AG Nominee Barr defended Ruby Ridge killers?

Are you wondering why you're hearing :crickets:?

Is that the Ring chick? That sum freaky shite Baw.

Barr received a routine questionnaire from the Judiciary Committee asking him to disclose his past work including pro bono activities “serving the disadvantaged.” The “disadvantaged” that Barr spent the most time helping was an FBI agent who slayed an Idaho mother holding her baby in 1992. Barr spent two weeks organizing former Attorneys General and others to support “an FBI sniper in defending against criminal charges in connection with the Ruby Ridge incident.” Barr also “assisted in framing legal arguments advanced… in the district court and the subsequent appeal to the Ninth Circuit,” he told the committee.

That charitable work (for an FBI agent who already had a federally-paid law firm defending him) helped tamp down one of the biggest scandals during Barr’s time as Attorney General from 1991 to early 1993. Barr was responsible for both the U.S. Marshals Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, two federal agencies whose misconduct at Ruby Ridge “helped to weaken the bond of trust that must exist between ordinary Americans and our law enforcement agencies,” according to a 1995 Senate Judiciary Committee report.


From the link. Dude worked pro bono for the killer, who already had government representation. Not quite the same as defending someone who needed him.

What are you getting that from?

LINK

quote:

---

Working as a government lawyer on a controversial case when a man is just starting his career doesn’t necessarily mean all that you are assuming.

---

What exactly am I assuming, other than the AG nominee doesn’t seem to think the Bill of Rights actually limits the power and scope of the federal government?

So he can work for the oppressive leviathan we call Fedgov and that’s fine by you, but he can only do the cases that with the benefit of hindsite you deem acceptable?

Barr is an establishment figure.

He believes in deploying the power of the government and defending it. I don’t believe he is a sinister person. Yet he has a clear history of being deferential to government and the flex of its powers. He is very much a team player on the executive branch.

I was unenthused to hear his return as AG. Yet in some aspects I understand it.

quote:

---

So he can work for the oppressive leviathan we call Fedgov and that’s fine by you, but he can only do the cases that with the benefit of hindsite you deem acceptable?

---

With the benefit of hindsight? The fedgov showed up to arrest Randy Weaver, and the killer shot his wife with a sniper rifle, while she had her baby in her arms. How much hindsight do you think it takes to say that was bullshite? I could have called that shite before he pulled the trigger. Couldn’t you? Can you imagine the government showing up to arrest you, and then slaughtering your wife? Is there any scenario where that is defensible? Is there any scenario where a sawed off shotgun is the death penalty for anyone?

quote:

---

People have a constitutional right to a competent defense.

Do you not believe in that part?

---

Absolutely. The killer already had a government team. Barr worked for free. Apples and candy bars.