Barr now facing perjury allegations

Channel: Fox Business
Published: 05/02/2019 06:07 PM

Former DOJ Deputy Director of Public Affairs Ian Prior on Attorney General William Barr's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. FOX Business Network (FBN) is a financial news channel delivering real-time information across all platforms that impact both Main Street and Wall Street. H...

Reckless. neil hillary, thank you very, very much. Getting back to this lying to congress issue hillary outlined at issue is whether barr was truthful when he said the attorney --. The counsel robert mueller had not had any issues with his characterization of the mueller report itself, when, in fact, just two days after he received it, mueller had sent him a letter saying he had serious issues wi ...
h that. Does that represent perjury? Does that represent something more sinister. again, democrats are opening up a firing line on this. Others are saying it's much ado about nothing. Let'S get the read from former justice department, deputy director of public affairs, ian pryor.

, one thing that seems certain nowis, regardless of how people feel on this subject: it's not going away. The hearings aren't going away, the nastiness isn't going away and if anything, the back and forth and lawsuits on each side indicate it drags into the summer. What do you think ? It'S certainly not going away. Look. Democrats didn't get what they wanted from the mueller investigation from the results of it and they are trying to continue to make controversy and the media is playing right along. You know, i think there is a lot of criticism from the media on barr's testimony. I think he did a good job.

, it's clear. He knows more about the law, about the department of justice, andthe role of the attorney general than the folks that were up there grandstanding and trying to get their points with the press. neil. I do wonder the chicken thing they did. The guy took body blows for more than five hours in senate testimony. His issues seem to be why the house judiciary committee would suddenly employ you know a special lawyer or lawyers to question him when, in fact, two-thirds of that body consist of lawyers, but the chicken thing didn't jive with me. What do you think yeah. yeah. ? That'S exactly right.

This is the house of representatives. That'S a campaign stunt that you pull when you know when you're running for congress. barr was upthere at the senate yesterday, testifying all day. He obviously is willing to go testify. But when the house changes things up and says, oh no, we're going to have our staffers question him. This is the attorney general of the united states. There'S a precedent. Here. , you don't have staffers question in oversight.

Hearings. , you have the actual members of congress. It'S their job, it's not the staff's job. , so then to change it up. I think barr did the absolute right thing in not going there and not setting the precedent. You can just haul cabinet officials and have staff question them like it's some kind of investigation. neil. You know ian it's more from whether russia youknow was colluding with the trump administration. That part seems to be settled. I stress seems to be settled to what did barr know and when did he know it? What did he know of these concerns of mueller, and when did he relay it.

indications are when he was asked whether he had heard or had any problems from mueller and indicated no such thing when, in fact, he was in receipt by that point of a letter From mueller outlining you know his concern. is that to you misrepresenting at a minimal -- at a minimum. What'S going on to the extreme, as democrats are saying, per juring himself, , no, absolutely not. ! I looked back and lookedat the exchange between charlie crist and bill barr. crist asked a rambling questions about news reports and what were the news reports referring to and barr said? I don't know because he doesn't know what the news reports are referring to based on anonymous. Sources. then he went forward and said: i presume that they are probably concerned that i didn't put enough out there. concerns that were certainly alleviated when a few weeks later, he put the whole report out there. So this whole issue is really much ado about nothing. The report is out there.

everybody can read it for themselves. , neil, fair enough. , that's a very good point. again, i think just to be clear. Whenhe originally said he wasn't aware of mueller taking issue with any of his top line findings when in fact he had a letter saying as such, it is a moot point if the report's out there, people can judge for themselves, but do you think that's going to Be a sticky point and just widen this at least for democrats, , you know i think democrats are going to seize on anything. They can. , especially when you have a presidential election coming up, and you have every presidential candidate out there calling on him to resign. , of course, just because he doesn't agree with their point of view, he's not going to resign. He works for the executive. Branch. He doesn't work for congress.

, so they growing to keep this issue alive until the next issue, and that may be when mueller testifies and they will find some little crumb there and they will blow it out of proportion.

Watch Next