President Donald Trump is in trouble after forwarding the nomination of William Barr to the Senate of Confirmation. He is Deep State and will end up stabbing Trump in the back politically as the ceaseless attacks on the 45th president continue.
The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for Attorney General nominee William Barr have centered on his views concerning Special Counsel Robert Mueller. However, there has been little discussion about his extensive legal efforts to secure blanket immunity for federal agents involved in the fatal shootings of American citizens.
During the hearings, Barr was to disclose his past work, including pro bono activities aimed at serving the disadvantaged. The most significant beneficiaries of his legal assistance were not the typical underprivileged individuals but an FBI agent implicated in the 1992 Ruby Ridge incident.
Barr spent two weeks organizing support from former Attorneys General and others to defend an FBI sniper charged with criminal offenses in connection with the event. In his response to the Judiciary Committee, Barr detailed his involvement in framing legal arguments for the agent’s defense presented in district court and on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.
His advocacy for the FBI agent, already represented by a federally-funded law firm, helped mitigate one of the most significant scandals during his first tenure as Attorney General from 1991 to 1993. Both the U.S. Marshals Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, agencies overseen by Barr, were found to have engaged in misconduct during the Ruby Ridge standoff—a controversy that, according to a 1995 Senate Judiciary Committee report, “helped to weaken the bond of trust that must exist between ordinary Americans and our law enforcement agencies.”
The Ruby Ridge incident involved Randy Weaver, an outspoken white separatist living in northern Idaho. After being entrapped by an undercover federal agent, Weaver’s land was trespassed by U.S. marshals, leading to the fatal shooting of his 14-year-old son, Sammy.
The following day, FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi killed Vicki Weaver as she stood in the doorway of their cabin, holding their baby. Despite being unarmed and posing no immediate threat, Vicki was shot without warning, a violation of the legal standard for the use of deadly force.
Randy Weaver was acquitted on nearly all charges following the incident by an Idaho jury. A federal judge later condemned the Justice Department and FBI for concealing evidence and showing “a callous disregard for the rights of the defendants and the interests of justice.”
An internal Justice Department investigation produced a 542-page report documenting federal misconduct and recommended criminal charges against those involved.
Despite Barr’s claims that he was not directly involved in the Ruby Ridge operation, reports later revealed that top officials within the Bush Justice Department, including Barr, were in communication about the situation in the hours leading up to Vicki Weaver’s death. In 1995, then-FBI Director Louis Freeh announced mild disciplinary actions for those involved, including Larry Potts, the official who had approved the “shoot without provocation” orders. Barr, however, publicly defended Potts, praising his judgment and abilities.
The Justice Department eventually paid $3 million to settle a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the Weaver family.
But when Boundary County, Idaho, sought to hold Horiuchi criminally accountable, Barr intervened once again, leading efforts to secure immunity for the sniper. Barr argued that holding federal agents liable for such actions would cripple the Justice Department and its ability to respond to crises like hostage situations and terrorist threats.
Although the Justice Department initially succeeded in having the charges dismissed, a court decision reversed the dismissal. The court condemned the FBI’s actions, warning against the establishment of a “007 standard for the use of deadly force” by federal agents.
As the Senate continues to deliberate on Barr’s nomination, crucial questions remain unanswered: Does Barr still support the “wartime rules” that absolve federal agents of accountability in the deaths of American citizens? Does he believe that “illegal government killings” are inherently contradictory? And most importantly, how does Barr reconcile these actions with a “government under the law”?
Is no one listening?
The Old Blog in the Desert 
Leave a comment