January, 16 2020, 11:00pm EDT
Democracy 21 Files Complaint Against Attorney General Barr for Repeated Failures to Comply with DOJ Norms, Rules and Standards of Conduct
Complaint cites pattern of bias by Barr to protect President Trump at expense of carrying out DOJ mission to "ensure fair and impartial administration of justice."
WASHINGTON
Democracy 21 filed a complaint today with the Department of Justice requesting an investigation and remedial action against Attorney General William Barr for his repeated failures to comply with DOJ norms, rules and standards of conduct. The complaint was filed with DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility and Departmental Ethics Office.
According to the Democracy 21 complaint:
The improper actions by Attorney General Barr cover a wide range of his statements and activities but all result from a single overriding impropriety: the Attorney General has eschewed the core mission of the Department of Justice "to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans."
Attorney General Barr has instead repeatedly demonstrated bias in acting to protect the personal and political interests of President Trump, as opposed to protecting the interests of the American people. He has done this to the detriment of the country and in derogation of the mission and integrity of the Department he heads.
According to Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer:
Attorney General Barr has repeatedly abused his office to provide cover for President Trump. The Attorney General has acted in biased ways and violated Justice Department norms, standards and rules to protect President Trump at the expense of fulfilling his responsibilities to provide fair and impartial administration of justice.
Attorney General Barr has made improper attacks on the investigations of DOJ Special Counsel Mueller and DOJ Inspector General Horowitz, has made unjustified and unsubstantiated claims to protect President Trump and failed to recuse himself from the Ukraine whistleblower matter involving the President in which Barr was directly implicated by Trump.
Attorney General Barr is doing enormous damage to the integrity and credibility of the Justice Department he leads. It is the responsibility of the Office of Professional Responsibility and the Departmental Ethics Office to hold Barr accountable for his repeated improper actions.
The complaint forwarded a letter also raising concerns about Barr that was sent by the New York City Bar Association to the congressional leaders. The complaint stated:
We enclose for your information a letter sent by the New York City Bar Association to the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate which expresses "serious concerns about the propriety of Barr's recent actions and statements." The letter urges Congress "to commence formal inquiries into a pattern of conduct by Attorney General William P. Barr that threatens public confidence in the fair and impartial administration of justice."
According to the Democracy 21 complaint:
As we discuss below, Attorney General Barr has directly contradicted, misrepresented or undermined the independent, non-partisan and credible work of both the Department's Inspector General and its Special Counsel, in order to blunt conclusions by these officials which were contrary to the views and interests of President Trump. He has publicly echoed the President's inflammatory rhetoric about "spying" and "collusion" without providing any adequate legal basis for using these terms. And he has refused to recuse himself from sensitive Department decisions about the handling of a whistleblower complaint alleging a gross abuse of power by President Trump and in which the Attorney General himself is directly and personally implicated.
The complaint continued:
It is the clear duty of the Attorney General always to maintain fidelity to the Constitution and to the nation's legal system, and never to abdicate these responsibilities to protect the President's personal or political interests at the expense of the impartial administration of justice.
Attorney General Barr has repeatedly failed meet this critical obligation to the American people. Therefore, as the Justice Department officials who have the responsibility to safeguard the norms, standards and rules that protect the Department's integrity and credibility, it falls to you to investigate and take appropriate remedial action to address the Attorney General's improper conduct.
According to the complaint, Attorney General Barr and U.S Attorney Durham publicly challenged and criticized the findings of the DOJ Inspector General that the Justice Department had sufficient basis to open the Russia investigation in 2016 and that the FBI and Justice Department had acted without political bias or impropriety in conducting the investigation.
The complaint stated:
Most importantly, DOJ rules prohibit Department officials from publicly commenting on open criminal investigations. These rules state that Department personnel may not "confirm the existence of or otherwise comment about ongoing investigations" and may not comment on "the nature or progress" of an "ongoing investigation." USAM SS 1-7.400 (April 2018).
In general, this provision forbids Department officials, including the Attorney General, from engaging in any discussion about active criminal investigations, except in limited, specific circumstances that are not applicable here.
The statements issued by both Attorney General Barr and U.S. Attorney Durham disagreeing with the key conclusions of the Inspector General report were clearly based on their views about the findings of the parallel criminal investigation they are conducting into the same matter that was investigated by the Inspector General. Thus, Attorney General Barr and U.S. Attorney Durham chose to discuss an ongoing criminal investigation in order to attack the findings of the Inspector General and thereby improperly provided cover for President Trump's obsessive attacks on the 2016 Russia/Trump investigation opened by the Justice Department and the FBI.
Democracy 21 believes these statements were in violation of DOJ rules prohibiting Department officials from commenting on open criminal investigations.
The complaint continued:
By publicly attacking the Inspector General report immediately upon its issuance, by specifically disagreeing with its central conclusion, and by having U.S. Attorney Durham follow with his challenge to the report, Attorney General Barr undermined his own Inspector General and attacked his own Department. Barr demonstrated his bias and fealty to President Trump, contravening the Department's mission of promoting "fair and impartial justice for all Americans," in favor of echoing President Trump's irresponsible attacks on the Justice Department itself.
The complaint then detailed the following actions Barr has taken since becoming Attorney General:
- Barr testified before Congress, without any substantiation, that FBI and Justice Department officials engaged in "spying" on the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.
- Barr sent a letter to Congress mischaracterizing the Mueller report ahead of its release, leaving it as the only information available to the public about the report for almost a month. Barr then refused Special Counsel Mueller's request to release the summaries included in the report and held a press conference hours before the release of the full report where he continued to mischaracterize it.
- Barr failed to recuse himself from overseeing matters being consideration by DOJ and related to the whistleblower complaint about President Trump's call with the Ukrainian President, in which Trump mentioned Barr by name five times.
The complaint concluded:
This pattern of biased behavior by Barr is in stark conflict with his duty to ensure the "impartial administration of justice on behalf of all Americans." It is contrary to the mission, the norms, the rules, and the standards of conduct of the Justice Department and it seriously undermines the integrity and credibility of the Justice Department in the eyes of the American people.
Because you are responsible for safeguarding the institutional integrity of the Justice Department and the standards of behavior that govern its officials, Attorney General Barr's pattern of improper behavior warrants investigation and appropriate remedial action by your offices. Democracy 21 strongly calls on you to fulfill that responsibility.
Read the full complaint here.
Democracy 21 is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to making democracy work for all Americans. Democracy 21, and its education arm, Democracy 21 Education Fund, work to eliminate the undue influence of big money in American politics, prevent government corruption, empower citizens in the political process and ensure the integrity and fairness of government decisions and elections. The organization promotes campaign finance reform and other related political reforms to accomplish these goals.
(202) 355-9600LATEST NEWS
NYC Driver Rams Into Anti-Genocide Protest, Hospitalizes One
"Zionists on the streets and in police precincts have declared open season on young people fighting for Palestinian liberation," said one Columbia University student group.
May 07, 2024
One pro-Palestinian protester was hospitalized on Tuesday after a pro-Israel driver "intentionally drove" into a group of picketers outside the home of one of Columbia University's trustees on New York City's Upper East Side, as demonstrations against Israel's bombardment of Gaza continued.
According to Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), the protesters "were attacked on the crosswalk" by an "Upper East Side Zionist."
CUAD reported that the man drove up to the demonstrators, who have been calling on Columbia to divest from companies that contract with Israel and for the U.S. government to stop supporting the Israel Defense Forces, and asked for a flyer before grabbing a protester by the arm.
He then "circled the block to drive into our peaceful demonstration," striking one person who was "arrested and handcuffed to the bed while in the hospital," said CUAD.
The New York Police Department
toldUSA Today that an argument broke out between the driver and the protesters and that "as the group of roughly 25 demonstrators walked away, a driver hit one person with his Volvo."
CUAD noted that the alleged attack took place as U.S. politicians including President Joe Biden have condemned the campus protest movement, with at least one lawmaker
applauding abusive behavior by anti-Palestinian counter-protesters and New York City Council member Vickie Paladino (R-19) saying last week that the student movement is being led by "monsters, and it's now our job to slay them."
Paladino's "call for vigilante justice was almost fulfilled today," said CUAD.
USA Today also reported that at a separate protest on the Upper West Side near the apartment building of the co-chair of Columbia's board of trustees, "a woman punched a demonstrator in the face, seemingly at random."
In Los Angeles last week, city police stood by while a mob of pro-Israel counter-protesters
attacked nonviolent students who had set up an encampment in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza, where Israel has killed at least 34,789 and on Monday invaded Rafah, where more than 1 million Palestinians have been forcibly displaced.
On Tuesday, in honor of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum's Annual Days of Remembrance, Biden gave a speech on antisemitism, conflating protests in support of Palestinian rights with the hatred of Jewish people.
CUAD and independent reporter Talia Jane said the driver is a relative of the late Meir Kahane, an American-born Israeli far-right extremist.
The driver's "actions today model a trend in which Zionists weaponize their discomfort over political slogans as an excuse to assault Palestinian, Muslim, Arab, Black, brown, and dissident Jewish protesters in violent retaliation for imagined threats," said CUAD. "Just as white supremacists ran over a protester in Charlottesville, Zionists on the streets and in police precincts have declared open season on young people fighting for Palestinian liberation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
TikTok Sues US Government Over 'Unconstitutional' Potential Ban
One expert said legislators' admissions "that the ban was motivated by a desire to suppress content about the Israel-Gaza conflict will make the law especially difficult for the government to defend," said one First Amendment expert.
May 07, 2024
A top First Amendment expert on Tuesday said TikTok has a strong case against the U.S. government as the social media platform filed a federal lawsuit against a potential ban—particularly since proponents of the law have admitted it is aimed at blocking Americans' access to news out of Gaza.
The platform filed the lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit nearly two weeks after President Joe Biden signed the Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversaries Act into law as part of a larger foreign aid package.
Under the law, TikTok parent company ByteDance, a Chinese firm, has 270 days to sell the platform, allowing it to continue operating in the U.S. If it does not sell TikTok, the app will no longer be available on U.S. networks and app stores.
As Common Dreams reported Monday, Republican lawmakers including U.S. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) and Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) have linked TikTok to the burgeoning anti-war protest movement spreading across the U.S., with the latter saying in an interview with Secretary of State Antony Blinken last Friday that "there was such overwhelming support" in Congress to shut down TikTok because of the frequent posting of Palestine-related content on the app.
"Restricting citizens' access to media from abroad is a practice that has long been associated with repressive regimes, so it's sad and alarming to see our own government going down this road," said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, on Tuesday. "TikTok's challenge to the ban is important, and we expect it to succeed. The First Amendment means the government can't restrict Americans' access to ideas, information, or media from abroad without a very good reason for it—and no such reason exists here."
"The fact that some legislators have acknowledged that the ban was motivated by a desire to suppress content about the Israel-Gaza conflict will make the law especially difficult for the government to defend," Jaffer added.
The law's sponsors claim it "is not a ban because it offers ByteDance a choice: divest TikTok's U.S. business or be shut down," reads the lawsuit. "But in reality, there is no choice. The 'qualified divestiture' demanded by the act to allow TikTok to continue operating in the United States is simply not possible: not commercially, not technologically, not legally."
Even if selling the app within the time frame was feasible, added TikTok and ByteDance, the law "would still be an extraordinary and unconstitutional assertion of power," ultimately allowing Congress to "circumvent the First Amendment by invoking national security and ordering the publisher of any individual newspaper or website to sell to avoid being shut down."
"And for TikTok, any such divestiture would disconnect Americans from the rest of the global community on a platform devoted to shared content—an outcome fundamentally at odds with the Constitution's commitment to both free speech and individual liberty," the plaintiffs continued.
At The Philadelphia Inquirer on Tuesday, columnist Will Bunch noted that about a third of Americans between the ages of 18-29 get their news from TikTok, according to a recent Pew survey—as Romney openly stated he fears last week.
As Bunch wrote:
During the war in Gaza, most mainstream Western journalists have been blocked from entering the war zone. The best source of real-time information is often the phone video of airstrikes and their aftermath either shot by Palestinian journalists—more than 90 of whom have been killed—or civilian bystanders. Look, there's disinformation about every issue on social media—it's a serious problem. I'm a clueless boomer myself about TikTok, but I do spend way too much time on X/Twitter and I can tell you exactly what is radicalizing young people about Gaza.
The reason so many under-30 folks have adopted the Palestinian cause isn't disinformation, from Hamas or China or anyone else. They've been radicalized by the truth—daily videos of young children, some of them bloodied, some of them already dead, covered in dust and targeted by 2,000-pound dumb bombs made right here in America.
"If the real motivation for zapping TikTok from your phone is to silence legitimate political speech, just because a lot of members of Congress don't like it," wrote Bunch, "then this bill is the worst attack on the First Amendment since the government was sending World War I critics like Eugene V. Debs and Kate Richards O'Hare to prison, more than 100 years ago."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Congress Urged to Tax Big Oil for Price Fixing and 'Issue Every American a Refund'
The Groundwork Collaborative's leader also said that "the Department of Justice should criminally prosecute Scott Sheffield," the former Pioneer CEO whom the FTC blocked from joining ExxonMobil's board.
May 07, 2024
Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens on Tuesday responded to U.S. government allegations of fossil fuel industry price fixing with calls for federal prosecution and congressional action to return money to the American public.
"Americans have been working harder and harder to cover rising energy costs, with the understanding that supply chain snags and geopolitical forces were keeping prices high," Owens said. "Now the Federal Trade Commission has uncovered the real source behind the price at the pump: collusion."
"The Department of Justice should criminally prosecute Scott Sheffield and Congress should tax back the industry's windfall profits and issue every American a refund," she added, referring to Pioneer Natural Resources' founder and longtime CEO.
Owens' statement came after members of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) declined to contest ExxonMobil's controversial $64.5 billion acquisition of Pioneer—which was completed Friday—but approved a consent order barring Sheffield from serving on Exxon's board of directors or as an adviser to the fossil fuel giant.
"This complaint is a wake-up call about the dangerous consolidation of Big Oil's economic and political power."
The FTC voted 3-2 to accept the order and place related documents on the record for public comment. Citing communications including in-person meetings, public statements, text messages, and WhatsApp conversations, a commission complaint accuses Sheffield of trying to collude with the representatives of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and OPEC+.
"Mr. Sheffield's past conduct makes it crystal clear that he should be nowhere near Exxon's boardroom. American consumers shouldn't pay unfair prices at the pump simply to pad a corporate executive's pocketbook," said Kyle Mach, deputy director of the FTC's Bureau of Competition. "The FTC will remain vigilant in its enforcement efforts to protect competition in these vital markets."
Pioneer toldFortune that the company and its founder "believe that the FTC's complaint reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the U.S. and global oil markets and misreads the nature and intent of Mr. Sheffield's actions," but neither party would take "any steps to prevent the merger from closing."
ExxonMobil "learned of the FTC's allegations regarding Sheffield from the agency and said in a statement that they are 'entirely inconsistent with how we do business,'" according to Fortune. "Exxon has agreed to the terms of the consent decree," which also "prohibits the oil giant from appointing any Pioneer employee or director to its board for five years."
Still, since the FTC's allegations were initially reported by The Wall Street Journal last week and then confirmed with the complaint's release, demands for additional action by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Congress have mounted.
Cassidy DiPaola, Fossil Free Media's director of communications, on Monday called the complaint "explosive" and said that Democrats "must respond with bold action to hold this rogue industry accountable," including:
- Aggressive congressional and DOJ investigations into the full extent of Big Oil's price fixing;
- A windfall profits tax to claw back ill-gotten gains; and
- End taxpayer subsidies for oil and gas.
"But accountability is just the first step. This complaint is a wake-up call about the dangerous consolidation of Big Oil's economic and political power. We can't let them use megamergers to entrench their control and crush clean energy competition," she stressed. "Ultimately, this is about the future we choose: One where we remain at the mercy of Big Oil's greed and destruction, or one where clean, democratically controlled energy powers our communities. It's time to make the right choice."
In response to the Journal's reporting, Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's Energy Program, similarly said that "Congress must immediately hold hearings on Big Oil's alleged collusion with OPEC to raise gasoline prices for Americans."
"Congress must not only investigate Pioneer's alleged role in conspiring with OPEC, but whether there existed a broader conspiracy by U.S. oil companies to collude with OPEC nations," he argued. "Big Oil must be held accountable for any conspiracy by or among American oil companies and OPEC members."
The reporting was notably published on the same day as the U.S. Senate Budget Committee's hearing about a nearly three-year investigation into fossil fuel companies and trade groups' decadeslong "campaign of deception and distraction," which has evolved from denying the planet-heating impact of their products to pretending to be part of the solution to the climate emergency.
"The joint report and documents we discovered show how, time and again, the biggest oil and gas corporations say one thing for the purposes of public consumption but do something completely different to protect their profits," Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, testified during the hearing. "Company officials will admit the terrifying reality of their business model behind closed doors but say something entirely different, false, and soothing to the public."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular