William Barr has testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, doubling down on his interpretation of the Mueller report and claiming that he never misled Congress about the special counsel's frustrations.
The testimony came just after the public release of a March letter from special counsel Robert Mueller to the attorney general, in which the investigator expressed frustration with how Mr Barr had presented the findings of the Trump-Russia report ot the public.
Mr Barr had released a four page summary of the report to Congress, which said that the nearly two year investigation found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia in 2016, and that there was not sufficient evidence to charge Donald Trump with obstruction.
But, Mr Barr was met with criticism from Senate Democrats who expressed amazement that Mr Barr had told a Congressional committee in April that he had not been aware of any frustration from the special counsel or his team related to his presentation of the summary. The recently released letter, Democrats said, showed that Mr Barr had been directly confronted on the issue, even though Mr Barr claimed that he called Mr Mueller personally after receiving the letter.
The hours-long testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee ended with committee chairman Lindsey Graham — a prominent Trump supporter — telling reporters that the issue is "over", and that he had no intention of asking Mr Mueller to testify before his committee. Democrats meanwhile, pushed for that testimony in the Senate, while the House announced Mr Mueller would testify there.
Since the report's release, Mr Trump and the right-wing media have hailed the findings of the report as a “total exoneration”, despite Mr Mueller declaring the opposite and the report painting a highly unflattering portrait of Mr Trump and his inner circle.
Mr Barr, during his testimony, stood by his determination not to charge Mr Trump for obstruction — arguing that, since there was no collusion or conspiracy, that the president could not have obstructed justice by firing former FBI director James Comey and then repeatedly attempt to get others to fire Mr Mueller.
When pushed on whether it was appropriate for Mr Trump to lie to the American people about contacts between his campaign and Russians, about his intentions with regards to Mr Mueller's employment as special counsel, and other questionable instances surfaced by the report, Mr Barr said that his job is not to determine who is behaving well or not.
"I'm not in the business of determining wether lies were told to the American people," Mr Barr said of the president. "I'm in the business of determining whether crimes were committed."
Mr Barr will return to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday.
Please allow a moment for our liveblog to load
A major focus of the hearing is likely to be last night's revelation that Mueller expressed frustration to Barr, in a letter to the Justice Department and in a phone call, with how the conclusions of his investigation were being portrayed.
Barr is also invited to appear on Thursday before the Democratic-led House Judiciary panel, but the Justice Department said he would not testify if the committee insisted on having its lawyers question the attorney general.
His appearance Wednesday will be before a Republican-led committee chaired by a close ally of the president, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who is expected to focus on concerns that the early days of the FBI's Russia investigation were tainted by law enforcement bias against Trump.
Democrats are likely to press Barr on statements and actions in the last six weeks that have unnerved them. The tense relations are notable given how Barr breezed through his confirmation process, picking up support from a few Democrats and offering reassuring words about the Justice Department's independence and the importance of protecting the special counsel's investigation.
Barr is likely to defend himself by noting how he released the report on his own even though he didn't have to under the special counsel regulations and that doing so fulfilled a pledge he made at to be as transparent as the law allowed. Barr may say that he wanted to move quickly to give the public a summary of Mueller's main findings as the Justice Department spent weeks redacting more sensitive information from the report.
After the letter's release, Barr raised eyebrows anew when he told a congressional committee that he believed the Trump campaign had been spied on, a common talking point of the president and his supporters.
Then came Barr's 18 April press conference to announce the release of the Mueller report later that morning. He repeated a half dozen times that Mueller's investigation had found no evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia, though the special counsel took pains to note in his report that "collusion" was not a legal term and also pointed out the multiple contacts between the campaign and Russia.
In remarks that resembled some of Trump's own claims, he praised the White House for giving Mueller's team "unfettered access" to documents and witnesses. He suggested the president had the right to be upset by the investigation, given his "sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks."
"And it's not up to anybody from the executive branch to tell the legislative branch how to conduct our business," Nadler said.
The committee will vote on allowing staff to question Barr at a separate meeting Wednesday, at the same time Barr takes questions from the Senate.
The top Republican on the House Judiciary panel, Georgia representative Doug Collins, sharply criticised the plan.
The Justice Department's stance appears consistent with the Trump administration's broader strategy of "undermining Congress as an institution," said Elliot Williams, who previously served as deputy assistant attorney general in the department's legislative affairs office in the Obama administration.
He said that if he were still advising an attorney general, he would resist the idea of staff questioning a Cabinet official. "It's a rational response to not want them questioning the attorney general," Williams said.
That said, Williams added, "It's an incredibly common practice in the House of Representatives and was a practice long before President trump or William Barr took their offices and will be a practice long after they're gone."





