What the Senate must ask William Barr
Highly partisan questions:
First, it is essential to establish whether Barr has made up his mind about the Mueller investigation. He should be asked directly whether the investigation is legal, constitutional and appropriate.
Sill question. If the investigation wasn't legal, constitutional, and appropriate it would not have been allowed to start.
Second, is Barr aware of any factual basis for investigating Clinton and will he abide by the prior determination of the DoJ that there was not sufficient evidence of wrongdoing?
Well, there seems to be quite a number of "facts" regarding the original "Hillary Server" investigation that tend to indicate a clear bias against a proper investigation which would had torpedoed her chances at what was expected to be a "shoe-in" victory.
Third, Barr should specifically lay out his understanding of the appropriate relationship between White House political aides and the Justice Department.
No need. The relationship is established in law and the Constitution. The Attorney General serves at the pleasure of the President, but the law provides the duties and obligations of the Justice Dept. (28 U.S. Code Part II - DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE).
Fourth, Trump has repeatedly insulted and smeared federal courts and judges. Barr should be asked whether he agrees with the president’s comments.
Silly question. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, Barr does not have to express his. Meanwhile, Trump is not the only person to voice concerns over partisan Judges, as even Senator Schumer's response clearly indicated he thought the Chief Justice was biased and a Republican. It is a simple truism...many judges maintain certain biases, although IMO they strive (in most cases) to control them.
Fifth, Barr was involved in controversial pardons in the George H.W. Bush administration. If Trump attempted to pardon his family members/associates to shield himself from legal harm, what would Barr do?
Silly question. The Attorney General has nothing to do with Presidential pardon powers. They are directly granted by the Constitution, and not subject to review by the Attorney General unless requested by the President.
Sixth, Barr should be asked flat out if he thinks the president can obstruct justice.
Silly question. "Obstruction" is a matter of viewpoint, many people seem to think the President has done this, other's do not. However, as a matter of course no one is "allowed' to obstruct justice.
Seventh, the Senate should inquire as to Barr’s views on prosecution of a sitting president.
No, the Justice Dept. has already issued their determination:
https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion...enability-indictment-and-criminal-prosecution
Eighth, senators should ask whether there is any basis for the conclusion espoused by the president and others that voter fraud is a widespread problem.
NO. The jury is STILL out on this issue, with possible evidence that voter fraud or voter corruption occurs on a fairly regular basis at some level in various areas of the nation. How major an issue remains to be seen.
Ninth, what would Barr do if Trump fired special counsel Robert S. Mueller III before completion of the Russia probe?
NO. If it is within Presidential authority to order an end to the investigation, then it is his job to follow that order. CONGRESS can always appoint one of their own if need be.
Tenth, he needs to be asked about the president’s attacks on the professionalism and integrity of the Justice Department, the FBI and the FISA courts.
No. Again he serves at the pleasure of the President. The President does not lose his right to opinions just because he is the President.
Eleven, will you commit to allowing special counsel Robert Mueller to complete his investigation into whether the president’s campaign team colluded with Russians who attacked our electoral system in 2016?
NO. That would tie his hands in the event he honestly believes the "investigation" has lost either merit or it's way and become a runaway situation.