AG William Barr Green-Lights Investigation of “substantial Allegations” of Voting Irregularities

Here we go:

Let’s hope this isn’t another Durham nothingburger. I feel like federal investigations are now more often federal cover-ups, so I’m not getting my hopes up here.

Ace of Spades explains why he’s bearish on the Barr investigation. It all hinges on the term “substantial”:

I fear this is misleading, and that Barr is tanking any possible investigation.

The Supreme Court ruled that the desegregation challenged in Brown vs. Board of Ed. must end “with all deliberate speed.” The lawyers challenging segration were initially thrilled — it sounded like the court was ordering desgregation at maximum speed. But then they looked up “deliberate” — which of course means “considered, careful, slow.” So what at first glance looked like a mandate to desegregate immediately actually meant “when caution and consideration permit.”

An order to investiage “substantial allegations” of voter fraud may sound bad-ass. But what is it really saying? Is it saying “investigate any allegation”?

No. It’s saying to only investigate the “substantial” allegations — which I take to mean the allegations which already, without any investigation, have substantial evidence to support them, and/or which are “substantial” in the sense that the allegation, if proven, would reverse the race. On its own.

So I see “substantial” as being a limitation on lawyers’ mandate to investigate. A double limitation — a Democrat DOJ lawyer (and almost all of the career attorneys are in fact Democrats) as far as both evidence already, pre-investigation, that exists, and as far as the allegations’ ability to overturn the election in and of itself, not considered in combination with other allegations.

So my fear is that Barr wrote a directive that will be used by Democrat DOJ lawyers to reject the need for any investigation into almost any — or maybe just any — allegation. They’ll say “Nope, can’t investigate this one, not a ‘substantial’ amount of evidence for it at the moment.”

Now, it’s up to investigators to find such evidence, but here it’s an out to not bother looking in the first place.

If I had ordered this — and if I wanted a real investigation — I might have said, “all plausible, nontrivial allegations of voter fraud.” I would limit the limitation — not expand the limitation.

I hope I’m wrong.

But I don’t think I am. I think this is quite deliberate, and the wording was selected to give the impression of a full investigation, while actually being crafted to insure almost no investigation at all.

I hope Ace is wrong. But I just have no faith whatsoever in the federal government. I think they’ve been planning on getting rid of Trump for the past 4 years, and now they are so close they can taste it. They’re going to power ahead. Barr will not come to our rescue.

Leave a Reply