Mostly agreed, but then if you end up with a document 75% redacted (LE is going to be very “proactive” in that way) then that creates a whole new controversy...
At the very least, some independent entity not overly connected to any side of the tranny controversy(s) or this particular case should be asked to review the question of the release of the “manifesto” if Nashville LE continues without good explanation to block said release.
Both your points are valid, but I can’t see a path to overcome either problem. A redacted half-loaf would dissatisfy many/most, but it perhaps beats nothing, and might focus questions on specific points and exposes particular gaps, leading to round two.
An independent review makes sense; I’m stumped on who/what both LE and the dubious public would find credible.