The unvarnished portrait of Mr. Trump is a linchpin of the argument that the committee is trying to make: that Trump knew his claims of a fraudulent election were not true and made them anyway. Mr. Barr said that in the weeks after the election, he repeatedly told Trump “how crazy some of these allegations were.”

The committee is making the case that Mr. Trump was a knowing liar. But Mr. Barr’s testimony offered another possible explanation: that the president actually came to believe the lies he was telling.

The needle that I was initially skeptical could be threaded. However, as I wrote earlier 1) When you choose--that is the key: choose--the prosecution has proven mens rea. You cannot rely of subjective good faith belief--because it's not good faith. Note too, "came to believe": That is not a defense. It is well known that lying criminals, with repetition, do come to believe their own lies--can pass goddamn polygraph on their lies. Most importantly, once the courts, all sixty two of them, reject your lies as the truth, or as good faith belief, you have no defense, and here, 46-1, losing under the law resorted to violent, criminal illegality.