Why Won't Republicans Name Bluto Barr?

Something that I find intensely irritating is this. Every time Chris Wray shows up in front of the Senate or House and gets asked about the non-investigation of Hunter Biden and the obvious effort to bury the investigation, nobody asks Wray about Bluto Barr.

Today we went through this charade again. Sen. John Kennedy, a smart lawyer who specializes in making public fools of foolish people, asked Wray the usual question:

"Why didn't the FBI just say, hey, the laptop's real? We're not vouching for what's on it, but it's real?"

To absolutely nobody’s surprise Kennedy got the usual and expected answer from Wray:

"We have to be very careful about what we can say, especially in the middle of an election season."

We could go on at great length about what a snake Wray is. This “very careful” approach comes from the head of an organization that was in up to its neck in the Russia Hoax right up to the day of the 2016 election. After the election they were in up to their neck with the—known to them—fraudulent Steele “dossier”. They obtained fraudulent FISA orders by withholding crucial information from the FISA court. They were a key part of getting the Republican party to sign off on a fraudulent Special Counsel investigation—the Mueller Witchhunt. Leading up to the 2020 election the FBI contacted social media groups like Twitter to try to derail the NYPost expose of the Hunter laptop—knowing it was genuine. Just as the Intel Community issued a false intel assessment after the election—including the FBI’s fraudulent Steele dossier—so, too, the FBI remained silent when the 50 intel “professionals” falsely claimed that the Hunter laptop was “Russian disinformation”—even though the FBI knew that claim was a lie. Was most of that not election interference? Barr was there. He knew everything that Wray knew, and he was Wray’s boss.

But there’s a very fundamental point here, which smart lawyer’s like Kennedy and Ted Cruz are fully aware of. The policy of not going public with an investigation of a candidate in a presidential election year … is a DoJ policy. It’s not an internal FBI policy.

Given all the bad behavior by the FBI cited above—and, of course, there’s much more, and it’s a continuing problem—why would Wray not go to Bluto Barr and ask for an opinion? Certainly the FBI has its own lawyers—in the past the FBI General Counsel position featured luminaries like Andrew Weissmann and James Baker. But this policy is a DoJ policy, not an FBI policy—why not go to the originator of the policy, the legal heart of the federal government, for an opinion? Given the FBI’s crappy credibility due to its misbehavior over the previous four years—outrageous interference in presidential elections and politics—what would you have done in Wray’s position? I know what I would have done. I would have gone to the AG. Who seriously thinks Wray didn’t discuss this with Bluto? Please. This was a conspiracy to job Trump just as surely as the Russia Hoax and much else was—all a result of FBI/DoJ malfeasance.

Kennedy and Cruz and the rest of these guys know all this. They’re gaslighting us, that’s all. Why? Because to expose Barr’s role in suppressing the Hunter investigation would reveal to the public the depth of GOP complicity in the war on Trump. It’s that simple. They’re protecting they’re own behinds.