Barett can't release his report while his investigation is on-going.
Our GOP Senate finally figured that ploy out. Now the investigation can be made public (save for home addresses and phone numbers and the like).
Life is good.
Posted on 10/20/2005 9:56:37 PM PDT by ordi
BARRETT BREAKTHROUGH? [Byron York]
In the Senate tonight, a major development in the struggle to make public the final report of Independent Counsel David Barrett, the man whose investigation of former Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros began in 1995. The Senate voted to cut off funds to Barrett's office -- he has spent about $20 million on the investigation -- but more importantly, lawmakers required that Barrett's report be released to the public within 60 days of final passage of the law. The report has been finished since late last year, and its release has been delayed by lawyers for Clinton-era figures named in the report. The document is said to go far beyond the Cisneros matter. "Media reports are giving very credible commentary that the independent counsel report discusses problems at the office of criminal investigation at the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Justice," Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley said on the Senate floor tonight. "These matters do not involve Mr. Cisneros but raise extremely important questions about the administration of the tax code."
The Senate bill calls for the release of the report, "except for any such portions that contain information of a personal nature that the division of the court determines the disclosure of which would cause a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy that outweighs the public interest in a full accounting of this investigation," according to the text of the bill. The Senate bill still has to be reconciled with one passed by the House. If the measures are finally passed, Barrett will be required to go out of business within 45 days after the report is released.
Posted at 10:25 PM
Another feather in the legacy cap...
Look for Fitzgerald to hold off on his indictments for a couple of weeks now.
Clinton's free pass?
Yes, it was a "personal" vendetta when the Clinton's told their IRS flunky to harass and intimidate their enemies, which was well enough documented throughout those years here on FR. Don't need this report at all. They may as well release Alamo Girl's files, which are public right now.
clinton legacy ping
Look at this statement: "except for any such portions that contain information of a personal nature that the division of the court determines the disclosure of which would cause a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy that outweighs the public interest in a full accounting of this investigation," - this is Hillary's lawyers doing - and you know that means all the dems will get away with it again.
I'm so screaming mad at the senate for allowing this obstruction of justice. No wonder the president didn't want to have a fight over a court nominee - all the yellow-bellied senators are covering for the damn democrats again.
You can't tell I'm mad can you ..??
More brilliant GOP timing, just in time to get ignored by the media while they nonstop blather about any Fitz indictments. Most of the public will just see it (as presented through the media filter) as dragging up old Clinton stuff to distract from the current GOP 'scandals'.
They get indicments, we get reports. What is wrong with this picture?
Cisneros DING, devoid of "privacy" issues, of course.
Barett can't release his report while his investigation is on-going.
Our GOP Senate finally figured that ploy out. Now the investigation can be made public (save for home addresses and phone numbers and the like).
Life is good.
Hiding the Cisneros Report
Hillary Clinton's lawyer is staying very busy.
Friday, October 7, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
What don't David Kendall, the law firm of Williams & Connolly, and clients such as Hillary Rodham Clinton want the public to know?
snip
One possible motivation isn't hard to imagine: Senator Clinton is running for re-election next year (never mind any possible Presidential ambitions), and she can't be excited about the possible release of a report that might reflect poorly on the Clinton Administration's IRS and Justice Department, especially with the IRS having been run by her friend, Peggy Richardson. Our calls this week to Mr. Kendall and Williams & Connolly for comment on the delays were not returned.
snip
We're told the Barrett report will be an eye-opener, as it is the first time the IRS has ever been investigated using grand jury subpoena powers. If the Senators and Congressmen like Henry Waxman are as concerned about the use of taxpayer money as they've professed to be, they'd urge Williams & Connolly to resolve its outstanding issues with Mr. Barrett and allow his report to finally see the light of day.
And What Judge decides this???
And what else is in this bill that we don't know about??
Thanks for the ping!
I'd like to know the answer to that, too.
And even if a given section clearly doesn't fit the stated definitions, Hillary's lawyers can claim such and sue for the next five years to block the release of such.
I had sent Rush an email about it - but he seems to think it was a victory .. and didn't even mention the language I quoted. So .. I guess it's not that important, but to me it is.
Rush just brought this up.
I was hoping he would. I sent him an email about it and how Hillary's lawyers were stalling this from being made public. First they tried to pass a law forbidding the report being released. That got deleted as an amendment - largely due to the efforts of Tony Snow.
Tony has said all along that people with knowledge have told him some of the stuff that's in this report - and it's dynamite. Hillary has had her lawyers working on keeping this report from being released because it will definitely damage her changes of being president. But .. the statement that some of the information can be hidden from public view does not sit well with me.
I sent Tony another email about it, and hopefully when the report gets released, Tony will be able to reveal what he knows. It must be bad, or Hillary would not be spending so much time and money trying to keep it from the public.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.