been AG and during, he expressed this view that, and I quote, God's law needs to reign, end quote, needs to reign supreme over this country. And that the only true way to order a society is according to, in his view, Judeo-Christian, principles and that the Catholic Church has to fight to get back its rightful place at the head of our society. So he was really not just illegal, but also a religious and sort of social extremist as well. It is just a complete and utter miracle we survived. Ellie, there's been some rumblings

about Bill Barr being in some fringe Christian groups. Did you see anything there? So that's important to note. We did dig into that. He's actually not a member of Opus Day, which is a good for him. Sort of, yeah. It's a persistent rumor, but he's not. But, you know, his views speak for themselves. I mean, I'll give you one other, one other, by the way, he is a member of the Federalist Society, not as wacky. That's fine.

There's plenty of good lawyers, legitimate people who are Federalist Society members. But no, he's not a member of Opus Day, but some of the things he said, I mean, here's one of the most extreme statements. In one of his tirades in public, you know, a speech he gave or an article he wrote, he raised. he railed against the quote, homosexual movement and quote, militant secularists. And again, this will, you talk about Newt Gingrich. It brings you back to the rhetoric and the divisive politics that were out there, worse than divisive, destructive politics that were out there in the 1990s. And he said those things were causing the destruction of society, everything from broken families to suicide, to depression, I mean, to drug use. So Bill Barr really has this old school. culture warrior approach. It is really kind of amazing. So the other question that I think a lot of us have is, is Merrick Garland doing enough? And you know, there was so many crimes committed during the Trump administration and some of them were, you know, the kind of crimes that you can prosecute, and some of them were the kind of crimes that you can't prosecute even if they're criminal.

And you know what I mean. But do you think Merrick Garland is doing enough to hold the Trump administration accountable. I think a lot of us worry that Democrats again want to take the high road as opposed to really do what's right. He's doing nothing to hold the Trump administration accountable. I mean, there's other things I've been critical of Garland for. There are things that I will praise and have praised Merrick Garland for. But if you want to talk about what he's doing specifically with respect to accountability for the Trump administration, he's doing almost literally nothing. And And you use the phrase the high road. That's a nice way to put it.

I think he's just looking for whatever road offers the least political turbulence because he doesn't want to get DOJ involved in anything that might be politically sensitive or politically controversial. And I get that. And I somewhat, I'm not going to say laud, but I understand that instinct. But at a certain point, you're just not doing your job as a prosecutor. And let's not forget, nobody's ever done anything on the Mueller report, including obstruction of justice.

I'm one of over 2,000 former federal prosecutors who said there's obviously crimes there. Nobody's ever done anything relating to Ukraine on the criminal context. Bill Barr refused to even open an investigation, even though there's at least enough to open an investigation for bribery, extortion, foreign election aid. Even January 6, Merrick Arland, is, you know, he vowed during his confirmation, we're going to follow every lead as high up as it goes. He hasn't charged, I believe, a single soul who was not physically present at the Capitol. They're just scooping up the sort of low hanging through, and I think undercharging them by not charging sedition.

So there's no indication that Merrick Garland has any interest in any of that or wants to go anywhere near any of that. I think he's trying to sort of restore DOJ's ballast, but you don't do that by just ignoring things. Yeah. Do you think that's a good plan? No. I think he has a job to do here. And as a prosecutor, you don't take the job if you're just going to, if your orientation as a prosecutor is, let me find the easiest way here. Let me find the way that's going to make the least headlines and the least ripples. You shouldn't be a prosecutor. I'm not saying Merrick Garland shouldn't be attorney general, but that's not what the job is of being any type of prosecutor.

Now, let me say one thing that I think some things that Merrick Garland has done to help restore DOJ. The biggest one is that both Merrick Garland and the president, Joe Biden, appear to truly respect the wall of separation between DOJ's prosecutorial function and White House policy. or any sort of politics. Wouldn't the DOJ be prosecuting because they're prosecuting all the lower down people who were involved in the insurrection? I mean, it's impossible to imagine that, you know, Ali Alexander and Representative Gosar and all the people who met together to get this whole thing and the people paid for the January 6 rallies.

I mean, how are those people not being held accountable? Well, so right. We don't, obviously, we don't know enough of this specific facts, but I do find it very unlikely. that the only people who can possibly be held legally responsible for this attack where the the people who physically breached the capital. I mean, you're telling me there was nobody other than those, you know, hands-on riders who had any part in this. Yeah.

I'm not buying that. And again, Garland said all the right things and we're going to take it wherever it takes us and as high up as it goes. But there's no indication that DOJ has any real will or inclination to do that. Yeah. So how, I mean, then if that's happening, then isn't the White House sort of doing the opposite of Trump? Well, yeah, I mean, not the White House. I mean, well, look, if it emerges that there's, yeah, if it emerges that there's been some instruction from the White House over to DOJ, hey, we want you guys to lay off this. I mean, that then I will criticize. Yeah. Everybody involved roundly. There's no, but, but there, it does appear to be the case that DOJ and, and the White House are remaining separate when it comes to any communications about specific. prosecutions. That was very much not the case under Trump and Barr. That's the distinction

of drawing. Yeah. It is so strange to me to watch Democrats make, I mean, this feels like a mistake that the Obama administration made too, you know, that we are too, you know, we are too good and pure to engage in partisanship. And so we will not do the right thing, which is hold the Trump administration accountable. Instead, we will, you know, let this go because it was bad and hopefully everyone will forget about it. I don't even personally view it through a Democrat-Republican lens. I view it as simply an accountability lens. And I'm not saying, well, I've already gone on record saying I think the obstruction evidence is enough to charge Donald Trump. But, I mean, let's at least be assured as a public, or please, DOJ, at least assure us as the public that you

are taking an actual look at these things, giving them serious consideration. And, and not just hoping you can put your hands in your pockets and whistle and sort of stroll by and nobody's going to notice. But that is a tendency that we've seen going back, you know, to other contexts where it's easier to move on. And Joe Biden made known, this is, I think, this is something I've been, I was critical of Joe Biden for, but he made known early on. He did not want his Justice Department digging into these things. He didn't say it publicly, but he said it to multiple advisors who went out and repeated it to the media. I mean, Joe Biden certainly savvy enough to know that if he says this to multiple advisors, it's going to get out there. And it did.

So to some extent, Garland maybe decided this on his own or maybe is taking that cue from Joe Biden or maybe some combination of those things. Yeah, it's just shocking. So the question that we all want to know, and this is like for my husband, my husband, who is not a lawyer, nor does he play one on television, wants Donald Trump to go to jail. Is Donald Trump going to go to jail? I think it's very, very, very unlikely. And I'll say, A, start with what I just said. DoJ obviously has no interest in digging into all the federal stuff. B, I don't think the Manhattan DA slash New York Attorney General's investigation is there or nearly there. Now look, you have to put this qualification in that we really don't know what prosecutors have. But reading the signs, the way they've rolled this case out so far, it does not appear that they have the goods at the moment on Donald Trump. And it does not appear that Weisselberg or any of those guys is going to flip. There are some out there who are, you know, what I call the tip of the iceberg crew. I want to see that iceberg. I've not seen it thus far. Yes. I mean, look, I'm still keeping a little, a bit of an eye on Fulton County down in Georgia, the election interference. I mean, look, that call that Trump made the

Rappinsberger is pretty down the middle. Right. It seems pretty darn election interferencey to me when he says, I need you to find 11,780 votes. So I win by one. Yeah, who's counting now? also understand Trump getting indicted is one thing, I think not particularly likely, but then convict you if you want to send him to jail, you got to convict him. I mean, he'll go to trial, bet on that. You get, you know, you're going to charge him in Georgia. You're going to get one person. I mean, even if it's Fulton County, which I think, I think he lost by a significant margin, even if you charge him in Manhattan where he's not super popular, you get one or two people, one person on a jury who thinks there's a political aspect of this or is a Trump follower or something.

And so, no, I would not hold my breath on this notion of Donald Trump ending up in an orange jumpsuit. Yeah, that is my take. But it is, I mean, part of it is fundamentally not because he didn't do any crimes. It's because we don't jail our presidents. Well, there's a lot of institutional factors. I think that's probably the number one, right? It doesn't feel Americans, so to speak, right? Because we see other countries where the deposed leader or the last president's getting arrested and worse.

And even Europe sometimes. Yeah. Right. And so I think we, we are uncomfortable with that notion and maybe a little worried about where it leads. Is every president going to, you know, face something down the line? Yeah, look, there's a lot of other institutional pressures and factors, whether it's wealth and power and connections and that kind of thing. But, you know, I do think it's very unlikely Trump ends up in jail. Yeah, that's. Again, I think we're in a position here where democracy is more important than getting, then partisan wins, you know, whatever that means. Yeah. Well, I think some of the main decision makers here have sort of made this calculation that

the way we're going to, we're not going to restore democracy by going out and getting accountability. We're going to restore democracy by moving on. Do you think that's right? No, I don't. I don't either, yeah. Yeah, I don't necessarily think every single grievance and every single scandal must be fully relitigated.

But I also think there's a line between that and just, like I said, just, whistling away and hoping that nobody really notices or cares anymore about anything that happened. No, I don't think it's the right way. I think there's a balance there. Yeah, me too. Thank you so much for joining us. I hope you'll come back soon. My pleasure. Anytime, Molly, you know that. On that note, we'll wrap this episode of the new abnormal from The Daily Beast. In future episodes, we'll be talking to smart folks from the Daily Beast and beyond from media, culture, politics, and science. will help us understand what's happening to our country and the world.

We hope you'll subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app and share the show on social media. Thanks so much for listening and we'll see you again on the next episode. Want more great listens? Check out our comedy podcast, The Last Laugh, and our star-studied The Daily Beast podcast at the Daily Beast.com slash podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, consider becoming a Daily Beast subscriber. Subscribing is the best way to feed the beast and support all of your podcasts as we cover what might become the darkest timeline. Head to the DailyBeast.com

slash membership slash podcast and sign up today.