>> So we're gonna turn now to Bill Barr, who
seems to not be sure whether crimes are in
fact illegal.
>> So let them send it in and let them go
vote and assist them is as good as they say
it is then obviously they won't be able to
vote.
That sounds like he's actually encouraging
people to commit a crime to vote twice. I'm
sorry, you'll have to read that again.
>> It sounds like he's encouraging people
to break the law and try to vote twice.
>> But I don't know exactly what he was saying.
But it seems to me what he's saying is he's
trying to make the point that the ability
to monitor this system is not good.
And if it was so good, if you tried to vote
a second time, you would be caught. If you
voted in person
>> That would be illegal if they did that
if somebody mailed in a ballot and then actually
showed up to vote in person. That would be
illegal.
>> I don't know what the law on that particular
states
>> We can't vote twice.
>> Well, I don't know what the law on the
petition Particular state says and when that
vote becomes final.
>> Any state that says you can vote twice?
>> Well, there's some, maybe that you can
change your vote up to a particular term.
I don't know what the law is. I'm not gonna
offer he was saying Tesla. You know what he's
saying, Why are you asking me what he said.
>> He doesn't believe in the mail and voting,
and you're the Attorney General of the United
States.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah, well if you know that he's telling
people to break the law why asking me whether
it breaks the law?
What am I gonna know about the law of Ag after
all? Yeah. And and I kept in that that reset
at the beginning with him like, you're gonna
have to read that again because this is a
tactic that he's using when, throughout the
interview when he's just so bored.
It's to imply That these aren't serious concerns
that the President actively encouraging his
supporters to break the law isn't something
serious? It's not actually a concern. Like
I don't Can you read it again? And that's
gonna pop up again when we talk about police
brutality. But with that said, Adrian, what
did you think about His lack of interest or
knowledge in the law.
>> So you were absolutely spot on in terms
of his body language and how Barr responded
and hey, you're gonna have to read that back
for me as though it wasn't worth paying attention
the first time so I'm really going to need
you to kind of make Make this make sense to
me.
And it's it's wild the gaslighting that we
see coming from this administration just so
that they can essentially not admit to committing
something that is blatantly a crime. And and
also we see these people saying that's not
what he said so our ears aren't good enough
And it goes on and wild and it's unapologetic.
And the worst part is there will be no consequences.
>> Yeah, well, I mean, we're assured of that
even more so than I generally am because that
is the AG, who, hypothetically in some alternative
US government that was actually a functional
democracy. Would be providing a check on the
president when necessary, instead of being
chosen specifically for and because he made
clear he would, in a letter defend the president
from any legitimate investigation into his
many and continuing crimes.
So here's the thing and on that body language
note, I guess, is he telling I don't know
a lot. How would I how would I ever google
it? I mean, it's only every single article
already made clear. That was against the law.
I can't care about it. He can get fired up,
though.
He's bored about that sort of thing can get
fired up, for instance, when he's fear mongering
against mail and voting.
>> Since that time there been in the newspapers
in networks, academic studies saying it is
open to fraud and coercion. The only time
the narrative changed is after this administration
came in.
>> So he's got this statistics that he can
cite and it's a big issue, even the Brennan
Center and every other analyst says that there
is sporadic voter fraud occasionally. It's
like 1 in 300 million. And generally, I mean,
look, if we were going to focus our attention
on them very frequently, it's republicans
that are doing it.
Not to say that that's not voter fraud, but
seems like maybe it being some sort of plot
by the left. There's not quite the evidence
that he's implying that there is there.
>> Exactly and it's really, really disappointing
just because I don't know necessarily that
the vast majority the American people has
the wherewithal to decipher what's going on.
Cuz everybody's dealing with a lot of things
in our own personal lives trying to stay healthy
from COVID, trying to keep a roof over their
heads. So even inviting people like Bill Barr
onto CNN to have the opportunity to gaslight,
the American people is problematic. And I
wish these outlets would stop doing this,
because as great as it is to have that got
you moment o n television, the fact is that
not everybody can decipher that it's a got
you moment.
And all they hear is essentially what Bill
Barr is saying and what he's communicating
with his body language.
>> Yeah and look, I'm not gonna go on too
long about this. But I don't generally have
a lot of hardcore conservatives on the show
and I know that some people who do jobs extensively
like my own do that, specifically to ask them
tough questions to fact check them live and
that sort of thing.
And I get the intent behind that, but there
reaches a point of willful dishonesty where
I just don't think that any light there's
no truth to be revealed in this like best
case scenario. If you are supernaturally on
your game, you can catch all the lies. And
then generally, if you stop to correct every
lie, the interview is gonna be nonsensical.
It's not gonna be an actual conversation,
but then what is the point of doing that?
Bring someone on who's gonna actively lie
to you to advance a horrific fascist policies
and then maybe you can defend against it.
I don't know, I don't necessarily see the
point. I know some people do a great job of
it, but he saw and others.
I don't generally see the point 
of that.
