CTH seems to be saying that Barr is telling FOIA requesters that they can shove a bagpipe chanter in their ... ear.
Here's the problem. Actually, we can break this down into a couple of problems.
First of all, the AG doesn't control the FOIA process. Here's what you can read at FOIA.gov/faq:
Who handles FOIA requests?
There is no central office in the government that handles FOIA requests for all federal departments and agencies. Each federal agency processes its own records in response to FOIA requests. There are many different officials at these agencies who work hard every day to make sure that the FOIA works. There are the FOIA professionals who search for and process records in response to FOIA requests, FOIA Contacts and FOIA Public Liaisons who work with FOIA requesters to answer questions and resolve concerns, and Chief FOIA Officers who oversee their agency’s compliance with the FOIA.
Secondly, the FBI, while falling under the DoJ, is in fact a separate federal agency headed by its own Director--who is just as much a Presidential appointee as is the AG. FOIA requests for records held by the FBI must be made to the FBI and are processed by the FBI. Bill Barr has nothing to say about that--it's the law.
Thirdly, it follows that CTH is, at best, displaying ignorance by claiming that "DOJ" is "stalling". Presuming that the request by CNN is legit--and let me say that I'd be very interested to see this material--then it's the FBI that's stalling. Barr has nothing to say about that.
Fourthly, CTH repeatedly makes statements like these re Judge Boasberg's 8/19/19 order:
CNN v DOJ - Archey Declarations - Loss for DOJ
the U.S. Dept of Justice has until October 11th, 2019, to produce the DOJ FOIA documents
The court has ordered the US DOJ
the DOJ delay
the DOJ and FBI could be attempting to hide the institutional corruption
You might think that sundance was paraphrasing Judge Boasberg's order. If you thought that, it might surprise you to learn that:
1) The case is NOT captioned CNN v. DOJ--as sundance claims;
2) The case IS captioned Cable News Network, Plaintiff, v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Defendant;
3) In light of sundance's repeated references to "DOJ" in the context of Judge Boasberg's order, you might be VERY surprised to learn that a search of the order reveals ZERO REFERENCES to either "Department of Justice" or to "DOJ". There are, however, many references to the named defendant in the case, the FBI.
I suggested above that sundance and CTH were, at best, displaying ignorance. The alternative is outright dishonesty. That may sound harsh, but if you seek an audience and status as a go-to source for information on a given topic--and sundance avidly pursues that--then you have a duty to get your facts straight.