Former Attorney General Bill Barr defended an indictment against former President Donald Trump on Sunday, saying it does not violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, despite claims by conservative legal analysts.
Barr admitted the lawsuit against Trump was “difficult” Admitted For CBS’ Major Garrett, it doesn’t violate the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
“This involved the situation that each state had already made a formal and authoritative decision as to who won in that state, and had sent votes to Congress to certify. , at that time the president conspired and entered into a plan, a plan involving a lot of deception, the purpose of which was to erase those votes and invalidate the legitimate votes,” Barr said. .
“From the prosecutor’s point of view, is this a case you would bring?” @majorcbs We asked former Attorney General Bill Barr about the January 6 indictment of President Trump.
“I think this is a legitimate case…but I think there are other considerations, and I’m going to take those into consideration.” pic.twitter.com/Gh2hz8L0M3
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) August 6, 2023
Barr said that if the indictment was strictly about Trump’s claim that he actually won the 2020 presidential election, the lawsuit would be sanctioned by the U.S. Constitutional Amendment because Trump’s claims are subjective. He acknowledged that it would challenge Article 1. Rather, Mr. Barr argued that the indictment went beyond Trump’s allegations, contained false certificates signed, and used that as an excuse to reject Biden’s certificates and force Mike Pence to adopt Biden’s certificates. He said it focused on Trump’s actions, including his attempts to pressure the vice president. Mr Trump. (Related article: ‘Turn it into a haiku’: Jonathan Turley says much of Trump’s Jan. 6 indictment was ‘protected speech’)
“The thing to remember is that a conspiracy charge is agreed and completed when the first step is taken,” Barr argued.
Barr told Garrett that he believed the lawsuit against Trump was legitimate from a prosecutor’s perspective, but that there were other considerations in filing a lawsuit as attorney general.
“[T]He was handed the Rubicon here when — when appointed by Attorney General Garland [Jack] Smith, because any decision to make, such as not to sue, must really be made by the Attorney General. And he chose the public prosecutor. And I think at that point the decision was made to file a lawsuit if there was one. That’s when the Rubicon was handed over,” Barr concluded.