WATCH: Jonathan Turley drops a TRUTH BOMB on the House Judiciary Committee over Barr contempt vote…

Jonathan Turley testified before Nadler’s House Judiciary Committee today and warned them not to pursue this ridiculous action of trying to hold Barr in contempt via the courts, because he said they would be heading into a “world of hurt if they do”:

Here’s more:

FOX NEWS – House Democrats are “heading into a world of hurt” if they escalate their fight with Attorney General Bill Barr over access to the full Robert Mueller report, according to constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley.

Turley, a George Washington University law professor, issued the warning during testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. As lawmakers grilled him and other legal scholars on issues having to do with executive privilege and congressional oversight, Turley stated that while he generally tends to give weight to congressional power, they are sure to lose if they go to court for the purpose of holding Barr in contempt for not releasing the full Mueller report.

You are heading into a world of hurt if you go to the D.C. Circuit,” Turley warned.

The D.C. Circuit recently ruled on this very issue, stating in the case of McKeever v. Barr that, outside of the specific exceptions outlined in Rule 6(e), courts do not have authority to order the disclosure of grand jury information. Since any legal action taken against Barr for contempt would likely end up before the D.C. Circuit, Turley made it clear that going down that road is a bad idea for Congress.

“There’s no question that he cannot release this Rule 6(e) information,” Turley said, calling Barr’s position “unassailable.”

Turley made no bones about it in suggesting that the House Judiciary Committee was asking AG Barr to commit a CRIME.

He also reminded the committee that during Barr’s nomination hearings when he supported Barr’s nomination before the committee, he told them then that Barr could not commit to releasing the full report. In fact he said that if Barr had committed to it, he would have been against his nomination because it would have been unethical for him to make such a commitment.

Watch the video for more…

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.