Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DOJ can't send Congress the Trump classified documents report, judge says
NBC News ^ | Jan. 21, 2025 | Daniel Barnes and Dareh Gregorian

Posted on 01/21/2025 9:16:19 PM PST by fluorescence

A federal judge on Tuesday barred the Justice Department from sharing former special counsel Jack Smith's final report on the classified documents case against Donald Trump with members of Congress.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, found there was no urgent need for the Justice Department to share the report with the chair and ranking members of the House and Senate judiciary committees while an appeal involving Trump's co-defendants in the case is still pending.

Then-U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said earlier this month he would not make the report public until the appeals involving Trump co-defendants Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira were decided, but planned to share it with the committee heads for a private review "upon your request and agreement not to release any information" about the report publicly.

In her ruling, Cannon said there had not been such a request, and suggested that the members of Congress could not be trusted not to share the contents of the report publicly.

"Given the very strong public interest in this criminal proceeding and the absence of any enforceable limits on the proposed disclosure, there is certainly a reasonable likelihood that review by members of Congress as proposed will result in public dissemination of all or part of Volume II," she wrote.

The first part of Smith's report, which detailed his investigation into Trump's efforts to stay in power following the 2020 election, was released earlier this month and contained mostly information from public court filings in the case.

Cannon said the volume on the classified documents case is different. In addition to the presence of co-defendants — whom Trump did not have in the election interference case — the report contains "detailed and voluminous" information outlining the case against Trump

(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aileencannon; danielbarnes; darehgregorian; jacksmith; nbc; trump

1 posted on 01/21/2025 9:16:19 PM PST by fluorescence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Another Trump backstabber.

....In her ruling, Cannon said there had not been such a request, and suggested that the members of Congress could not be trusted not to share the contents of the report publicly.....

Congress should not take this insult. They should move forward with impeachment articles


2 posted on 01/21/2025 9:20:09 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Man made Climate Change is Real. Cal. Officials responsible for the fires just proved it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

As with Trump’s taxes, “Leak” in 3, 2,

And yes, our yellow “Press” WILL publish.


3 posted on 01/21/2025 9:24:01 PM PST by Ex gun maker. (Free thinking is now a radical concept, I will not be assimilated by PC or EV group-think!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence
A federal judge on Tuesday barred the Justice Department from sharing former special counsel Jack Smith's final report on the classified documents case against Donald Trump with members of Congress.

And why does Cannon want to withhold this report? Cause there's nothing in it. Smith had no case from the get go. Releasing it would only embarrass the dems.

4 posted on 01/21/2025 9:24:05 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Man made Climate Change is Real. Cal. Officials responsible for the fires just proved it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

The Trump DOJ should follow the lead of Biden’s Department of Injustice and leak this report.


5 posted on 01/21/2025 9:25:08 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Man made Climate Change is Real. Cal. Officials responsible for the fires just proved it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Taking a couple of replies here, and smashing them together. I predict the report will somehow leak to the press, and since it’s “out there” congress can then read it, and they will harp on details from it for the next 2 years.


6 posted on 01/21/2025 9:36:21 PM PST by FrankRizzo890
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Judge Aileen


7 posted on 01/21/2025 9:59:50 PM PST by Jeff Chandler (THE ISSUE IS NEVER THE ISSUE. THE REVOLUTION IS THE ISSUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FrankRizzo890
I predict the report will "accidentally" be deleted even though data procedures are that it never is not backed up.

When her heanous didn't want to share the emails she send out she used an app called bleachbit to make sure that it was deleted everywhere and even against her own policies for government transparency.

For when important documents are deleted like this, transparency goes out the door and the deletor (which is supposed to be logged as well) tries to hide the data from the public.

In government, these folks will cite national security as justification for deleting government documents and erasing the trail of the one who deleted it.

Typically this happens when a head of an agency or the Presidency changes. It is an attempt to evade government dcoument retention and transperency rules.

In her heanouses case, she was under investigation when on this very issue came up about emails obviously sent by her from a secret email site to evade government rules. When, asked for the secret email server data, she said it had been bleachbitted and was not available (a clear violation of governmental regulations).

The debacle went public, her party and her partys press defended her to a ludicrous degree but the public did not buy is. Her campaign crashed and she has never been held accountable.

No, this governmental document will never see the light of day. It and its required trace logging will be H-d as the rats depart the ship.

8 posted on 01/21/2025 11:00:43 PM PST by CptnObvious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence
This is why President Trump issued an Executive Order for data retention within agencies like this. When the rats say it was deleted while under an Executive Order not to, guess what.

Trumps DOJ can thoroughly investigate just as the previous DOJ would on changeover, and do what the Biden DOJ did to make their lives H*LL. However, with Trump, I suspect he will declassify and release to the public the evidence of what was done and let the public weigh in on it when the Judicial and Press rats back up the deletor(s) illegal actions.

9 posted on 01/21/2025 11:13:23 PM PST by CptnObvious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence
The Federal judge should have said that it would be a prejudiced action against the defendant (Trump) and possibly slanderous to do so release it to the public.

The judge is correct, to cite that only the committee heads of the proper congressional venue using proper procedures would be able to see the documents.

10 posted on 01/21/2025 11:28:09 PM PST by CptnObvious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Misleading headline?

“...while an appeal involving Trump’s co-defendants in the case is still pending.”


11 posted on 01/22/2025 2:43:32 AM PST by McGruff (Trump: Joe Biden will go down in history as the worst president ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

Release it. Let’s hear the story. Then release the a real report on the Biden’s.


12 posted on 01/22/2025 3:38:48 AM PST by Pete Dovgan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Not sure if sarcasm or not. This release was requested by Garland DOJ and opposed by Trump attorneys.


13 posted on 01/22/2025 5:48:13 AM PST by billakay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Julie Kelley who was present at most of, if not all of, the court proceedings, disagrees with you. In fact, she says Cannon is the one that finally stopped the case, when evidence was found that Jack Smith was illegally put in place by someone other than President, if y memory is correct. Cannon had initially blocked the request by DoJ to release Jack Smith's report. But the decided to release the Jack Smith report. Can't really remember here reasoning for making that decision. But I Julie Kelley gives Cannon high marks for her presiding over the case.

Just sayin'. 🙂👍

14 posted on 01/22/2025 6:49:48 AM PST by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fluorescence

There’s still plenty of Garland underlings in the department that have a copy of it and will leak it to the NYT or WP.


15 posted on 01/22/2025 2:24:43 PM PST by damper99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson