Barr Defends Trump at Pre-Report Press Conference, Sans Robert Mueller
Attorney General William Barr, responding to a question from a reporter, disputed the notion he was being overly friendly to the president in his remarks.
April 18, 2019 at 10:23 AM
5 minute read
U.S. Attorney General William Barr, previewing the release of special counsel Robert Mueller III's findings, defended President Donald Trump on Thursday as he explained the Justice Department's determination that Trump did not obstruct justice while in office.
Speaking at a press conference before the planned public release of Mueller's report, Barr said it was “important to bear in mind the context” and acknowledge that Trump “faced an unprecedented situation” when he took office with the Justice Department investigating whether his campaign coordinated with the Kremlin in the 2016 U.S. election.
“As he entered into office, and sought to perform his responsibilities as president, federal agents and prosecutors were scrutinizing his conduct before and after taking office, and the conduct of some of his associates. At the same time, there was relentless speculation in the news media about the president's personal culpability. Yet, as he said from the beginning, there was in fact no collusion,” Barr said in a statement. “And as the special counsel's report acknowledges, there is substantial evidence to show that the president was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.”
Still, Barr said, the White House “fully cooperated” with Mueller's investigation and provided full access to campaign and White House documents while directing aides to testify freely. The White House, Barr said, made no privilege claims in the course of the investigation, nor did it invoke privilege to black out portions of the Mueller report being released today.
Barr, responding to a question from a reporter, disputed the notion that he was being overly friendly to the president in his remarks.
“The statements about his sincere beliefs are recognized in the report, that there was substantial evidence for that,” Barr told the reporter. “So I'm not sure what your basis is for saying that I'm being generous to the president.”
Mueller's findings are expected to be shared with congressional lawmakers at 11 a.m. Barr said the nearly 400-page report would be posted on the Justice Department's website.
The special counsel's report, he said, addresses 10 episodes of possible obstruction by Trump and “discusses potential legal theories for connecting these actions to elements of an obstruction offense.”
Mueller was not present at Thursday's press conference. Barr, asked why Mueller was not present, said Mueller was only required to file a report to the attorney general. He did not respond to whether Mueller was asked to appear, or whether he declined to appear at the news conference.
After Thursday's press conference, Democratic lawmakers renewed their demands to hear directly from Mueller.
“It is clear Congress and the American people must hear from Special Counsel Robert Mueller in person to better understand his findings,” said House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-New York. Nadler said his committee would request Mueller to appear “as soon as possible.”
Barr had only acknowledged on Thursday disagreement between Justice Department leadership and the special counsel's office in making a determination on the obstruction question.
“Although the deputy attorney general and I disagreed with some of the special counsel's legal theories and felt that some of the episodes examined did not amount to obstruction as a matter of law, we did not rely solely on that in making our decision,” Barr said. “Instead, we accepted the special counsel's legal framework for purposes of our analysis and evaluated the evidence as presented by the special counsel in reaching our conclusion.”
Barr was asked whether Mueller, in declining to articulate a clear position on whether Trump obstructed justice, was influenced by a DOJ legal opinion holding that the president cannot be charged while in office. Mueller, he said, “made it very clear several times” that the Office of Legal Counsel's position did not drive the decision on the obstruction question.
“He was not saying but for the OLC opinion he would have found a crime,” Barr said.
Barr's full statement is posted below:
Read more:
Jessie Liu Says DC Team Is Ready to Handle Mueller Cases
Where Will Robert Mueller and His Fellow Wilmer Alums Go Next?
'Stormy Weather Lies Ahead': What Lawyers Say About Barr's Obstruction Call
DC Judge Spurns Push to Force Quick Release of Mueller Report
Greg Craig, Defiant After Lobbying Charges, Will Plead Not Guilty
Judges Have No Inherent Power to Disclose Grand Jury Records: DC Circuit
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRead the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute read3rd Circuit Nominee Mangi Sees 'No Pathway to Confirmation,' Derides 'Organized Smear Campaign'
4 minute readJudge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
Ex-Deputy AG Trusts U.S. Legal System To Pull Country Through Times of Duress
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Lawyer to Be Deposed: 2 Courts Abused Discretion in Google Suits
- 2Sunbelt Law Firms Experienced More Moderate Growth Last Year, Alongside Some Job Cuts and Less Merger Interest
- 3Walt Disney, IBM Denied High Court Review of Old NY Franchise Tax Law
- 4The Right Amount?: Federal Judge Weighs $1.8M Attorney Fee Request with Strip Club's $15K Award
- 5Is 1st Circuit the New Center for Trump Policy Challenges?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250