On the recordFebruary 12, 2019
I guess I am here to follow my friend Senator Graham and bring the opposing view regarding Mr. Barr. I offer my appreciation to the chairman, as he leaves, for the way that he conducted the hearing. I know that he offered his appreciation to the ranking member, but the hearing, I thought, was well handled. Everybody had a chance to ask their questions and say their things, and I think the comments that the chairman made afterward about trying to bring the committee together were well received on my side. There are a number of problems, however, that I have with this nominee. Many of them relate to continuing problems in the Department. One, in particular, I warned Mr. Barr about in a letter that I sent to him beforehand in order to make sure that he wasn't surprised by the question and so that I could get a proper, thoughtful answer. The problem is that the Department, for purposes of recusal analysis and for purposes of conflict analysis, takes a look at what people's different financial entanglements are and who they worked for before. It is a fairly standard process, but there is a big gaping hole in it. The big gaping hole in the process is that when it was set up originally at the beginning of the Obama administration, the Supreme Court hadn't yet decided Citizens United, so the flood of unlimited special interest money that poured into our politics, which quickly became unlimited, special interest dark money, was not then a problem.…





