Good riddance, Bill Barr
Trump's legal henchman is on the way out, and not a moment too soon
Bill Barr was supposed to be the adult in the room.
It is difficult to remember now, but when Barr was originally nominated in December 2018 for a second stint as attorney general — he had earlier served under President George H.W. Bush during the early 1990s — he was widely portrayed as a steadying influence for the Department of Justice, somebody who could take a firm stance against President Trump's attempts to use the federal justice system for corrupt and undemocratic ends.
"Barr plainly has the stature and the character to stand up for the department's institutional prerogatives, and to push back on any improper attempt to inject politics into its work," Harry Litman, a liberal constitutional scholar, wrote for The Washington Post.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
That's not how it worked out. (And Litman, for what it is worth, has admitted as much.) Instead of character, Barr has treated Americans to a parade of hypocrisy for two years: He was a law and order crusader who helped presidential cronies evade consequences for their crimes in two administrations; a constitutionalist who didn't mind blowing off congressional oversight; a moralist who put his talents and intellect in the service of the most corrupt president since Richard Nixon.
Barr's resignation, reported by the president Monday on Twitter, changes none of that. While both Barr and Trump tried to put a happy face on the attorney general's early departure from office, reports suggested that Trump had been enraged by Barr's recent declaration that — despite the president's false allegations — "we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome" in the presidential election.
Barr, meanwhile, was reportedly tired of taking the president's guff.
"For weeks Barr had expressed frustration to advisers about the attacks on the integrity of the election system by Trump and his allies, telling one they were outlandish and nutty," the Los Angeles Times reported. "He was particularly irked when they pushed him to launch investigations on the thinnest of reeds."
This explanation makes no sense. Barr knew Trump would attack the results of any election he lost — he has telegraphed his plan to do so for years. And as president, he has long made it abundantly clear that he expected the Department of Justice — including the FBI — to serve him in much the way his former fixer Michael Cohen did before Trump was president, protecting his friends and punishing his enemies. For the most part, Barr has seemed willing to play that role, no matter how "outlandish and nutty" the president's demands.
Most famously, Barr released his own distorted summary of the Mueller Report, one that seemed to exonerate the president from wrongdoing connected to Russia's interference in the 2016 election. (The actual report, released later, strongly suggested Trump had committed obstruction of justice.) And while Barr was in charge, federal prosecutors often ended up giving the president's friends the benefit of the doubt — trying to undo its prosecution of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn after Flynn had pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, and reducing its sentencing recommendation for dirty trickster Roger Stone after Stone was convicted of obstruction in the Russia investigation. Indeed, Barr's record under Trump is one of undermining the integrity and independence of the Department of Justice.
So, why grow a spine now? If the reports are true, why the sudden attack of integrity? Was there some real principle being violated, some line crossed by the president that was too far for Barr? If so, what could it have been? Did he just decide that he simply didn't want to endure Trump's tantrums for a few more weeks? Or did he think by leaving now, under these circumstances, he might preserve some shred of his reputation for probity?
If so, too bad. Barr's legacy as Trump's legal henchman is already set.
In all likelihood, he will suffer no real consequence for enabling this president's lies and corruption. Barr hasn't provided much evidence that he cares what other people think of him, and has sometimes seemed to delight in angry criticism. He is also rich, and — at 70 — old enough to retire again. He won't have to join the list of Trump administration staffers finding out that serving this president isn't a great resume item back in the business world.
It was already the case, though, that one of the best things about Trump's election loss is that Barr won't get to do this president's dirty work any longer. Now he's leaving a month early. Good riddance.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a freelance writer who has spent nine years as a syndicated columnist, co-writing the RedBlueAmerica column as the liberal half of a point-counterpoint duo. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic, The Kansas City Star and Heatmap News. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
'Make legal immigration a more plausible option'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
LA-to-Las Vegas high-speed rail line breaks ground
Speed Read The railway will be ready as soon as 2028
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Israel's military intelligence chief resigns
Speed Read Maj. Gen. Aharon Haliva is the first leader to quit for failing to prevent the Hamas attack in October
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Arizona court reinstates 1864 abortion ban
Speed Read The law makes all abortions illegal in the state except to save the mother's life
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Trump, billions richer, is selling Bibles
Speed Read The former president is hawking a $60 "God Bless the USA Bible"
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Rwanda plan is less a deterrent and more a bluff'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By The Week UK Published
-
Henry Kissinger dies aged 100: a complicated legacy?
Talking Point Top US diplomat and Nobel Peace Prize winner remembered as both foreign policy genius and war criminal
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Last updated
-
Trump’s rhetoric: a shift to 'straight-up Nazi talk'
Why everyone's talking about Would-be president's sinister language is backed by an incendiary policy agenda, say commentators
By The Week UK Published
-
More covfefe: is the world ready for a second Donald Trump presidency?
Today's Big Question Republican's re-election would be a 'nightmare' scenario for Europe, Ukraine and the West
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published