CNN
promoted its one-on-one interview with Attorney General William Barr [Sept. 2] as
though viewers would learn something from Wolf Blitzer’s questioning of President
Trump’s henchman at Main Justice. Instead, despite the veteran newsman’s best
efforts, Barr used the appearance to peddle misinformation about election
security aimed at underlining Trump’s baseless warnings about likely fraud in
the Nov. 3 presidential election.
A few hours
earlier, Trump had made the bizarre suggestion that his supporters in North
Carolina should test election security procedures by voting twice in the
presidential election—first, by absentee ballot and then on Election Day as
well. “If their system’s as good as they say it is,” Trump explained
in a briefing with reporters, “then obviously they won’t be able to vote.”
Blitzer, with
30 years’ experience at CNN, used the transcript of Trump’s remarks to ask Barr
whether the president’s plan would amount to a violation of the state’s
election laws. Barr, the chief law enforcement officer in an administration
deeply concerned about election fraud, ducked Blitzer’s questions by pleading ignorance
of North Carolina law.
In fact,
the federal Voting Rights Act prohibits voting more than once in a given
election, and most states have separate state laws that prohibit voting more than
once in the same election within the state or in different states. The National
Conference of State Legislatures lists North Carolina among 31 states with such
laws.
Admittedly,
Barr had no forewarning of Trump’s ridiculous idea, so he could justifiably
disclaim any knowledge of the president’s specific intentions. Even when shown
the transcript, however, Barr ventured no opinion on whether his boss’s
suggestion might run afoul of state election law. Instead, Barr appeared to
endorse the plan as a permissible method of testing the potential for voter
fraud in mail balloting procedures.
With
Blitzer pressing for an answer, Barr became more and more testy, as seen in a ten-minute
excerpt posted on YouTube. He claimed that numerous studies—by government
bodies and news organization—had showed in recent years that voting by mail is
“open to fraud and coercion.” As an example, Blitzer related a completely
inaccurate account of a supposed election fraud case in Texas.
In Barr’s telling, “we indicted” –
that is, the federal government – a Texas man who “collected” 1,700 ballots and
“made them out and voted for the person he wanted to.” Blitzer had no
on-the-spot ability to check and correct Barr’s account, but the Washington
Post and ABC News corrected Barr within the next two news cycles. In fact, Barr
was referring to a local prosecution involving suspected mail-in voting fraud
in a city council election in 2017 in Dallas County.
The local prosecutor in the case,
Andy Chatham, told the Post that Barr’s account was all wrong. “That’s
not what happened at all,” Chatham, now in private practice, said. Chatham went
on to note that the Justice Department had never contacted the district
attorney’s office about the case. “Unfortunately, it speaks volumes to the
credibility of Attorney General Barr when he submits half-truths and
alternative facts as clear evidence of voter fraud without having so much as
even contacted me or the district attorney’s office for an understanding of the
events that actually occurred,” Chatham added.
Queried about the discrepancy, the
Justice Department’s spokeswoman Kerri Kupec blamed it all on staff, not on
Barr. “Prior
to his interview, the Attorney General was provided a memo prepared within the
Department that contained an inaccurate summary about the case which he relied
upon when using the case as an example,” Kupec told the Post. Pause now
to feel sorry for the hapless DOJ lawyer who thought he was giving Barr just
what his boss wanted: some really juicy dirt about voter fraud.
Blitzer continued in the interview to
ask Barr whether Russia was attempting to interfere in this year’s election as
they did four years ago. “It wouldn’t surprise me if Russia tries something
again,” Barr answered without going further. When pressed, however, Barr told
Blitzer that between Russia and China, he was more concerned about China’s
possible meddling in this year’s election. Blitzer asked for an explanation,
but Barr said no more. “I’ve seen the intelligence,” he said.
By giving Russia a kind of a pass
and demonizing China instead, Barr was serving Trump’s interests: Trump’s base,
like Trump himself, worries more about China than about Russia. Whenever asked
about Russia, Trump has a one-word answer: “Hoax!”
Blitzer changed subjects again to
ask Barr whether he believes there is “systemic racism” in criminal justice in
the United States. Barr stopped short of a complete denial, but could not find
the word to describe what he acknowledged as fact. “I think there are some
situations where statistics suggest that they [Black and White Americans] are
treated differently,” he said. “But I don’t think that that’s necessarily
racism.”
The Justice Department might be better able to answer the question if the Trump administration had continued the Obama-era policy of aggressively using its power to investigate local law enforcement agencies for “policies or practices” that entail excessive force or discriminatory harassment. Perversely, Trump now falsely accuses the Obama-Biden administration of having done nothing in regard to police reform when in fact his administration has shut down any federal oversight.
The Justice Department might be better able to answer the question if the Trump administration had continued the Obama-era policy of aggressively using its power to investigate local law enforcement agencies for “policies or practices” that entail excessive force or discriminatory harassment. Perversely, Trump now falsely accuses the Obama-Biden administration of having done nothing in regard to police reform when in fact his administration has shut down any federal oversight.
No comments:
Post a Comment