Posted on 05/11/2019 9:12:56 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
As Congressional Democrats prepare to hold attorney general William Barr in contempt over his supposed lack of transparency, it’s worth remembering that he has made available to top Democrats the entirety of volume II of the Mueller report, save for two full and seven partial lines, which were redacted to protect grand jury secrecy in keeping with federal law.
In order to provide lawmakers with greater transparency into special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, the Department of Justice placed a less-redacted version of his report in a secure room on Capitol Hill, and granted access to that room to congressional leaders of both parties, as well as the chairmen and ranking members of intelligence and judiciary committees in the House and Senate.
As of this writing, not one of the six Democrats granted access to what amounts to 99.9 percent of volume II of the Mueller report, which details the president’s behavior as it relates to obstruction of justice, have taken the opportunity to examine it. If they had, they could have viewed the entirety of Mueller’s obstruction case against Trump except for the following seven redactions, two of which are applied to footnotes.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Not viewing it makes the law case so much easier.
just more fake outrage by the left ... and of course the left gets away with this because the dying lying leftist fake steam enemedia perpetuates any lies the left tells ... though of course, the left tells these lies simply to the give the dying lying leftist fake steam enemedia something to perpetuate.
They don’t care. They just want their political theater.
But those are the two lines that show Trump is a Russian agent!
Exactly
What they really want is “the underlying evidence” so their staff can selectively pick out and dramatize passages to make a presentation justifying impeachment. I think this was decided in advance, and was behind Kamala Harris’ bizarre questioning line of Barr where she asked if he had examined the underlying evidence... which was something like a million pages.
If they just viewed the report, only six (IIRC) Dems could see it, and they couldn’t leak the details that differed from the public report. And, there’s probably little there anyeay. What they want is endless show-trial hearings using selected out of context abstracts from Mueller’s raw interview and investigative files. It’s not the “full report” they are after; it’s all of the investigative text that the report was based on. Misrepresenting parts of it would enable the presentation of an entirely different conclusion.
They’re in the full on Alinsky mode. They make unreasonable demands and you meet their demands and they immediately demand more. Doesn’t make any difference what you give them, it will never be enough.
Obviously, the Democrats want the issue much more than they want the resolution.
Moving the goalposts yet again. Couple that with “non-negotiable’ demands, and you have a reprise of the professional student-protesters of the 1970’s all over again.
Too bad those hippy protesters ended up in Congress.
When did the Congress become the Grand Jury?
Russian agent? I thought he was a blind ignoramous being led around by a Jewish dog that looks like Netanyahu, or so the NYT seems to think. So which is it? Tool of the Zionist dogs or tool of Russian intelligence?
When they gave up a bulk of their power to the other two branches.
But those are the 7 lines of power.
How many WORDS are redacted?
25?
30?
When did a CHOICE to NOT read a document become a “Constitutional Crisis”?
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.