[ad_1]
Starting on election night 2020 and during his last days in power, Donald Trump unraveled and dragged America with him, to the point that his supporters sacked the U.S. Capitol two weeks before the end of his term. Axios takes you into the collapse of a president with a special series.
Episode 4: Trump burns down what is arguably his cabinet’s most important relationship.
Attorney General Bill Barr stood behind a chair in the private dining room next to the Oval Office, above Donald Trump. The President sat at the head of the table. It was December 1, almost a month after the election, and Barr had some wise tips for getting rid of his chest. The president’s theories of a stolen election, Barr told Trump, were “bullshit.”
White House attorney Pat Cipollone and a few other assistants in the room were shocked that Barr came out and said so – although they knew to be true. For good measure, the attorney general issued a warning that the new legal team Trump was betting his future on was “clownish.”
Trump had angrily dragged Barr into an explanation after seeing a story of PA breaking up all over Twitter, with the headline: “Challenging Trump, Barr Says There Is No Widespread Voter Fraud.” But Barr didn’t back down. Three weeks later he would be gone.
The relationship between the president and his attorney general was arguably the most important in Trump’s cabinet. And in the six months leading up to this meeting, the relationship between the two men had quietly disintegrated. No one was more loyal than Bill Barr. But for Trump, it was never enough.
The president had become too manic for even his most staunch allies, listening more and more to conspiracy theorists who echoed his own views and offered an illusion, an alternate reality.
In late summer 2020, Trump and Barr were regularly arguing over how to handle the rising Black Lives Matter protests sparked by the death of George Floyd while in custody. As the national movement grew, some demonstrations gave way to violence and looting. Trump wanted the US government to crack down on the unrest harshly.
The president wanted to invoke the insurgency law and send the military to American cities. He wanted troops in the streets. Some staunch outside allies, including Judicial Watch chairman Tom Fitton, were pushing him. The thankless job of pushing back was on Barr.
Sometimes Barr was the heat shield between President and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, both strongly opposed to Trump’s fantasies of US troops descending on Portland.
The president regularly summoned a group of national security leaders to the Oval Office, and a meeting in mid-August was particularly volatile.
From his seat behind the Resolute desk, a restless Trump told Barr to go do Something, and to do it right now – make an announcement, send troops, something. Come in and solve it, ordered the president. He wanted a devastating and provocative show of force.
Barr disagreed. He believed that the heat of the protests was gradually diminishing. He explained the law enforcement strategy and his view that military intervention would backfire. Federal investigators were already looking for the leaders of the protests.
Also, Barr asked, what was the end of the game to add the military to the mix? Federal forces could find themselves stranded indefinitely in a city like Portland.
Trump was getting more and more frustrated, but Barr pushed harder, standing in front of everyone in the room. He was ready, willing and able to be strong, he said. But, he added, we also need to be thoughtful.
What would these soldiers do, Barr pointed out. Stand up and get yelled at? Trump didn’t care. We look weak and it hurts us, he declaimed. Then he slammed his hand on the Resolute desk.
“No one is backing me,” shouted Trump. “Nobody gives me fucking support.
Trump got up and left the Oval Office to his private dining room, leaving Barr and the others behind. Barr glanced at a red-faced White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and joked, “It went well.
Constantly fighting over how aggressive they should be was a serious irritant in the relationship. Trump wanted shocking and awe-inspiring TV shows, especially in Portland and Seattle.
Barr was not a pacifist, but he thought Trump’s ideas were more aggressive than necessary. They fought all summer, and Barr later compared the experience privately to “Groundhog Day.” It was always Groundhog Day trying to explain things to Trump.
Trump ricocheted between the advice of seasoned advisers like Barr and Cipollone and the growing coterie of outside instigators like Fitton who were steadily gaining weight.
Publicly, Barr praised Trump. In private, his head ached. In September, Barr was doing all he could to avoid the president. There was little direct contact between the two men and Barr had stopped visiting Trump in the White House.
He was fed up with Trump making public statements and others doing so to pressure U.S. Attorney John Durham to pursue more prosecutions or publish a report on the Russia probe ahead of the election.
In mid-October, as Rudy Giuliani attempted to publicize the alleged contents of Hunter Biden’s hard drive, Trump allies began pressuring Barr to appoint a special advocate to investigate his son’s son. opponent. Unbeknownst to Trump, the Justice Department was already investigating Hunter Biden. But Barr, in accordance with departmental policy, had kept the investigation a secret.
Barr maneuvered so as to deal primarily with Meadows and Cipollone. Those around the two men could see that Barr was annoyed and frustrated by the President’s constant bites.
Avoiding Trump just got easier as the countryside heated up. The President spent more time on the track and less time cooking in the Oval Office.
But Barr’s respite came to an end after polling day, as Trump joined with an array of conspiracy theorists to amplify absurd theories of election interference, claiming Biden and the Chinese Communist Party, among others. , had robbed him of the election.
On November 29, Trump told Fox News that Barr’s Justice Department was “missing.” Barr was furious. In fact, the attorney general had abandoned cabinet precedents to expedite federal investigations into allegations of electoral fraud. The Justice Department was not absent in action – there was simply no evidence of major fraud.
Barr gave an interview to PA reporter Michael Balsamo, who made it clear. This would take things to a critical point.
As he drove to the White House for meetings on December 1, Barr knew that Balsamo’s story could come online while he was there. He soon found himself in the president’s private dining room, along with Meadows, Cipollone, Trump and others. They sat at a long table under a glittering chandelier, amid Trump’s paraphernalia framed by floor-to-ceiling windows.
Trump was positioned in his usual seat at the head of the table, facing a huge flat screen TV with low sound. On screen, the conspiratorial One America News network played a Michigan Senate hearing on voter fraud.
Trump had seen the Balsamo story and he was furious. “Why would you say such a thing? You must hate Trump. There is no other reason for it. You must hate Trump,” the president accused, speaking of himself in the third person.
“These things don’t move,” Barr told the president, standing next to his chief of staff Will Levi. “The stuff that these people fill your ear with just isn’t true.” Barr explained that if Trump wanted to challenge the election results, the president’s internal campaign lawyers would have to.
The Justice Department, he continued, had looked into the main fraud allegations that Trump’s lawyers had made. “It’s just bullshit,” Barr told the president. Cipollone backed Barr by saying the DOJ is investigating the allegations.
Trump pointed at the television and asked if Barr had watched the hearing. Barr said no. “Maybe you should,” the president said. Barr reiterated that the Justice Department was not ignoring the allegations, but that Trump’s outside lawyers were doing a terrible job.
“I am a fairly informed legal observer and I cannot understand what the theory is here,” he added. “It’s just scattered. It’s all over the hill and it’s gone.”
“Maybe,” Trump said. “May be.”
A week later, The New York Times reported that Barr was considering resigning. Barr’s relationship with the president was becoming untenable, and the president listened to Sidney Powell and Giuliani instead of his attorney and White House attorney general.
Barr decided to quit before their private skirmishes spread more widely to the public. Some have speculated that he resigned due to the president’s increasingly questionable pardons. But that had nothing to do with it. Barr had made it clear to Cipollone that he did not want to be consulted on these post-election pardons. He didn’t need to hear about it until he received official notices. The only forgiveness he made an effort to stop preventively was for Edward Snowden.
On December 14, Trump and Barr met one-on-one in the Oval Office. Others were there with Trump when the attorney general arrived. Barr requested that the room be released so they could speak in private. He explained the reasons he pulled out early, explaining that while they had had a good relationship, they no longer agreed on key issues.
They didn’t need a public explosion. It was time to leave when the departure could still be amicable. Barr later told associates the meeting was calm and rational and that he had written his resignation letter – which effusively congratulated the president on his political achievements – the day before.
Trump appreciated Barr’s loyalty and praise. But praise and loyalty were not enough.
On voter fraud, Barr had told Trump what he didn’t want to hear and the president had stopped listening. It was time for Barr to leave.
🎧 Listen to Jonathan Swan on Axios’ new investigative podcast series, titled “How It Happened: Trump’s Last Stand.”
Read the rest of the “Off the rails” episodes here.
About this series: Our reporting is based on multiple interviews with current and former White House, campaign, government and congressional officials, as well as eyewitnesses and people close to the president. Anonymity has been granted to sources to share sensitive observations or details they would not be officially authorized to disclose. President Trump and other officials to whom quotes and actions have been attributed by others were given an opportunity to confirm, deny or respond to the report material ahead of publication.
“Off the rails” is reported by White House reporter Jonathan Swan, with reporting and research assistance from Zach Basu. It was edited by Margaret Talev and Mike Allen. Illustrations by Sarah Grillo, Aïda Amer and Eniola Odetunde.
[ad_2]
Source link