Your task is to predict the verdict of a claim based on the provided question-answer pair evidence. The possible labels are: 'Supported', 'Refuted', 'Not Enough Evidence', 'Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking'. Justify your answer using the provided evidence and select the correct label.

Claim: William Barr, the US Attorney General's testimony lacked context in investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.

Q1: What did William Barr say about the Mueller investigation
A1: There are reports that Trump tried to fire Mueller but William  Barr went with the narrative that there were other plausible reasons why Trump would've wanted that

Q2: What did the national papers report on the Mueller report?
A2: Mueller: Barr's summary of report did not capture 'context, nature, and substance' of Russia probe
user
justification: Q&A 2 does agree with the claim by showing the investigator himself said Barr's testimony lacked context as the claim states.

verdict: 'Supported'
assistant