I was impressed by the questions of the members of the panel, however, the questions of Senator Booker and Senator Harris are notable. The questions by Senator Harris are extremely telling from a legal point of view, which of course, is the focus of the Special Council.
I have to agree with her in that as AG Barr went through the report of 488 pages he didn't ever once look at the supporting documents that accompanied the report. While the report is voluminous, it also has considerable findings that have resulted in trials, convictions and guilty pleas. Those findings are a result of evidence found by the Special Council.
To my way of thinking and I can't speak for Senator Harris, how can anyone proclaim the findings by the Special Council as non-chargable if there was no examination of the evidence that lead to the finding of clearly ten times obstruction of justice by President Trump? I would not expect Congress to make any allegations about law breaking by the president without first examining the evidence that lead the Special Council to their conclusions. I would not expect any judge to simply accept the Special Council report as primary evidence. What do you tell a jury? Does a prosecutor tell a jury that they trust the Special Council Report and therefore the defendant is guilty. No one would tell a jury that. Yet, Bill Barr proclaimed himself judge and jury and made decisions without examining the evidence of the conclusions stating ten counts of obstruction of justice.
I believe Senator Harris' focus is correct. These are my words and not hers, but, Barr's decision making is very sloppy and not supported by evidence.
''
