Posted on 03/30/2019 4:58:07 AM PDT by Olog-hai
The top Republican on the U.S. House Judiciary Committee said on Friday that Attorney General William Barr would “break the law” if he released Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia report without redactions, as Democrats are demanding.
The lawmaker, Representative Doug Collins, also criticized the panel’s Democratic chairman Jerrold Nadler for not accepting Barr’s offer to testify in early May, but said he looked forward reviewing the Mueller report’s classified material with Nadler. […]
“(Nadler) stands alone in setting arbitrary deadlines for that release and in calling the attorney general to break the law by releasing the report without redactions,” he added. …
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
He’s exactly correct. Release of some portions of it would be quite illegal.
What does the law mean to the Rats?
Place the report in a pit with a thousand rattlesnakes and tell them to go for it.
Their MO is always to create the problem for which they have a “solution”.
This is really the same thing: It’s not illegal to ‘Rats if Mueller report is released in full. And, if Mueller should do so, the ‘Rats would turn around, and set a new focus on the problem of exposing this or that from the report, with the “solution” of Barr’s exit.
Of note here is that the “problem” (release the full report) has two ‘Rat “solutions” - one with full release (fire Barr!) and the other with partial release (Barr didn’t release full report!).
What’s the statute that identifies attempting to coerce someone into breaking the law?
Nadler can be tied down with that. And it would change the conversation.
antics with semantics. It can be modestly redacted then released. That’s what Barr says he’s doing.
Well, this is of course in the face of Nadler’s demand for an unredacted version, which he has no right to whatsoever.
I suppose this is technically true.
It is also true that the President can declassify anything he wants.
To some extent, I think a heck of a lot of stuff should be declassified, let us see it all, and let justice be done though the heavens fall.
I’m not sure this that is one of those cases where the names of US assets embedded in foreign countries would be revealed and thus the lives of Americans put at risk. I certainly wouldn’t want to do something like that. But I suspect most of the “redacted” stuff is redacted because it’s just darn embarrassing to certain US politicians. That’s the stuff I really want to see, and I don’t think it should be withheld.
If someone was on a jury that chose not to go after Trump, imagine what the democrats would do to them.
If someone was on a jury that chose not to go after Trump, imagine what the democrats would do to them.
—
The Leftists would then send out their Antifa goon squads to beat down or kill anyone on the grand jury who didn’t vote to indite.
Since none of us (perhaps a few) have factual information or know EXACTLY what is in Mueller’s final and official report or what it contains, it’s all speculation at this point. The American tax payer paid for the document so publish it in it’s entirety. Let the chips fall where they may. I am tired of hearing this or that, etc. IF there are problems, fix them and move on.
If Congress is serious about wanting the full report released, they can enact a law requiring such action. That would be foolish, but would be legal. Trying to force the AG to release Grand Jury and classified material is not proper.
Why redacted?
Congress wants the full report.
Show us the enacted legislation demanding that from President Trump. Then we will see about it after Trump vetoes it.
Mr.Trump. They play the game. Play it right back.
Agree some records are sealed.
The left wants state secrets revealed, so they can give them to our enemies.
Unless you tell people about it, how will anyone know you are on a grand jury?
To the extent the report contains Grand Jury testimony, release would violate Rule 6 of the FRCP. Also, there may be “sources and methods” issues with classified material. This latter reason is often cited as a reason for not releasing FISA records.
Good point. Thanks.
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.