https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...ntempt-1302982

Didn't see this mentioned in the Trump thread.

Seems like Barr just has to release the report and it's automatically dropped.

Any reason they should stall, not give it up, etc?

I don't know if there is any legitimate reason for them not to turn it over but I think you can expect that Barr will not do so. As far as what happens after that, I would guess the answer is basically nothing? At least with regard to the contempt charge. It's possible that the courts could rule that DoJ has to comply with some requests, I think.

But legally he can't because it contains grand jury testimony. So, I guess he tries to sit down with the Dems and explain to them that he is giving them everything he can legally give them and they are acting like 1 st graders. But it is hard for some not to act like a 6 year old and throw a temper tantrum.

It was my understanding that they legally couldn't release an unredacted version because of laws that came about from the Start report during the Clinton investigation, but I couldn't find any such law when I researched the subject a month ago when this first came up

I don't know the answer to this but I wouldn't presume that a law which precludes making grand jury testimony public also precludes providing that information to congress.

Other AG held in contempt of Congress.

https://www.politico.com/story/2012/...ongress-077988

Political theater.

Can someone explain what the role of the Attorney General is
and what the role of Congress is?

Can someone explain why it's political theater on the part of the Democrats but why it was perfectly legitimate for the Republican dominated Congress to want prosecute H. Clinton about the email.
Can someone explain why the emails matter but Russian collusion is a witch hunt?

Does anyone care about this country anymore?

I'm confused.

What is being Redacted from the Mueller Reportf

Quote:

Grand jury information

Mueller used a grand jury to interview more than 500 witnesses and issue more than 2,800 subpoenas and 500 search warrants throughout his 22-month-long investigation. The attorney general will redact these materials from the report Thursday morning.

Material collected through the grand jury process cannot be disclosed, according to Title III, Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The rules were put in place to protect the secrecy of federal investigations and people who may be under investigation but haven’t been charged with a crime.

Because of these guidelines, any grand jury material in the report must be redacted. Of all four categories of redacted material in the report, the rules protecting grand jury material are the most inflexible, Barr told Congress. Barr said the Department of Justice was working with attorneys in the special counsel’s office to identify the sections in the report that have grand jury material and need to be redacted.

But while Barr does not have the authority to disclose grand jury material on his own, it can be released by court order. If court-ordered, disclosure of grand-jury matter may be made to a government attorney, other government personnel, or another federal grand jury, if the information involves foreign intelligence or counterintelligence. Barr has indicated that he is not going to seek such a court order, but others could make the request, including congressional Democrats.

But attorneys said convincing the judge to release grand jury material is a long shot.

Barr does not have the authority to disclose grand jury material on his own, but it can be released by court order.
“Unless Attorney General William Barr walks arm-in-arm [to a judge] with Jerry Nadler, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, to say that there is a need for this material in connection with an impeachment proceeding, it’s not going to be released,” said Robert Ray, who succeeded Ken Starr as head of the independent counsel investigation into former President Bill Clinton in the late 1990s.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this month ruled that with a few exceptions, including in response to an impeachment proceeding, federal judges cannot order grand jury material to be released. This decision could affect the disclosure of the grand jury material in the Mueller report; based on the ruling, Democrats would likely have to start the impeachment process before asking a judge to release grand jury information.

“Democrats in Congress would have to make a difficult choice in order to initiate formally an impeachment proceeding in order to get grand jury material,” said Jessica Roth, a former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York.

Barr said last week that he would work with the House and Senate Judiciary Committees to try to disclose grand jury materials if necessary. It’s unclear, however, if Barr and congressional leaders would wind up working together to disclose grand jury information, or if the process would spark a political and legal fight.

So it would seem that is all political theater and Barr essentially has his hands tied and nothing can even come of this. I get why you do it though... Have to give the appearance of action so your true believers stay loyal.

I missed alot of the hearing but I saw the second round and thought Cruz made a good point- the letter issue is bs because Barr intended to release the entire report, less the redactions, within weeks. What Mueller wanted released was ultimately released by Barr.

Barr also said something like his letter was not intended to be a summary, he did intend to boil the entirety of the 400+ page report in his four page letter. I would think such a task would be impossible.

If the grand jury **** cant be released, how do the dems think they get the unredacted report?

Barr could seek a court order himself but what why would he. Your last sentence is an accurate assessment in my view.

The Dems could seek a court order themselves. The Dems are implying imo that more was redacted that shouldn’t have been. Get Mueller and maybe some of his team to testify. We’ll see if that happens.

Mueller Memo Advising Barr on Trump Findings Is Ordered Released


The US Justice Department must release a 2019 memo advising then-attorney general Bill Barr on how to handle the conclusion of the Mueller investigation and the department’s decision not to charge Donald Trump, a federal appeals court ruled.

The 3-0 decision Friday, by a panel of judges of the appeals court in Washington, upholds a lower court that ordered the department to make the March 2019 document public after finding that DOJ lawyers failed to accurately describe it from the start.

The district judge had found that the memo was about the kind of public statement Barr should make over special counsel Robert Mueller’s findings and not -- as she said she had been led to believe -- whether the Justice Department was seriously considering whether to bring charges against Trump.

The memo to Barr came at the end of Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether Trump had tried to meddle with the probe. Mueller’s team declined to make a recommendation about whether to charge Trump, and Barr said the evidence was “not sufficient” to prosecute.

^^^ Release shows Bill Barr was lying re Trump exposure to Obstruction of Justice charge re Mueller investigation.


Cliffs :

- Bill Barr's DOJ said there was no basis to charge Trump with obstruction citing a DOJ memo
- Bill Barr refused to allow anyone access to Memo
- Court orders it released
- Lower Court and Appellate Court accuse Justice Department of "dishonesty" in justification for keeping memo hidden
- The memo disclosed that what Barr had represented was not in there and the discussion was in fact on how Bill Barr would characterize and spin the Mueller Report
- Memo show the DOJ NEVER even considered bring a charge for obstruction of Justice and just focused on how to message to Congress and the Public

More Barr abuses coming out, demonstrating how so very easily the DOJ is corrupted by a POTUS hand pick political appointee.

To me, I think this is evidence that a POTUS should not be able to choose his AG. They should be appointed by the Senate or House with the POTUS having power to still fire them, but not put their hand pick back in place.

Also

There is nothing I feel deserves the full weight and force of the law more than those in positions of power, who are supposed to uphold the law (police, prosecutors, judges, Politicians, etc) abusing the law.

I feel they should face much harsher charges and pursuit than normal citizens who might break the same law. Elliot Spitzer should get more punishment for his prostitution charge than the harshest treated person he prosecuted for Prostitution. I feel there is a justified element of added 'abuse' that should be considered.

Bill Barr and the others in his DOJ will never be prosecuted for what they did as Trump's AG/DOJ despite the fact they certainly should be. The DOJ should see it as an imperative to prosecute to send a message that simply holding such office will not make you immune from your crimes, and when the next administration comes in, you will be heled accountable.

Instead their is almost always this deference given, that no normal person would receive. I think it is a nod between them all that 'I won't look in to and prosecute you... so you therefore should not look in to and prosecute me'. Even if you are an AG and DOJ who believes you will not commit crimes like Bill Barr did, it is comforting to know there is a norm that we do not prosecute each other even when crimes are committed.


Cliffs on the video below is Bermain (former US attorney as SDNY) faced enormous and immediate pressure and political interference in his ongoing cases against Michael Cowen, and other Trump related targets, and threats he would be replaced if he did not fall in line and hand over those investigations to a Trump toady. Barr should face an obstruction of justice charge.

meanwhile


(and yes lozen that is another example of how whataboutism can and are used appropriately. Can you understand why saying 'whatbout' to Barr here is a direct rebuttal and not a derail in an unconnected direction?)