Rumbles that Barr is gonna reject Horowitz’s Opinion

Sorry about the WAPO link- but here’s a cliff of contents:

quote:

---

Attorney General William P. Barr has told associates he disagrees with the Justice Department’s inspector general on one of the key findings in an upcoming report — that the FBI had enough information in July 2016 to justify launching an investigation into members of the Trump campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.

---

quote:

---

Barr has not been swayed by Horowitz’s rationale for concluding the FBI had sufficient basis to open an investigation on July 31, 2016, these people said.

---

quote:

---

Part of Barr’s reluctance to accept that finding is related to another investigation, one being conducted by Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham, into how intelligence agencies pursued allegations of Russian election tampering in 2016. Barr has traveled abroad to personally ask foreign officials to assist Durham in that work. Even as the inspector general’s review is ending, Durham’s investigation continues.

---

In short, good sign that my Sexy Unsexy Old Boyfriend is doing work.

WAPO

Issue Presented: If Horowitz (as anticipated) declines to recommend prosecution of the people he criticizes in this report, and Barr thinks they should be prosecuted based on Horowitz’s findings - do any of you Polibarristers know if Barr/Durham would be precluded from prosecuting anyway? I can’t see how this would preclude prosecution, but I don’t really do any criminal legal work.

(incidentally, for those of you who may be paywalled out of WAPO the rest of this propaganda essentially just plants the seed that Barr would be Orange Man Bad/meanie pants for prosecutions, but doesn’t explain whether such would be actually, legally precluded. Wednesday doesn’t think “Meanie Pants” is a legal reason to stop him).