U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr has sent the totality of the U.S. media into spasmodic fits of apoplexy today as he discusses the findings of the DOJ inspector general review of a highly corrupted FISA process.

The Attorney General talks about how the FBI weaponized their official duty in an effort to carry out what seems to be a political agenda. Mr. Barr goes into detail with his thoughts on the current criminal review assigned to U.S. Attorney John Durham; and the unfortunate issues with a group at the top of the organization who politicized the FBI as an investigative agency and used an alliance of media assets to achieve political goals.

.

Many people are writing and asking for my personal opinion of AG Bill Barr. I shall provide that below.

.

Thoughts: Leading up to the trial of George Zimmerman he had two attorneys: Mark O’Mara and Don West. Don West was the deliberate and angered attorney who was rightly furious over how a completely false case was assembled against his client. The entire CTH community agreed on the value of Don West.

(Left to Right) Mark O’Mara, Don West, Mark Geragos.

However, Don West wasn’t the lead attorney… there was another, Mark O’Mara.

Mr. O’Mara gave the intentional impression of being above it all, elevated above the politics, and affable to the groups who wanted to hang Zimmerman in the town square and also understandable toward the defenders of Zimmerman who recognized the rail-roading.

O’Mara became a Rosetta stone. Some Zimmerman supporters saw O’Mara as self-serving, duplicitous, cunning (not in a good way) and essentially deceiving his client by not trying to be assertive in defense. Others saw O’Mara as smart, prudent and staying above the fray to be more influential toward the benefit of his client amid circles of media opposition.

The strong differences of opinion over O’Mara were fought on the pages of CTH for over a year. Pro-O’Mara and Anti-O’Mara we both good groups of people; excellent and passionate people; but each saw Mark O’Mara in a different way.

Personally I did not see Mark O’Mara in a good light. I predicted his positioning was to gain a lucrative media gig at the conclusion of a fraudulent trial. [He took a CNN contract within three weeks of trial ending] But more important than that recognition of selfish sensibility was the evidence.

The evidence was overwhelming (at least to CTH in 2012) that Witness #8, Rachel Jeantel, was an imposter.

The anonymous Witness #8 was the only reason the State of Florida could get an arrest. Witness #8 was also manufactured by the corrupt Scheme Team of Trayvon’s family.

Completely made up.

Incredibly the corrupt State of FL prosecution team consisting of SAO Angela Corey and Bernie De La Rionda went along with a criminally corrupt prosecution using evidence they knew was manufactured.

If we knew the manufacturing of evidence to be true… demonstrably and provably true.. well, Don West and Mark O’Mara certainly knew it to be true.

Yet Mark O’Mara did nothing about it… EVER. O’Mara knew the state had manufactured evidence. O’Mara Explicitly knew his client was being railroaded by a criminal enterprise carried out by the State of Florida and Trayvon Martin Family. And Mark O’Mara never brought it up before, during, or even after the trial… Not once.

Attorney Mark O’Mara won the case because the case itself was a fraud. However, the “case” never should have gone to trial. In my passionately frustrated opinion O’Mara should have called out the fraud and defended his client by avoiding the ridiculous trial.

[NOTE: Seven years later, with Witness #8 admitting to the fraud, George Zimmerman is rightly suing all of those who participated.]

Why do I bring up this example?

Because in my opinion, having watched nine months of his professional effort, right now the metaphor is: Bill Barr is Mark O’Mara, the U.S. Constitution is George Zimmerman, and we’re about to go to trial again.

Peace.