Is it OK with Chief Justice John Roberts if we call US District Judge Reggie Walton a hero, or does that violate his sense of decorum? We are just curious.

Because Reggie Walton, a George W. Bush appointee, is a fucking hero, for calling Attorney General Bill Barr out for what he is, which is a low-rent truck stop Cracker Barrel dildo dispensary approximation of Roy Cohn, doing cover-ups for Donald Trump. (We should be clear that Walton did not use the words "dildo dispensary." He's not that cool.)

BuzzFeed and a transparency group called the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) have been suing for the unredacted Mueller Report, which, as you'll all remember, Barr hid inside his bottom for weeks on end while lying to the public about what it said, which gave rise to such common lies as "NO COLLUSION!" and "TOTALLY EXONERATED!" In an order in the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) case for the unredacted report, in response to BuzzFeed and EPIC's request for an in camera review of the unredacted report, Walton wrote nice English words about what he thinks about Barr's handling of the report.

Wait, did we say nice English words?

The Court has grave concerns about the objectivity of the process that preceded the public release of the redacted version of the Mueller Report and its impacts on the Department's subsequent justifications that its redactions of the Mueller Report are authorized by the FOIA. For the reasons set forth below, the Court shares the plaintiffs' concern that the Department "dubious[ly] handl[ed] [ ] the public release of the Mueller Report."

That's right, Judge Walton called Bill Barr a common DUBIOUS HANDLER. And he said that because Barr is a such a DUBIOUS HANDLER, he must absolutely do that in camera review of the unredacted Mueller Report, ergo ipso facto FUCKINGGIVEIT.

Walton agrees with the letter Mueller sent on March 27, 2019, objecting to how Barr spent the weekend lying about the contents of the still-unreleased Mueller Report. Walton concurs that "Attorney General Barr distorted the findings in the Mueller Report." He specifically takes issue with how Barr jumped to say "NO COLLUSION!" when Mueller clearly "identified multiple contacts [...] between Trump [c]ampaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government." Walton is moreover pissed that Barr didn't tell America about how Mueller wrote that he wasn't allowed to reach a traditional prosecutorial judgment on Trump's obstruction of justice, because of how you supposedly can't indict a sitting president, but that if Mueller found Trump definitely did not commit crimes, Mueller "would so state," therefore his report "DOES NOT EXONERATE."

(The judge's conclusions may be of interest in a current Trump campaign lawsuit or several.)

Walton doesn't like how Barr announced his own conclusions about the contents of the Mueller Report on Sunday, March 24, 2019, and then waited fuckin' weeks until April 18 to actually release the damn (redacted) thing. This, Walton writes, "causes the Court to question whether Attorney General Barr's intent was to create a one-sided narrative about the Mueller Report—a narrative that is clearly in some respects substantively at odds with the redacted version of the Mueller Report." YA THINK? Walton thinks!

AND Walton doesn't like Bill Barr's lie press conference from the day he released the (redacted) report, where Barr said NO COLLUSION! and that we should all feel sorry for Donald Trump, who was being witch hunted, therefore also too NO OBSTRUCTION! Later that afternoon, we all got to read all 400-someodd pages for ourselves, to see how much Barr was lying. Except for how shitloads of it was redacted, including all the grand jury information.


[T]he Court cannot reconcile certain public representations made by Attorney General Barr with the findings in the Mueller Report. The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr's statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary.

These circumstances generally, and Attorney General Barr's lack of candor specifically, call into question Attorney General Barr's credibility ...


In conclusion, Walton just cannot be sure the Mueller Report's redactions were not "self-serving," therefore he will now read it for himself GIVE IT.

Hey wait, did Bill Barr LIE?

Bill Barr lied.

He said there was just no collusion at all, and that because Mueller didn't decide whether Trump committed obstruction of justice, it was his job (as Trump's dildo dispensary Roy Cohn) to decide Trump didn't. Mueller intended that to be a job for Congress. Mueller moreover found all kinda weirdass contacts between Trump people and Russians, but was not able to establish full criminal conspiracy, noting that if Trump people like Paul Manafort hadn't deleted and concealed their communications and lied to the special counsel's office, he very well might have.

After Barr's initial statement, Robert Mueller was pissed, stating in the aforementioned letter that Barr's statement "did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions" of the report, and that because of Barr, "[t]here [was] now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of [his] investigation. "

Barr told Congress that letter was "snitty," and said it probably just came from whiny disgruntled Mueller staff.

When Mueller finally addressed the American people in a short press conference in May, he specifically said that if his team "had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

Mueller also made it incredibly FUCKING clear in that presser whose job it was to decide if Trump had committed a crime, and it was not Bill Barr. "[T]he DOJ opinion on indicting a sitting president] says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing," said Mueller, being VERY SUBTLE about how that was Congress's job.

And then, when Mueller testified for Congress, he shocked a Republican idiot congressman when he clarified that Trump absolutely could be indicted for his conduct after he leaves office.

In other words, Bill Barr is full of shit, and everybody knows it, including US District Court Judge Reggie Walton, who was appointed by George W. Bush, and who is a fucking hero.

We hope Walton has a very nice Reading Time, as he decides how many of Bill Barr's redactions were absolute Trump-serving bullshit.

Because we are very nice, Wonkette hereby grants Walton permission to use the phrase "ALL OF THEM KATIE" when he writes to tell us what he found.

Oh yeah, and "dildo dispensary Roy Cohn." He can totally write that about Bill Barr if he wants.


[Walton order]

Follow Evan Hurst on Twitter RIGHT HERE, DO IT RIGHT HERE!

Wonkette is fully funded by readers like YOU. If you love Wonkette, SUPPORT WONKETTE FINANCIALLY.

How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)

Evan Hurst

Evan Hurst is the managing editor of Wonkette, which means he is the boss of you, unless you are Rebecca, who is boss of him. His dog Lula is judging you right now.

Follow him on Twitter RIGHT HERE.


How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)


©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc