Important point to remember here, as Natasha Bertrand points out. Back in November 2017, Barr told The New York Times that he thought the “predicate for investigating the uranium deal, as well as the [Clinton] foundation, is far stronger than any basis for investigating so-called ‘collusion.'”
Remember that later Barr wrote a detailed memorandum, addressed to the Justice Department, further arguing that he thought the obstruction part of the investigation was essentially bogus as well.
So Barr is on the record saying both portions of the probe lacked merit even in concept.
