Debate builds over making Mueller report public

The Hill ^ | 01/21/19 | Morgan Chalfant

[yesthatjallen]

The Mueller final report will a dud because there was never anything to investigate.

When the report isn't made public, Democrats will accuse Mueller (their hero) of a cover-up.

This will not be the end but a continuation.

[shalom aleichem]

Rules are rules. When an investigation uses a Grand Jury, the proceedings and “report” is secret unless and until an indictment is issued. If no indictment, then it remains secret and sealed.

[odawg]

It will not be made public, as per Mueller’s desires, because it will contain nothing having to with what its main purpose was supposed to have been.

This will spawn charges of a cover-up by the MSM.

[xzins]

I want it public. If it is not made public, the excuse will be national security secrets.

I want the FISA documents public. I want it all out there in black and white.

Secrecy will only aid the democrats and liberals.

[LostPassword]

If it’s not public, you can be sure “anonymous sources” will confirm to CNN/MSNBC/... that all of the worst things they think about Trump are true and then some.

[Tench_Coxe]

The Democrats won't want the report made public if it's a "dud".

Its analogous to to that meeting between Pence, Trump, Pelodi, and Schumer. Pelosi and Schumer didn't want the media there. And in a later meeting without the media, immediately after Schumer ran to the cameras and gave an account that others present denied happening.

In other words, if the Mueller report is a dud and contradicts "the narrative", Democrats would want it buried so they can claim something that just isn't so.

[Red Badger]

Dems should be very careful what they ask for.

They might get it........................

[fireman15]

This was never anything but a political exercise. We can be sure of one thing only, the “report” will be used for maximum effect by the Democrats. If there is nothing in it that can be perceived as damaging to the President, it will be trickled out in ways that imply that it is. This is what we are seeing with Buzzfeed and the rest of the Democrat controlled media.

[Williams]

No we have to listen to Diane Feinstein,a Chinese agent, tell them not to redact national security info. Cannot make this stuff up.

[DJ Frisat]

Diane Feinstein sez: “I served for a long time on the Intelligence Committee, and I know redaction can be excessive.”

Blind squirrel time. Although she didn't mean it, this applies in spades to the documents grudgingly supplied in response to subpoenas issued the FBI, DOJ and other bad players by Congressional and Senate committees. And all with the intent to hide what these bad players did.

[morphing libertarian]

Tell me this is a joke

[alloysteel]

Robert Swan Mueller III, guilty of a COVER-UP? Doesn’t he KNOW that the cover-up is ALWAYS much more damaging and incriminating than the original behavior it was supposed to conceal?

I am aghast....< /sarcasm >

[Flick Lives]

Mueller will indite Trump. That decision was made *before* the “investigation” started. The investigation itself is just for pretense. The crux of the inditement will be redacted, to protect FBI “methods and procedures”, which is to say the FBI coup against Trump.

[Magnum44]

Are the pathetic convictions Mueller got (Cohen, Manafort) not the result of indictments? What about the indictment of the 17 Russians? If so then the report should be released, yes?

[butlerweave]

The Mueller Report = cover page and 1 blank page

[Heart of Georgia]

There is a cover-up, but not the one the MSM/Dims are panting after.

We know if the report contains bad news for Trump, there would be no debate. It would be released in a nanosecond.

[tiki]

And if that doesn’t happen they will just invent new and more horrendous accusations. Trump will never win the media until everyone who can sues the pants off of them and forces them to report Truth.

[Political Junkie Too]

The "debate" will be over how much exculpatory information that helps Trump will be revealed.

I saw an intriguing article yesterday that said that Democrats will launch impeachment proceedings as soon as Ginsburg steps down to try to prevent Trump from nominating her replacement. The idea is to slow walk impeachment into 2020, and then claim the "Biden Rule" to stop Trump from making a nomination. This strategy relies on Republicans to back Democrat calls that Trump shouldn't nominate while impeachment is underway.

Two major impediments to this strategy are:

1. Impeachment, by its very nature, suggests an imminent threat to the country by the President, who must be removed without haste. To then slow-walk such a process in order to delay a SCOTUS nomination for a year is counter to the sense of urgency that impeachment brings.
2. A Mueller report that shows that the underlying suspicions that launched the probe were false, namely collusion with Russian agents by the Trump campaign, will only serve to undermine the causes for impeachment. Any secondary findings of a process nature will not rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors" warranting impeachment.

It's clear that Democrats can't allow the Mueller report to help Trump in any way against impeachment, because they need impeachment as a last-ditch ploy to stop a conservative replacement on the Supreme Court for Ginsburg.

-PJ

[Toespi]

And when there is a criminal investigation of media which will reveal bribes, blackmail, extortion, all of which will be unfathomable payoff amounts.

[Mr. K]

MUELLER IS THERE TO COLLECT $$$ AND TO COVERUP AND HIDE EVIDENCE OF CLINTON/OBAMA CRIMES.

HE KNOWS THERE IS NO ‘RUSSIA COLLUSION’- SO THEY ARE ON ENDLESS FISHING TRIPS FOR TRIVIAL CRIMES AND PERJURY TRAPS, AND I BET THEY ARE FINDING AND DESTROYING EVIDENCE AGAISNT HILLIARY/OBAMA/THEMSELVES.