I wonder if there are little hidden tidbits in the Mueller Report that are very damaging to Democrats? Little hints that lead down some heretofore hidden paths.I wonder if the Democrat Leadership were dragging their heels for other reasons?
Shine a light and see who scatters,
red or blue, it doesn't matter!
6
On the other hand ...
"This is just a stall tactic and I'm upset the House is playing along."
Maybe the DOJ will do what it's promised to do, but that evidence won't be enough to charge Trump with anything. After all, Mueller didn't charge Trump (or any Trump campaign official) with anything -- an irrefutable fact that seems to be forgotten here.
Some Trump critics might cite Manafort and Gates to the contrary. But let's not forget that the crimes with which they were charged had nothing whatsoever to do with Trump; they were based on well-known conduct that had occurred several years before either of them was hired by Trump. Mueller hoped to parlay that earlier-conduct guilty into cooperation on charges against Trump, but obviously that effort failed.
4
@Commenter
As you well know Mueller referred it to Congress to decide, and clearly believed that substantial evidence of obstruction existed.
Contrary to your claim, Congress very much can charge him with high crimes, and not for just what was included in the Mueller report. There's already enough evidence for that.
13
My goodness -- the dog has caught the truck it had been chasing, and now wonders whether the chase was worth it!
"It is hard to tell if the DoJ will really do this, or it is simply another bait and switch play. Time will tell."
Maybe the DOJ won't do what it has promised to do, though I suspect it will. As this commenter notes: "Time will tell."
1
Both sides agree on this:
"Instead, it is up to Congress to act."
Mueller neither exonerated Trump from the "obstruction of justice" charge nor recommended that he be charged with OOJ. He simply left that to his superiors. In his report, Mueller said the DOJ policy precluded him from recommending prosecution (which Barr correctly noted is absurd), but Barr testified that he and Rosenstein asked Mueller several times whether he (Mueller) was relying on that DOJ policy or simply hadn't come up with enough evidence to justify charging Trump. According to Barr, Mueller said unequivocally that it was the latter.
Maybe Barr lied, but Mueller has never claimed that.
1
Mueller did indeed state that Barr misrepresented his (Mueller’s) findings in the report, which is, one assumes, why Mueller spoke out. Nadler and committee will read the evidence and act accordingly.
7
"I have to think that the unredacted Mueller report gives the House Judiciary committee 95% of what they need to decide whether to recommend impeachment on obstruction of justice."
Agreed, but Senator Lindsay Graham claimed publicly that he'd read the entire unredacted Mueller report, and presumably any Democratic Senator could have done the same (and maybe they all have). I suspect Nadler could strike the same deal. If he does, maybe the House will reach the opposite conclusion from Mueller, concluding that Trump can and should be charged with obstructing justice.
My hunch is that the Democratic-controlled House WILL disagree with Mueller, but that the Republican-controlled Senate will agree with him (and thus not convict Trump). Indeed, that outcome seems all but inevitable; only the timing is uncertain, and I'd do exactly what the Democratic Party appears to be doing: Stretch it out as long as possible; use poor old Nancy Pelosi to build "tension" within the party, but ultimately have the pro-impeachment House members push aside poor Pelosi and impeach Trump.
At the time of the first Iraq War, George H. W. Bush's "approval rating" was 91%. But he peaked too soon. By the following November (1992, about 22 months later), his approval rating had plummeted and Bill Clinton beat him.
Timing is everything.
3
Lyndsey Graham has read the “less redacted” report available to Congress, not the completely unredacted report, which has not been made available.
4
@Anaboz Well, Graham claimed publicly that he'd read the fully unredacted Mueller report, and nobody challenged his claim (until you did). Maybe Graham was lying or mistaken, but maybe you are.
1
Agreed, but I'll wager that Nadler could see that if he wanted to ...
"Unless the House sees the complete unredacted Mueller report they cannot be certain that they have all of the pertinent information."
Senator Lindsey Graham said publicly that he'd read the unredacted Mueller report, and any other Senator on that committee presumably could do so too. I suspect Nadler could get the same treatment. It's the PUBLIC release that's at issue. It's hard not to notice that Nadler has agreed to accept only a "private" viewing of Mueller's evidence, not public disclosure.
1
As several commenters have pointed out, the Mueller Report did say that Mueller wasn't recommending for or against an obstruction charge because of the DOJ policy against charging a sitting President. In his Senate testimony, though, Barr claimed that he and Rosenstein asked M several times whether his "no recommendation" conclusion relied on that DOJ policy, or whether M simply failed to find sufficient evidence of obstruction to charge Trump. Barr claims M said the latter. Maybe Barr was lying, but M hasn't challenged his statement. Possibly M forgot that he'd written the opposite in his report.
If Barr was telling the truth, however, then his and Rosenstein's explicit questions to M supersede M's report.
2
@Commenter
" Possibly M forgot that he'd written the opposite in his report. ".
I seriously doubt that Sir.
4
The IRS was in on this dastardly plot too?
"Trump's tax returns [are] where a treasure trove of criminal acts will be found. I think the IRS is somehow involved ... "
If Trump's tax returns indeed are "a treasure trove of criminal acts," it goes without saying that the IRS was involved -- at least to the extent of looking the other way when it had clear evidence of Trump's criminal behavior.
Would that be the IRS under Obama?
10
@Commenter
It wasn't my comment you quoted, but I see you edited off the rest of the phrase, "... involved over the decades of Trump's crimes ..." to force it to align with your propaganda.
Why is it that all of your voluminous comments here are lies or disingenuous half-truths? It's nothing more than SPAM trolling.
8
Might be a delaying tactic. Also perhaps designed to delay or dilute the move towards granting committees ability to take the non compilers to court. So, this may just be a tactical move: delay, undermine, confuse etc, to draw out the process till about elections when they hope Dems would not control the house.
1
I am an optimist. I never want to give up on the good, ethics, peace, respect and doing the right thing. Please heavens above, let justice prevail. This news lets me softly exhale.
Democrats are settling for the information that can be legally shared. Regained their senses.
2
Key evidence? Not all evidence?
Who gets to define "key"? Key to whom?
Just asking.
1
Trump can claim executive privilege exempting WH staff from testifying before Congress on the Mueller Report if it interferes with the execution of his duties. Congress is rightly trying to figure out how extensively Trump was involved in Russian meddling in the last Presidential campaign. Protecting Russia is not one of Trump’s duties. Trump has been leading us into the weeds by covering up his knowledge of Russian campaign activities. If he and his staff had told the truth long ago, we could have had much more knowledge of the extent of that involvement and we would now be in a better position to counter it, leading to fairer, cleaner elections and less lies. Instead, we have to endure hearings and subpoenas to get past Trump’s obfuscations regarding the extent and meaning of Russia’s actions.
I can understand why Republicans just want to ignore the whole debacle, they got their man elected by any means and don’t want any questions asked. The same thing happened when Bush was “elected” by the Supreme Court when the country could just as easily have waited for a legal count of Florida’s questionable ballots, the historical precedent for waiting was there. This time Trump with Russia’s aid, used social media spreading lies in states who assign all electoral college votes to one candidate instead of proportionally. The Trump campaign regularly fed polling results to Russia to effectively identify and target states down to the precinct level. Democracy was not served.
1
The real key is, who decides which documents are "critical evidence"?
The American people deserve to see the entire document unredacted. Nothing less. It exists for a purpose. To provide a transparent view of the illegal, unethical behavior of the criminal enterprise in the White House. We should be outraged to receive anything less than full disclosure.
1
Democrats remain paralyzed because Nancy Pelosi refuses to do what MUST be done: initiate a formal impeachment investigation.
NOTHING has changed since Ms. Pelosi took the gavel in January. The compelling evidence that Mr. Trump MUST be removed from office was as obvious then as it is now, and yet the Democratic majority in Congress continues to dither.
Instead of doing what needs to be done, Ms. Pelosi is attempting to beat Mr. Trump in a media contest aimed at the 2020 election. She will lose. He is a master at trashy media spectacles, and she is a rank amateur. Her "strategy" exemplifies why Democrats continue to be so utterly ineffective.
This is a case where the most effective strategy is to do what's right -- initiate a formal impeachment investigation.
Everything else that the Democrats need to win in 2020 will follow.
2
Pulese! The House needs to grow a spine NOW and do it's job. Hold anyone defying subpoenas in contempt. That is the law. The Democrats are still playing the same game that has gotten nowhere with this administration. They need to stop backing off, apologizing and ruminating in the face of the bluster coming out of the White House. They need to face it - they are not going to win the votes of the Trump core, but they may just win the swing voter by defining what is right, once and for all.
2
AG Barr is in the "Give them enough rope."phase of the investigation of a very large and convoluted web.
"May you live in interesting times."
I am so tired of hearing our classless president calling people of actual accomplishments a “loser”. Offering up the truth about the loser in chief doesn’t make you a loser, it makes you a patriot. By the way, explain why 6 bankruptcies (not including the one he is working on now) doesn’t make one a loser? People that support, protect and vote for Trump hardly fit the definition of winner.
1
Jumping off point is question posed by seniordem['s] CT June 10 Times Pick "... Is anyone else getting fed up with the White House's actions?"
This 8th decade observer - who recited the pledge of allegiance every day of his eight years in grammar school, got a law license in his 3rd decade and worked as a state's attorney for 20 years - hungers for a response to:
"Is there anyone who ever entertained the slightest notion that what is occurring and has been since Mr Trump became president, could ever happen in America? Anyone? Really?"
2
It is indeed very strange why these accomplished individuals would stick out their necks for a sleaze ball like trump and ruin their reputations in the process.
Why would Barr, already Attorney General a generation ago, return to damage his own reputation, risk jail and loss of law license, plus the damage he has done to the country through his lies to Congress, the public, and obstruction of justice? What is drawing people to do these terrible things to themselves and the country?
3
@JM (who wishfully thinks that Barr, if nominated to the SCOTUS won’t be approved)
Sadly, if he gets nominated the Senate will approve him. The Senate would approve Roy Cohn if Trump managed to nominate him from Hell!
Nothing is as effective for destroying trust in a person's integrity or intelligence as the person's making a perfectly self-contradictory statement: "While it is certainly true that no man, including the president of the United States, is above the law, . . . some [laws] don’t apply [to him] at all." What? The president is above "some laws" but not above "the law"? Who hired this guy, and for what job? And how do do we have to put up with this not-even-clever sophistry?
4
Democrats agree to what the Justice Dept. offered weeks ago and then declared a victory. They have had access to additional materials from the Mueller report from the beginning- have they even bothered to read that? This meandering, confused, circus of an investigation has lost its way. Time to focus on the election.
3
@Jackie
Yes, they always knew the grand jury material was off limits, but needed a ruse to claim "coverup".
2
Watching most of the House Judiciary Committee yesterday, it was apparent that the House Republicans had no interest in the facts of the Mueller Report.
It is scary to realize our country has "leaders" in the House of Representatives with the obnoxious behavior of Jordan, Collins and Gaetz.
The witnesses, with the exception of John Malcolm of the Heritage Foundation, were impressive. Malcolm's opinion stated in the last paragraph of this article is incomprehensible.
How can it be that the "no man, including the president, is above the law", and at the same time "some laws apply differently to him, or not at all". Doesn't make sense.
6
Broken Oaths...make a mockery of all those who gave their lives in protecting the Constitution.
Throw them all in jail.
2
This will never end. I'm convinced Congress has filled themselves and the public with such distrust and hatred that our country will take years to heal and trust government. I have lost total trust in DC, their ethics, and their ability to serve the people. They serve no one but their party and themselves. Both Dems a Reps are repugnant. They do not deserve a raise; they deserve a pay cut.
4
Democratic obsession. It is a 3 ring circus that is costing tax payers a fortune. Why was the old Nixon clown dragged in there? The obsession to try and find something against this president is becoming obstruction to our Democracy. If Mueller had anything, he would have stated it in his report.
4
Ha - at least this time they were multiple egregious crimes. But, yes, I recall “her emails” “Benghazi”, which I’m totally sure never amounted to “obsessions”, right?
5
He did say so, several times.
Is this the best the Democrats can do? Presenting 3 MSNBC pundits to give “testimony “ —essentially what we see every night on MSNBC? The reputation and expertise of these witnesses is beyond reproach, and I agree with everything they had to say,—but this just looks like the same optics the Republicans would be using by having FOX pundits like “judge” Janine Pirro or Andrew Napolitano testify as witnesses.
Was this hearing supposed to convince voters on the fence regarding impeachment? Yesterday’s hearings don’t provide anything like the clarifying moment that a vote in favor of impeachment would.
The Democrats appear to be dangerously unfocused as they stumble along, hoping for some magic moment when impeachment becomes the will of a united citizenry, rather than the mere majority they have now. Kicking this can(cer) down the road and hoping Trump is defeated 16 months from now because the voters like Joe Biden better, or because they like Bernie Sanders’ plan for healthcare is hopelessly naive.
You can’t impeach the President unless you vote to begin impeachment hearings. Democrats in the House need to stop running away from collecting on the bill Trump has run up and must pay. Impeachment means that Democrats are voting to punish a criminal. Stop running away from what you should be running toward and embracing fully.
5
They are goiving the DOJ "time" to get the report over to them? What does that mean? October 2020?
3
Trump is quite a character. Compared to Bill Clinton's impeachment he has committed ongoing crimes. Also his two sons are running his business instead of placing it in a blind trust. That alone should be an impeachable offense. Do we really need someone who spends just about every weekend playing golf at taxpayer's expense travel to his business resorts instead of traveling to Camp David by helicopter on weekends?
Have Robert Mueller testify live before congress.
This is the only way the 400 page report will ever be given the light of day while this administration CONTINUES to obstruct the job of congress to oversee the presidency.
5
The DOJ, "has agreed to provide Congress with key evidence collected by Robert S. Mueller III"
Keep going Democratic House , keep the squeeze on using any and all means to uphold your Constitutional duty presenting any and all evidence found in this report we paid for.
djt and this GOP know once exposed ,"The cats in the bag and the bags in the river"
3
Quotes
“the House Oversight and Reform Committee, is to vote on Wednesday to recommend that the House hold Mr. Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt for defying subpoenas in a different case related to the Trump administration’s addition of a citizenship question on the 2020 census.”
I would have preferred to seen Barr held in contempt still.
“John W. Dean, who made his name in an entirely different scandal, Watergate, working for another president, Richard M. Nixon. He was joined not by Mr. Mueller but two former federal prosecutors known as contributors on MSNBC, as well as an outside conservative legal expert.”
That is one I would have liked to seen on the tube as I saw the first ones in the seventies.
2
This is a huge gamble by the Democrats. They have no credible policies and are all in on impeachment or, more likely just pushing an obstruction narrative on an investigation that we are now finding out likely ginned up by themselves to unseat the president. I hope for the sake of the country and our democracy that they are not allowed to succeed.
2
Democrats look increasingly desperate and pathetic the more they harp about the Mueller report. They are drastically overestimating how much the majority of Americans actually care about this. Either they act on their empty calls for impeachment or start focusing on other things.
3
@Oatman
Democrats *have* focused on other things. They have passed numerous important bills but they're sitting in the Senate where McConnell won't even let them be discussed.
6
@Oatman
Outside the bubble, Americans don't care about this. If anything, as democrats try to appease their angry leftwing, they risk alienating Democratic voters who have a much more rational approach to this. They want democrats to focus on more important issues.
It is always the left that is the undoing of the Democratic Party.
Now it turns out that the Congressional Democrats are as wacky as the Presidential ones. John Dean for gods sake! I had lost faith in the free student loans and free rent candidates now I am losing faith in the House.
2
Unfortunately the obsession over this report simply makes the Democrats look more desperate with each new request (demand). Does congress really expect to find something dozens of the nation’s brightest attorneys after two years of unfettered access could not?
3
@Ross Burns
Yeah, imagine, obsessing over the fact your President is not only a liar and a cheat but a verifiable criminal, and all the other party does is cover for him.
Funny that.
(Read the Mueller report. BTW there’s shorter abstracts at the beginning of each volume.)
1
I don't know why the Democrats are wasting their time with these hearings. They should begin impeachment. If they are wait for more than 52% of the public to get on-board they will be waiting forever. Fox News will only be airing Republicans questioning witnesses and spinning, so their viewers will never be informed.
5
It remains to be seen whether the evidence that DoJ is willing to hand over to Congress would shed more light on possible crimes, like obstruction of justice and power abuse, committed by Trump. DoJ has budged an inch, hoping to fend off any attempt to hold its boss, Willaim Barr, in contempt.
The House Democrats need to hear Donald McGahn, who was the star witness in Robert Mueller’s investigation, or even the special counsel himself.
It’s a real shame that Mueller has resisted the request to testify, saying two weeks ago, that his report speaks for itself, and suggesting that his recent public appearance would be the only one he made.
Should Trump use his executive privilege to stonewall any effort to get to the bottom of the Mueller report, dividing the country with his mendacious tweets and vicious attacks on his critics and opponents, let’s hope there would be a “Deep Throat” within Mueller’s team, who could help the country bring Trump to account.
4
Instead of presenting the whole Robert Mueller report the selective release of the contents by the Justice department shows that there's a systematic campaign by the Trump administration specially by AG William Barr to coverup the truth--a clear sign of the obstruction of justice. But for the sustained pressure of the House Democrats even this much couldn't have been extracted from the Justice department.
4
The title of this article says everything. When it is the DOJ that does not want to hand over evidence, you know it implies that the evidence is not exculpatory.
6
@N The Mueller Report IS exculpatory.
"The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the IRA. [The Russian Internet Research Agency.]"
"Further, the evidence was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election."
Now if you want to go in front of the jury in the Court of Public Opinion and impeach Trump on obstruction charges, be my guest. They know Trump was falsely accused of collusion and that he was set up by holdovers from the Obama administration who used a scurrilous dossier with info provided by Russians to try and lynch Trump or at least make his first two years in office extremely difficult.
People know what is going on, even if you don't.
3
@Dougal E
Insufficient does not mean exculpatory. And yes I - and many others - do not know what is going on. That's why evidence should be handed over.
2
@N
“Insufficient does not mean exculpatory.”
In fact, the entire narrative of William Barr, Republican leaders, and Republicans in general, is based on precisely that premise: that insufficient evidence is exculpatory.
It’s all they have.
1
I don't like or accept being lied to repeatedly by the guy who swore to uphold and defend the Constitution. Therefore, I shall vote for whomever Democrats run next year against President Pathological.
14
" Mr. Nadler said in a statement. “If the department proceeds in good faith and we are able to obtain everything that we need, then there will be no need to take further steps."
Good god almighty Mr. Nadler and all the old line Democrats that seem to be stuck in the late 1960's . After you got the Voting Rights Act passed you just all seemed to have gone to sleep thinking your job was done forever.
Well, Your job isn't done. There is a whole new slew of issues and freedoms we have to fight for. If you aren't willing, whether to old or just don't care, then get out of our way (yes, I am a 66 year old Democrat).
I have watched my over cautious political party accomplish nothing in my adulthood. Only to be ran into the ground my other people that are totally delusional and will cheat any way they can to get what they want.
I have had enough. For the first time in my life there are people in my political party that at least have the guts to say they believe in what I believe. They say they will fight for us, the people.
So, old out of date Democrats get out of my way. Your old argument of the "status quo"; either vote for me or your vote is a vote to re-elect Trump is so bogus. We see the Democratic establishment banning help for people that would like to run in open Democratic Primaries. Just how stupid do you think we are? If I see one more Democrat bring up Clinton vs Sanders. Go get a life!
Come on. Join the new Democratic Party.
10
@Atticus
Well said, sir, well said indeed.
The fight is on and the fate of our nation hangs in the balance. Let us not descend to the tactics of our unprincipled opponents, but neither should we hold back.
Too often have we Democrats collectively sought a safe path leading to the “surest chance” for electoral victory. We have been victimized by liberal pundits’ visions of how things will play out should we run Candidate A, or B, or C... only to learn, to our dismay, that none of them can predict the future.
Let us proudly present our principles, our programs and vision to the people. Programs that serve the broad mass of the American people, not just the select few. Let all registered Democrats choose their candidates in fair and balanced primaries, and send them on to the national convention.
Let the voices of the People be heard.
And let the grime and corruption of Trump be washed from this land.
6
Being unafraid to state the obvious, I'll state the obvious: "Mueller, or any member of his staff."
"And who’s to say that Barr, hasn’t selected what he thinks the congress should see, and the rest and important papers are already in a safe place and DJT, and Barr are the only ones who know where?"
9
@Commenter
Mueller has already stated that we've heard the last from him. There is zero reason to believe that he would comment on any further releases or lack therof.
1
If you throw enough money at a problem president, you can muddy the waters and cause internal chaos that allows us to ignore the pressing national security interests on our southern border. Who is throwing that money, and if the Mueller Report could not accomplish anything definitive, after all that money spent, why are the Democrats keeping up this charade?
1
Too little, too late
2
The Justice Department is the hired help of the American people.
The Attorney General of the United States's client is the American people. And the prime directive of the Attorney General of the United States is to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
9
The Mueller Report and the documents behind it have not changed since they were first requested. Or have they? The only thing worse than giving out those documents directly would be to hand them over now and it proves to be smoking guns everywhere. They must have realized that when redacting in a report that contains so many unanswered questions, questions will be asked. If they have been buying time, what for? Just to stall or to change the paper trails slightly? Who will know if a document from the report "accidentally" goes missing?
4
"Enough of [Barr's] delay tactics! The Democrats need to stop playing nice."
Darn straight! Nadler should just ask a court to declare that Barr is in contempt of Congress? Ever wonder why Nadler does not ask any court to answer that question?
Or does Congress get to decide? That would be unusual indeed -- an obviously "interested" party being allowed to decide the scope of its authority. Usually (as in "always") a neutral party -- a court, for example -- gets to decide that. Ever wonder why Nadler never asks any court to do that?
2
Are Barr’s goals in overseeing which Mueller-documents Congress may receive; akin to Mnuchin’s goals in overseeing the President’s tax audit?
5
I'll believe that is enough when I see it. Congress can not rest alone upon the Mueller Report, as substantive as it is. There are allusions to deeper threats to the Constitution and national security.
We have the utmost weight of moral obligation to act with true courage, leadership, and the ability to tell the story of truth better than the liars can tell a great lie.
Our stories of truth must be far more impactful than the story of their lies trying to cover lies.
Be your best; write more eloquently, with metaphors of universe smashing proportions or call's to the emotional heart strings that are the super strings bonding us through Love to our unity in the One.
"If they are releasing key information why not unlock the whole report?"
Good question. I'm pretty sure the same "grand jury" redactions will be made (according to the NYT, those redactions were 18% of the redactions in the Mueller Report). I can't see any reason why a different standard would apply.
Maybe Nadler should ask a court whether it's OK for the DOJ to release "grand jury" material. Ever wonder why Nadler hasn't?
4
@Commenter
Democrats have, without public acknowledgement, acknowledged that their demand for grand jury material was illegal.
@Commenter
During his confirmation hearing, Barr swore he would release the maximum allowable by law. The GJ members themselves could vote to waive their rights and allow the material to be released. Yet Barr refused to ask. A court could also order it to be unprotected. Yet Barr refused to ask. Barr is the one keeping the GJ material secret by refusing to comply with his sworn promise, not Nadler, and not any court.
2
Now federally elected and appointed ‘public’ officials suddenly have dual privileges and liabilities as officials or as common citizens by their own discretion(s). Yet their oaths of Public Office were not intended as a means to compromise public duties but as a warning not to demean or diminish their Public Trusts because The Public is their Judge as is their relationship to common citizens.
"Could it be that a contempt of Congress constitutes a crime worthy of disbarment [?]"
Maybe so, but Barr is saying essentially that a court, not Congress, ought to decide that.
Only courts get to decide whether a crime has been committed. No prosecutor can do so, even if the "prosecutor" is the US Congress. Nadler is treading softly here NOT because he's a nice guy, but because he's unsure about the strength of his position. Ever notice that Nadler has been consistently unwilling to let a neutral party -- a court, for example -- decide whether Congress has authority to demand that the Executive Branch jump through the hoops that Nadler insists it must jump through? Ever wonder WHY Nadler is unwilling?
3
@Commenter Providing material to Congress so that it can perform its oversight function is not "jumping through hoops".
How many times did Hillary Clinton testify before a Congressional committee?
5
@Commenter
He can't just "let" a court decide, a case has to be brought through the proper steps, and the way this is going, it's probably headed there.
All precedent points to Nadler being within his rights, and consistent with past Congressional oversight requests. Endless legal scholars agree.
There is no Executive Privilege for most items: that only applies to a President's communications with his close advisers.
3
I don't know whether Trump will win in 2020 (though I'd bet he will if I were forced to take a position now). My very strong hunch is that he'll be impeached by the House, not convicted by the Senate (which would require 67 votes), and that his critics will then argue that the Senate has betrayed the American people.
I have no idea whether that argument will be persuasive or not. At the moment, it seems unlikely that it will be, but the situation may change. Either way, I don't see that the Democratic Party has any choice. If they DON'T impeach Trump, he'll insist that that shows he's done nothing wrong, and most Americans will conclude that a great deal of time and money has been wasted.
That leaves impeachment by the House. The Senate almost certainly won't convict, which means that the Democratic Party will argue that the Senate has shirked its duty. I doubt the American people will agree, but I'm much less sure about that than many of the Republicans claim to be. Maybe the American people will then feel that Trump should have been convicted -- of something. I doubt that, but it's possible.
4
Never mind negotiating with Barr. Enough of his delay tactics! The Democrats need to stop playing nice. Either hand over ALL the Mueller investigation materials to Congress now or do jail time for contempt of Congress.
To paraphrase what was stated at the 2016 Republican Convention: Lock them up!
And with all due respect to John Dean, Congress needs to call the “more than 1,000 bipartisan former prosecutors (who) have now signed their names on a petition maintaining that if Trump weren't president of the United States, he would have been indicted on multiple charges for obstruction of justice.” Let’s see how low the Republicans will go to discredit the former law professionals.
SEE: newsweek.com/former-federal-prosecutors-trump-indicted-wasnt-president-1439716
7
Commenter Chin Dao makes a suggestion that differs markedly from most thinking:
"Congress should pay more attention to volume I of the Mueller report."
Volume I, of course, deals with the "collusion" allegation, and Mueller said he'd found no evidence of that. That's why most impeachment proponents focus instead on Volume II, which lays out Trump's efforts to "obstruct justice." Though Mueller recommended NOT charging Trump with any "collusion" crime, he didn't come down either way on the "obstruct justice" charge. He left that to Barr and Rosenstein, and they decided that Trump couldn't be charged with that either. Many observers insist they reached the wrong conclusion; many others insist they reached the correct conclusion.
It really doesn't matter. Congress is free to impeach Trump for just about anything. Some of us Americans feel we should respect the voters' expressed preference, and thus vote Trump out of office in November 2020 if he shouldn't be there. Others feel voters shouldn't get to decide, that Trump should be impeached, convicted and then thrown out on his ear.
For better or worse, Trump is NOT going to be convicted and thrown out of office. If he's "thrown out," that will happen because the voters decide. That's called "democracy."
2
I think you haven’t actually read the Mueller Report. If you had, you wouldn’t need to go no further than page 2 to know that Mueller’s team “applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of ‘collusion.’” And if you read Mueller’s letter to Barr, you would know that he took Barr to task for mischaracterizing his findings as showing that Trump is innocent (of crimes in Volume One). While it is true that Mueller did not prove “coordination” between the Russian government and the Trump campaign, he has 142 pages of details of communications between them. Mueller did not mean to close the case on Volume One crimes. Instead he clearly stated that Congress should continue the investigation based on his findings. That is what Congress is doing. There is plenty to investigate in both volumes of the report - with relation to conspiracy AND obstruction of justice.
Yes, democracy is a great way to select our President and our Congress. But only when we have eliminated the interference of foreign governments, recognized the great harm of gerrymandering, quit efforts to disenfranchise blocks of voters, and rd ourselves of the electoral college, will we truly have a democracy worthy of the name.
8
@Commenter Wrong! Mueller did not examine collusion because it's not a legal term of art.
If you look at what the Trump campaign did vis-a-vis the Russian interference in our election the normal English word which applies is collusion.
Turns out collusion can be legal. Doesn't make it okay. Doesn't absolve any American who thinks it's okay from being considered a traitor by the rest of us. Not in a legal sense.
4
And who’s to say that Barr, hasn’t selected what he thinks the congress should see, and the rest and important papers are already in a safe place and DJT, and Barr are the only ones who know where?
5
Congress has only two sources of authority under the Constitution (three, if you count Congress' authority to determine what's an "emolument" and what's not, which a US district court judge recently argued, persuasively in my view):
1. Authority to make laws.
2. Authority to impeach certain officials, notably the President.
That's it. That district court judge argued -- again, persuasively in my view -- that Congress need not "explain" itself to someone who challenges its authority, but must at least say which authority it's relying on. Here, Congress could say it's considering whether new laws are necessary. (It doesn't have to actually adopt a new law; it just has to consider it).
But why in the world would Congress rely on its authority to adopt laws (or to consider whether a law ought to be adopted or amended)? Why not just say it's considering whether to impeach Trump? Doing so triggers all sorts of authority and -- let's be "real" here -- will ultimately result in the House impeaching Trump (though the Senate will never "convict" him and so he won't actually be removed from office.
The only thing worse for the Democratic Party than impeaching Trump would be to consider impeaching him but decide not to. Trump would tweet till the cows come home that that means the Democrats think he's done nothing wrong.
Most Republicans say that impeachment-without-conviction would be good for Trump, but I don't see how they reach that conclusion. Maybe so; maybe not.
1
@Commenter
So who handles appropriations?
Who handles declaring war?
Who handles imposition of tariffs?
Just wondering.....
5
@MauiYankee I highly recommend that you read the Constitution. (And, on the question of who declares war, take reality into account: the last time Congress actually declared war was on a Sunday in December of 1941. It's true that the Constitution states that only Congress may declare war, but it's been a very long time since that actually happened.)
3
Don't be entrapped in the partisan self-preservation. Barr is a dangerous man who has sold his soul to the Trump upper world.
He will do anything to protect Trump and the latter's family, under the smokescreen of legitimate presidency. But Barr will fail because Trump only gained his fake presidency due to foreign interference, especially the neo-Leninist-Marxist Russia under Putin.
The Congress should pay more attention to volume I of the Mueller report. The proffered evidence that the Mueller team gathered didn't meet the burden of beyond the reasonable doubt was probably due to the fact that the Special Counsel Office was kept out of many documents which may relate to the DOJ regulations. For example, it could not interview Lying Trump and his son, Don Jr, in person.
9
Could it be that a contempt of Congress constitutes a crime worthy of disbarment Are Barr and company thinking about a post Trump world?
7
"While it is true that no man, including the President, is above the law ..."
If the President's life illuminates anything, it is that Mr. Trump has been above the law from the moment he was born. More than 30 years ago, he couldn't get a casino license in Australia because if his ties to the criminal underworld, and that was before he began running with the Russians and laundering their money. Now he's doing to the United States what he did to his businesses: first moral bankruptcy followed by the real deal.
25
I will believe that the Justice Department is cooperating when we see exactly what they send to the Judiciary Committee. I truly believe that the White House is going to lose in the fight to keep people from testifying and to keep the Mueller report from being verified. But with all of the stalling and the attempts to assert executive privilege to keep the American public in the dark will anyone still care when the truth finally comes out?
3
President Trump says Mexico is doing more to stop the border crisis than Democrats.
Prove him wrong.
1
@Dr. John
Proof:
Mr. Trump is a pathological liar.....
......prove that they are......
7
This all sounds momentous but means a whole lot of nothing. The president will not be impeached because he is not impeachable (by cause). Even is such proceedings were undertaken procedurally, it would die constructively in Senate. The DNC is lost (as an organization), has lost (its credibility with core moderates), and will lose (in 2020). Again.
4
If they are releasing key information why not unlock the whole report? Stop adding more fish to the swamp. Swamp is getting bigger and bigger.
6
Broken News (from Fox Fiction):
Here are the terms and conditions laid out by KoKo Barr with respect to House Committee review of Mad Mueller's underlying material.
1. Materials will be available in the 7th floor janitors closet at the DOJ;
2. Once in the closet Representatives and their aides are to close their eyes.
3. A DOJ employee will read each page to the Representative and their aides.
4. No recording devices will be permitted.
5. No pens, pencils, marking pens, crayons or markers will be permitted in the room.
6. Representatives and aides are forbidden to memorize anything that they hear.
Jerrold Nadler has agreed to these terms.
3
"possible" obstruction of justice? This is ridiculous. There's enough obstruction of justice in his twitter feed to justify impeachment. The Dem's need to stop dragging their feet and do what needs to be done, instead of patting themselves on the back for passing bills that are doomed to die in McConnell's Senate graveyard.
11
Not even 1,000 comments... the public is losing interest. Justice blown again due to inaction from our leaders, you can count on it.
4
Losing interest, you say? An yet here we are reading the article and taking time to comment.
3
Disturbing details related to the Mueller report:
(Based on a survey at my local coffee shop)
Half of those polled said they have been sleeping much better after the report .. they found the printed version made for a nice pillow.
The other half asked, Mueller, who?
2
Agreed. Mueller should have added a car chase and an explosion or two so Trump supporters could follow it.
4
Wise up.
We are lucky to have President Trump.
He is trying to make life better for all Americans - and none have been made worse (unless a wild and biased imagination is at work).
3
Donald Trump’s neo-Nazi, Klan and white nationalist followers definitely agree with that.
10
If the tables were turned, what would Republicans be doing? They would have already held the AG in contempt and simultaneously be whipping up a horrific public relations campaign to discredit the AG and his staff. The Democrats are just not meaan enough to compete with the Republicans in these matters.
8
The New York Times needs to continuously publish the video of he heroism shown by Virginia Republican congressman M. Caldwell Butler in his speech to Republican colleagues during Watergate hearings. Mr. Butler is a true American hero who risked his career for the sake of the constitution and future generations.
10
John Dean? Are there any other Watergate villains still alive to come in and add their two utterly irrelevant cents? I was beginning to think, well, maybe they have something, but c'mon. What are they thinking? "Maybe we can get some Nixon stink to rub off... (because otherwise we really got nuthin')". This Dean episode alone makes me now think they got nuthin'.
Why move with an impeachment anyway when they don't have the votes in senate? To showboat for the 2020 election?
3
i don't trust any of it. if there is good stuff to be had this is probably not it. this is politics not governance.
1
Want to get to the bottom of it all? Get Barr, Rosenstein and Mueller side by side on the witness stand and make them answer the same unknown questions one at a time.
15
Jordan and Gaetz’s performance today was pitiful. Why are they not interested in finding the information about our election interference by Russia?
12
Because they know it will sink them and they are dishonest.
6
Given Republican Congressman Jordan’s shifty, shady performance today, it’s no surprise he’s a central figure in that Ohio State wrestling abuse scandal. Along with Roy Moore, Trump supporters seem to like those kind of guys. And don’t forget convicted drunk driver/felon Matt Gaetz.
1
John Dean holds in his hand the evidence that trump and Barr are Soviet agents. Impeachment of both are likely this week.
11
@Fred
Are you trying to be funny? The democrats on the judiciary committee dont care about russia... they are all about impeaching trump or damaging him politically ahead of 2020.
@Fred didn’t Dean get jail time for lying and have his licensed revoked?
Any port in a storm, I guess.
AG Barr seems to think a drip drip drip of information will hold off the contempt vote or maybe sway a few his direction when he's done nothing but obstruct and obfuscate and outright misrepresent.
Go Rep. Nadler. If AG Barr wants unlimited executive authority then give him a copy of the Constitution as a consolation prize after voting him in contempt of Congress.
15
So instead of McGahn and Mr. Mueller being called to testify, Nadler calls John Dean. Brilliant! Lacking strong iron clad evidence, obstruction by Trump is more opinion than fact. Two facts remain clear: the investigation was completed in full and Mueller just would not make a decision one way or the other. Pontus Pilate did similar.
I dislike people without back bone!
2
Perhaps you’ve forgotten that when Pilate saw the truth standing before him, he waved it aside. After all, he asked, “What is truth?” If you are looking for those who sit today in Pilate’s seat and mock the truth, cynically disregarding it or denying its existence, turn your eyes to our president and our attorney general. Gaze and weep.
5
Here we go, another Mueller story (sigh).
OK OK, I'll play along.
Q: Why did the Barr-tender set out empty steins and call it Mueller time?
A: Because there was nothing in it.
3
READ THE REPORT. Note that over 1,000 bi-partisan prosecutors added their names to a statement that anyone committing the acts Trump committed would be indicted and prosecuted. You seem to just hear what you want to hear.
18
That after the Mueller report found nothing criminal just thin threads of possible obstruction as Trump bloviating to fire investigators...but no move was made to do so, there was total cooperation!..I hope voters remember this contrived drama.
1
@Lane Or maybe voters will read the report, as you clearly have not. Thin threads? That's nice rhetoric, but it is not at all what is described in the report.
13
Kind of funny to read Trumps rants on twitter.
They are very similar as we all have heard and seen in many, many movies and read in books in which an arrested criminal in jail, rants against the warden, accusing everyone for his false imprisonment.
If Trump acts one part very well, it is the part of the loudmouth, obvious lousy criminal, who is ultimately willing to even blame his own family members if it will benefit him and get him out of jail.
He is not there yet, right now he accuses every political opponent or lawyers, even some of his lawyers and blame them for his own failures.
For any actor this is a grandiose moment for big (empty) gestures and dramatic grandstanding. For loud (empty incomprehensible) speeches, waiting in vain for applause and then blaming his audience for not reacting.
It is not a Tony winning performance, for that he has to say at least something meaningful, but when you say it loud with big gestures, it might even look great on TV sets where the sound is turned off.
But like in the movies and theater and books,
it will ultimately end up in an inaudible whimper, followed by a loud scream of self inflicted pain.
7
Liberals are being trolled (again) - and don’t even know it.
3
We’re always being trolled by the Right. It seems to be the one thing they’re good at. Carry on.
17
I can see Barr rewriting the report to make Trump the victim.
6
Why are the Dems not standing strong and requiring Barr to hand over everything, as was made specified in the subpoena? Barr's already proven himself to be a liar covering from Trump. The Dems are now essentially leaving Barr with the leeway to hold back the portions of Muellers report and the evidence that is most damaging to Trump. Why?
9
Don't psychiatrists tell their patients not to dwell or focus on the past?
NYT please grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
Focus on the 2020 election.
5
@P&L
In 2016. many liberals could not bring themselves to believe that someone as rude, ignorant and unbalanced as obnoxious Donald Trump could possibly win the presidency. Now we know better. What we didn’t count on was an inexplicable madness that has infected tens of millions of Republicans.
The answer here is not to forget about impeachment and focus on the 2020 election. The answer is to eliminate Trump from the the political picture as soon as the law allows.
Trump can’t win in 2020 if he’s been impeached and convicted. Imprisonment would be an nice dash of extra insurance.
14
But being convicted by the republican senate is the issue.
1
@Mary Ann, no, conviction is not the issue. Indictment under articles of impeachment, followed by presentation of evidence, is the issue.
At this point, impeachment has become morally urgent, and if the Dems default on it, they certainly will not deserve, and probably will not have, a political victory in 2020. It's a matter of trusting candidates to get priorities right.
1
It's clear from today's House hearings that the Trump and his minions are not the only ones bent on obstruction.
GOP House members are now errand boys of the White House.
Very dangerous for our Constitution, the separation of powers, and the system of checks and balances.
16
This is a positive development because Barr has shown that his stalling tactics will halt at the point where the full House would have voted tomorrow to hold him in contempt of Congress. Now lets see if the FBI 302’s reports, and personal contemporaneous notes by witnesses, that have been requested by the House Judiciary Committee, will be included in the documents to be provided by DOJ.
Tomorrow the House will vote to give Chairman Jerry Nadler D-N.Y. subpoena power to get grand jury testimony released to his Judiciary Committee. AG Barr has refused to personally go to court and petition for its release, thus more stalling by the president’s personal legal counselor. An Impeachment Inquiry can’t be voted to begin without some of these important documents, especially the redacted grand jury testimony.
AG Barr is stalling for time in order to get his testimony straight on the Mueller Report in front of the Democrat majority House committees, instead of the do-nothing Republican Senate Judiciary committee led by Lindsey Graham R-S.C.
Too bad for AG Barr and President Trump that the evidence for obstruction of justice in volume 2 of the Mueller Report against the President is strong, solid, and irrefutable. Hold AG Barr in contempt of congress if he continues to stall in his subpoena to appear before Congress. Progress is slowly being made. Unfortunately not as quickly as some would want. There is only one shot at this, so let’s get it right. Onward!
14
Mueller wrote "Second, while the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges."
Barr totally ignored this when he misrepresented the report- way back when he concealed it to spin the narrative.
Even though it was not enough evidence to lay charges it was still evidence of collusion- as Mueller said:
"... the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign..."
Numerous links? Then this gem for those interested in America's well-being:
“Goldstone relayed to Trump Jr. that the "Crown prosecutor of Russia ... offered to provide the Trump Campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia " as "part of Russia and its government ' s support for Mr. Trump." Trump Jr. immediately responded that "if it 's what you say I love it," and arranged the meeting through a series of emails and telephone calls. "
This is not nuclear physics... this is quite simple. All the above is about collusion. It does not even begin to address obstruction of justice.
11
“While it is certainly true that no man, including the president of the United States, is above the law, it is equally true that the president occupies a unique position in our constitutional structure and that some laws apply differently to him and some don’t apply at all,”
I thought conservatives were strict constructionists. Where is this stated in the US Constitution? The founding fathers took great pains to make sure the president was not a monarch. For example the Constitution never states that a sitting president cannot prosecuted for a crime. That is the brain child of the DOJ in 1973. By the way there are also memos from independent and special counsels of the DOJ that take the opposite position.
11
I’ve been reading comments for weeks now which advise Democrats to be very cautious, in spite of the long list of ways in which the president appears to be eminently vulnerable, very likely guilty.
I wonder how many of these defeatist remarks were written by helpful conservative Republicans — trying to spread fear, insecurity and indecision by pretending to be thoughtful liberals.
Some of these comments are as spineless as our Republican senators.
Be of good heart. Do what is right under the law. Do not allow those fearful prognosticators of doom to dissuade you. DO WHAT IS RIGHT, FOR OUR COUNTRY, FOR OUR FUTURE. Have faith that right will prevail.
19
Cite Barr for contempt anyway, he's certainly guilty of that. Keep going after the docs that the DOJ is shielding from public view. Get McGahn up there in front of the committee or cite him for contempt too, and anyone else that refuses to appear under oath to testify about our POTUS. We have the right to know what went on, and what continues to appear to be a crime family running the White House.
12
Trump is a criminal & was one long before he became a “fake” conservative, the question is how far down the rabbit hole is Barr prepared to go in order to shield Trump. Is Trump a traitor or just a grifter caught up in one of his own schemes, inquiring minds want to know. Republicans do not.
11
@John Chastain
You are right, Donald is not respectful of US law. As Mueller said in the report:
"President Trump reacted negatively to the Specia l Counsel's appointment. He told advisors that it was the end of his presidency, sought to have Attorney General Jefferson (Jeff) Sessions unrecuse from the Russia investigation and to have the Special Counse l removed, and engaged in efforts to curtail the Special Counsel's investigation and prevent the disclosure of evidence to it, including through public and private contacts with potential witnesses."
Um.. that would support your contention John that he is a criminal. Obstructing justice is a crime. The above quote from Mueller, therefore, also supports your statement. Especially salient is this segment: (Trump) "engaged in efforts to curtail the Special Counsel's investigation and prevent the disclosure of evidence to it... No wonder 1000 or so prosecutors, Dem and GOP say Trump has a case to answer.
7
The Justice Department needs to release the entire, unredacted report to Congress for them to make their own judgment about what was or wasn't obstructed.
I feel like we're now living in what they used to call a "banana republic," where government agencies continually lie to the helpless and self-victimized population, and where he who lies loudest wins. I was against impeachment for many tactical reasons, but I'm afraid that we're at the point where that may be the only thing that will wake people up from their gaslit stupor.
10
Nixon was crooked, This is a whole new order of crooked.
17
@Mike NY, you wrote “For the DOJ to then try and keep any supporting or exculpatory evidence of such found by the special counsel is what one would term a “coverup”.” Mr. Mike, that is not what “one” would call a “coverup” but is a classic definition of that action.
The only thing that is preventing the proper impeachment of that demagogue residing in the WH is the Democratic Leaders refusal(because of fear or ignorance???) to implement the powers granted by the Constitution, the people and laws of the US.
Everyone with a slight smattering of intellect knows that “171 Russian contacts” with Trump campaigners is not because they like the sounds of the Russian language. Russia believes in harsh “quid pro quo”, if you are not delivering what Putin wants, you get some “Novochok” delivered to you and your family, ask the UK. Putin is NEVER “wishy-washy”, you either deliver what he wants or “you sleep with the fish.” Ask the Russian general who botched the hit on the former spy in the UK. Ooops, never mind that, it seems that the general “now sleeps with the fish.” Do you hear me now?
TO THE DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS: With every minute that you delay or have delayed, you have violated the mandate, and the trust, that the people gave you by the votes of 2018. Irreparable damage has already been done(you know this) and people have even died. That blood is on the hands of everyone who had some power to stop it or intervene and did not. Did not Constitution give you the power?
7
I dunno, could you pontificate some more so I can figure it out?
1
I dunno. Could you be a bit more snide and dismissive of the facts?
To be honest, Looked like an MSNBC panel.
1
I would liked to see William Barr be held in contempt. I would loved to see the House's Sergeant at Arms show up at Barr's home in the early hours and drag him off to the House jail.
Yes, folks, there actually such a place on the premises.
11
It is my opinion that President Trump has promised Attorney General Barr the next Supreme Court slot and Barr is desperate not to push things to the point he would become ineligible for his dream job as a Supreme Court Justice.
4
If the Democrats would like to win a majority of seats in the senate in 2020, here’s a straight-forward plan.
Gather the needed testimony and evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. Obstruction of justice, collusion, campaign violations, constitutional violations, perhaps even treason. Construct an iron-clad, solid case.
If the senate convicts, the Democrats campaign for senate seats based on the fact that, for years, the Republicans failed to confront an out-of-control chief executive.
If the senate acquits, the Democrats point out that the Republican senators put partisan loyalty above law, justice, the safety of our country and our people.
We — the Democrats, the People, our national reputation — can’t lose.
Do the right thing. Have faith in our system of government!
Impeach Trump. Start the process now.
10
What am I missing here? Barr's agreed to turn over some "key Mueller evidence" to the House to avoid the contempt action, but he still defied the subpoena to testify to the Committee and he is still on record for having lied twice under oath. Is the House now letting him off the hook? I don't get it.
8
As a teacher, I am pretty familiar with Barr’s tactic here. I’m not sure why he didn’t go with “my dog ate it.”
11
It’s tough work Congress but just do the job
You were elected to do .
6
Everyone should be very skeptical about what would seem to be a step forward in possibly prosecuting Trump.
The sad fact is that the DOJ would never release anything that would lead back to Trump.
Democrats should be cautious about giving him another PR victory.
5
I have always respected John Dean for coming forward and spilling his guts to Sam Ervin and Howard Baker and the rest of the panel on that fateful day in June 1973.
But I have to be honest here. Does Mr. Dean know more than any of us as to what President Trump actually did or did not know or do? His presence today felt like a desperate act of some kind to garner more support for impeachment. If he personally feels that an impeachment inquiry and/or process is the way to go, fine, great, let's hear it. But I don't think his words alone due to his prior involvement in Watergate should be the basis for a solid and concrete endorsement.
I thought using John Dean, and I mean USING John Dean was a cheap trick. And this is coming from someone who does NOT believe this president nor the Attorney General.
This entire ordeal is beginning to resemble a very bad "Saturday Night Live" broadcast.
4
If Congress could convict of Contempt of Congress for say Don McGahn imprison and disbar him then this might be sufficient to force compliance with subpoena. If Congress has no sufficient penalties to force the a recalcitrant executive to supply oversight material then the checks and balances is mere propaganda and we have a 4 year elected dictator which an additional term possible. Lets hope Congress can compel officials past and present to supply documents and testify. I am not convinced that at this juncture Congressional oversight power is mere propaganda.
3
All of the actions Trump has been taking just look like more obstruction of justice and a cover-up of crimes even worse than we have considered.
Contrary to his nonsense about a witch-hunt, it is Trump's own actions that have persuaded us that there were very bad things done by his campaign, things that border on treason
If he were really innocent of such suspicions his best bet is to let everybody testify and to let everything come out.
The problem is that Trump and his party only think of themselves and how they would act, which is to invent untrue things to blame others and disregard the role of intelligence in assessing evidence. Not having any sense of just fair-play themselves they don't trust anybody else to behave that way. Not wanting a base of voters who can think, they think Democrats likewise have voters who can't use reason.
Those of us who think Trump and others have betrayed American democracy are still willing to consider evidence to the contrary if it exists. . We are fair-minded so while we must insist that Trump is not above the law, it is part of our belief system that he is entitled to the presumption of innocence and the investigation of all of the evidence.
What he is making it very difficult to do is suspending judgment on whether he should be impeached for his current conduct in denying the Constitutional role of Congress in assessing his administration and in making laws.
I will believe it when we are assured that they have received the evidence.
3
22 months of investigation --wait-- report released to Justice --delay-- 4 page summary --wait-- redacted report -- delay -- Mueller speaks -- wait -- Barr agrees to share unknown sliver of redactions with congress --delay.
Pelosi, Nadler, and the rest are being masterfully played, and it is (almost?) too late to bring the facts to some transparency and act on those revelations. The time to act is NOW.
13
I'll believe it (cooperation with House Democrats) when I see it. Fool me once, etc.
12
It is obvious Barr is slow walking Congress and giving them a little bit here and there to run out the clock. He should have provided all evidence right away and anything else is unacceptable. I think he should still be held in contempt is he doesn’t provide all evidence.
19
Well, everyone certainly had quite a few weeks to get their stories straight. Do you really think we believe this? Whatever happened to; "The Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the truth"? The heck with your justice, there is none! Apparently, the entire government is above the law. The Kingmaker Barr is setting precedents and the Democrats are playing pretty please. That walk to the voting polls sure is getting to look a lot longer to me.
10
After that pathetic white-wash presser that Barr pulled before releasing the Mueller report, I wouldn't trust him as far as I could toss him and neither should the American public. At some point we all need to wake up to the fact that this is the most corrupt, incompetent, law-breaking and disrespectful administration in modern American history, if not all American history.
24
The biggest loser? Trump. He'll be up bright and early tweeting about how Barr never was any good, worse than Sessions, should have never been appointed, etc.
6
Barr is in contempt for defying a subpoena. As are McGhan, Hicks, and Donaldson.
Hold them in contempt.
Fine them daily.
22
@Naples
$100,000 per day each.
4
Doesn't matter what the documents say, it won't be enough to satisfy Nadler and his cronies. This nonsense will continue until the Presidential election next November.
6
Congress has the constitutional authority to obtain all of the evidence so what is the problem? If there is nothing to see, you should have no problem with it. The Mueller report report itself contains damning information regarding obstruction of justice which many people are not aware of due to Barr’s misleading summary and press conference. Nadler and the other Democrats are doing their job by informing the public and if there is any problem, they are not being aggressive enough.
19
@Howard J
Read the Russia report.
Volume I details 140+ meetings between Russian agents and the Campaign personnel of Individual-1.
Volume II specifically outlines 4-7 even as many as 10 instances of obstruction of justice committed by Individual-1.
There is a criminal in the White House and his supporters are ignorant of this fact.
6
@Bmnewt No need to repeat what I said.
Let's clarify what Obstruction of Justice is by quoting Mueller's Report:
"Whoever corruptly...influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavours to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress."
Trump is doing that right now as he tells people not to respond to Congressional subpoenas.
You don't even have to be patriotic enough or interested enough in the welfare of the USA to just read that definition. This excuse about not having the time or inclination to read the 440 page report is nonsense. You just have to read one paragraph and turn on last weeks news.
As we say in Australia (like the late Steve Irwin) CRIKEY! A crocodile is nowhere near as dangerous as Trump as he wallows in his swamp.
10
The absolute worse outcome of this entire mess would be the House not proceeding with Impeachment and Trump being re-elected. History would take a very harsh view of the inaction and lack of fulfillment of the Constitutional responsibilities of this Country's elected Congressional Representatives. Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats--whether true or not--would be held responsible for Trump's second term and the consequences from his continued disregard for our democracy.
I doubt the Democratic Party would ever fully recover, the Supreme Court would be ultra-conservative for the next 20 years and the social progress we have made in the last 10 years would forever be reversed.
President Trump obstructed justice and must be held accountable. He may never be convicted in the Senate, but the record will show that we did not just shrug our shoulders or tried to play politics with the truth.
9
Congress still needs an un-redacted copy of the Mueller report itself for context. Also, Bill Barr and the key witnesses interviewed in the report need to quit flaunting the law by ignoring subpoenas and testify before Congress.
6
Are they finally turning on him? Barr was hired to protect and defend Donald Trump. He did not agree to turn over info out of the goodness of his heart. Maybe the owners are seeing the end for of his usefulness.
4
Mueller dropped the ball big time. Volatility has cooled off as time as passed.
4
The impeachment process should have as its goal to do as much damage to Trump as possible ...short of taking the process to the Senate and "dragging" the process out to show the American public the guilt of Trump. The Senate can and should be left out of the process. All members of the House should each and everyone make points pointing to the guilt of the president. Who knows, if they do an efficient job the Senate may not have a choice if for the reason of losing their seat angered by the American public.
8
American taxpayers funded an investigation that doesn't allow them or even their elected officials to see all the evidence. I want my money back.
15
Hold Barr in contempt for defying a congressional subpoena to testify; failing to produce documents to Congress; and for lying to Congress about Mueller’s team disagreement with his interpretation of the Mueller report. So far, without consequences in addition to lying to Congress and defying subpoenas and congressional requests, he also white-washed the Mueller report’s conclusions as best he could exonerate the President. His department also wrote a legal opinion defending Mnuchin’s refusal to turn over the President’s tax return; where Mnuchin had no legal discretion to refuse. And Barr and the President attempted to “classify” or claim “executive privilege” on the Mueller report to prevent its release. Barr is not going to suddenly act in good faith.
12
The House Democrats and the people shouldn’t have to settle for a filtered version of the report. Even if it was honest Abe doing the filtering which clearly Barr is not.
I wouldn’t trust Barr or Trump to change a nickel for five pennies let alone something as important as the Mueller report.
The People’s House should start an impeachment inquiry now. By not using the power of impeachment the House Democrats are taking away the most powerful tool to stop Trump and his mob. Our country is being plundered by Trump, Kushner, Ivanka and others while our Democracy is being destroyed.
8
I'll believe this when it actually happens. Barr and the rest of the Trump loyalists are following the age old strategy of any good defense attorney: delay, delay, delay. They're trying to run out the clock, promising everything, but delivering nothing. The Dems should stick to their original timetable and threats. Every day that passes without the American people and their representatives having the full and unadulterated information they need to determine whether Trump broke the law, is a day too long.
5
THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE Has scored a breakthrough by getting the Justice Department to release some of the evidentiary documents as part of its fulfilling its duties of oversight by providing checks and balances on the Executive branch. Giving those charged with releasing the papers time to comply with the subpoena is logical--it is fair and reasonable. At the first sign of any departure from the agreement, or sending insufficient documents, the Judiciary Committee will then take the next step of taking the matter to court, where the House will prevail. Barr, while a malign influence and a stain on the Cabinet, is intelligent enough to know when he will lose and further disgrace himself. More than that, if taken to court, he could face more severe consequences than the committee could assess, including being placed under arrest, disbarred (pun intended) and incarcerated for contempt of court as well as contempt of Congress. In the end, I believe that Barr is astute enough to realize that he must act to save himself, because Trump will gladly throw him out like a piece of used garbage, whether he wins or loses for him. Trump's anti-social defiance of the laws stretching back over decades, are indicative of his utter incapacity for empathy, remorse and, most importantly utter disregard for upholding the laws and the Constitution, as he is sworn to do.
2
The Mueller report was needed, bought, and paid for by the American people. For some reason, its author chose not to definitively skewer anyone, leaving that job to a higher authority and personally abrogating his own responsibility.
Now, it is likely that a sanitised version of the report, complete with vagaries to be wrung over will be what is submitted. It seems that the report, and the controversy around it, acts like a delaying tactic designed to keep a criminal in office for as long as possible while Republicans re-engineer US society from the local level up, outlawing women’s reproductive rights to slashing taxes for the wealthy. Theirs is not a long term plan for national equanimity, simply an in the now agenda of self enrichment masked by mendacious morality.
I agree with Pelosi that impeachment is risky; she knows the stakes better than most. It might be an ambush waiting to happen. But, contempt for the law is a greater threat that transcends politics. What to do?
The situation is dire for Democrats who lack a killer instinct to succeed against a burgeoning tyranny. The constitutional checks and balances never took into account a wilful defiance of the rule of law by its leader aided and abetted by his party. If I was Pelosi, I’d be engaging in an unrelenting media campaign, because the base is media driven, around the concept of your president is a villain who must be removed. Let the voter impeach him.
3
How much info is Barr really releasing? I have doubts because the man has unprecedented power and I just don’t see him handing over anything of worth. However, the longer he drags it out...the closer to the 2020 election this will come to fruition.
1
How can the evidence collected by Mueller shed new light when the "old" light was determined by the same Mr. Mueller to be inconclusive?
3
It wasn't inconclusive. It was pretty clear that Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice and other outrages. Mueller only said that bringing charges for such crimes was not part of his purview.
7
So said over 1,000 BI-PARTISAN prosecutors. Trump should be prosecuted and ultimately jailed.
5
America needs the "appearance" of a Presidential Impeachment!
We really gain nothing by an Impeachment Conviction in the House, only to be denied a conviction in the Senate, which right now appears to be a certainty.
However, if we begin an official Impeachment Inquiry, then our rights, and specifically, those rights of the House, make in more realistic, and legal, to obtain the required documentation from all sources, for a thorough impeachment investigation of the president.
By doing so in this manner, the current stonewalling by the GOP and the Justice Department, will cease, and the power of our Congress for asking for and securing the requisite evidence for a full impeachment investigation will be not only possible, but will do so as per the legal doctrines already associated with the act of impeaching a sitting president.
We should not be fooled by the recent DOJ acquiescence of releasing Mueller information.
As William Barr is the Captain of the Mueller Disinformation Ship, we should not anticipate "anything" useful towards the cause of bringing justice to our country.
"They" are simply stalling - running the clock out.
Using the strategy of a very well planned Impeachment "Inquiry", could afford us a steady stream of real dirt which will certainly muddy any expectations of re-election of Trump.
Goal #1 - Prevent the Re-Election of Trump - PERIOD !
He must be removed from office.
Goal #2 - Unveil Trump and his "crew" for the criminals they actually are.
7
Notice that they are getting "summaries" of interviews. Not any actual evidence. No actual testimony, no actual correspondence, nothing. It's a show, the fix is in, just another day in the Fascist States of America.
6
Justice does not want to risk a court precedent here, so they have little choice but to cooperate. Or, are they confident that the investigation into the investigation into the investigation will give them the (ultimate) scape-goat and make this all go away? Hmmmmm...
1
There isn't much to be gleaned from Mueller's "evidence". The reason is Mueller, as a faithful Republican, felt his duty was to exonerate Trump, who fully owns him and everyone else in the GOP.
Democrats will have an extremely hard time accepting this because it implies accepting there is no such thing as American Democracy, and this transcends political parties because it implies America's Democracy is a fraud. You can't see what you have been programmed not to see from early childhood - most Americans would rather live their fantasies of democracy than see the truth.
1
How can they check if all the requested material is all handed over? Anybody actually trust Barr?
Instructing people not to obey subpoenas is in plain sight obstruction of justice by OJ (Obstruction of Justice) Trump.
The main difference between the 2 OJ's is that one could not get his hands into a glove and OJ Trump could get his small hands into every glove in America.
2
This article is a display of moving the goal posts.
After demanding a bunch of stuff they clearly can't get, like grand jury transcripts, while refusing to accept less, now they accept that lesser offer and it is claimed as a victory over Trump.
Nonsense.
3
Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said “today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.”
What's the date? How many months make for a stonewall? Justice delayed is justice denied!
11
The material would eventually come out. But the Justice Department (i.e. Bill Barr, Trump's personal lawyer) delayed and delayed until the public lost interest. It is now time for Democrats to make sure that this stays on the front page.
5
This article states that "key evidence" would be provided by the Department of Justice to Congress but then states "The exact scope of the material the Justice Department has agreed to provide was not immediately clear". How does the NYT know that the evidence is "key" if it does not have knowledge of its scope?
4
The New Trump Department of injustice is a cult with images of William Barr and Rod Rosenstein by the front door.
Word of the DOJ sending Congress valuable information is a dark promise.
The Democrats have to dial up their game to match the deceptions of the New DOj
2
is a little bit of history from 1973 that Nadler and Pelosi should recall:
After Nixon fired Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in what has been called the Saturday Night Massacre, newly seated House Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino (D-NY) began his committee's investigation. The committee spent eight months gathering evidence – "mostly behind closed doors but with frequent news leaks" – and pushed Nixon to comply with a subpoena for conversations taped in the Oval Office.
As the Judiciary Committee prepared to vote on articles of impeachment, Rodino said: "We have deliberated. We have been patient. We have been fair. Now the American people, the House of Representatives and the Constitution and the whole history of our republic demand that we make up our minds." The committee, with six Republicans joining the Democratic majority, passed three of the five articles of impeachment.
Now it’s 2019, Nadler is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee the clock of justice is ticking away. Mueller released his report several months ago and Nadler is once again dragging his feet and acting as a sucker while naively believing Trump and his personal attorney general William Barr agreeing
to cooperate and Nadler is trading away his constitutional powers. Say what one will about Chairman Nadler but he’s no Peter Rodino.
1
There is plenty already there in the report that most Americans are not even aware of. How about this?
"Kislyak indicated that he wanted Kushner to meet someone who had a direct line to Putin: Sergey Gorkov, the head of the Russian-government- owned bank Vnesheconombank (VEB). Kushner agreed to meet with Gorkov. 1151 The one-on-one meeting took place the next day,"
This may not be an air tight case of conspiracy but it sure looks like collusion to me.
8
@Bob Guthrie
retired federal attorney F/70
Thank You! Spoon-feeding is the only way we can out the facts that speak for themselves.
My neighbors are mostly FL retirees from OH + PA + W VA rural poor places who came to FL to take care of sick and dying parents. All have worked always all ways. So each expects me to listen and then deliver only what she requested and I do. Using the same numbers of words in plainer-English than you used and a page reference to the SCO Report AND a date for DJT's on-TV statements.
Listen - don't talk. Not yet a message that most of the people running for D Presidential nomination have practiced and can do. Only thing remarkable about Sen. Warren is that she always forgets to ask during endless photo selfies after events "Do YOU have questions I didn't get to? Those who say "Yes" get introduced to a staffer who confirms the question and gets an answer by whatever means that voter chose as part of a Thank You communication.
Questions matter more than answers. Always all ways.
2
That didn’t take long! Doesn’t our ignoble leader understand that if he had nothing to hide, he wouldn’t have to worry about any Congressional discovery?
Every day we get a little bit closer to justice. Good will prevail, right will trump wrong, and dishonorable actors will be punished.
3
I understand the focus on obstruction since it is a felony and it is the most apparent issue...perhaps the easiest to pursue.
But let's not lose sight of the multiple examples of collusion (noted: not enough to charge criminal conspiracy per precise legal code and per DOJ rules). Even if not criminal, after reading Vol 1, I believe there certainly appears to have plenty of evidence for impeachable offenses post election relative to not protecting the country, the election process, etc. Plus those people who have not kept up with the details or who think it is all fake news really need to have all those issues exposed for what they were: colluding for nefarious purposes with agents of a foreign government to win an election or tamper with it or for personal monetary gain.
1
The best evidence of the worst crimes committed by Trump & Company remains redacted in Mueller's report and the underlying documents.
Nobody thinks that Trump (via Barr) is ever going to WILLINGLY give Congress this part of Mueller's report.
It must be taken.
This is why Congress must have EVERYTHING Mueller discovered in his investigation. Mueller must be cross-examined to divulge EVERYTHING he did not write down in his report.
An impeachment investigation is the ONLY way to accomplish this.
Mueller will then have to talk about all subject matter that might be impeachable, and not merely the Russia investigation and not merely what he would consider criminal activity that he discovered in the course of his investigation.
4
Millions of Americans remain highly skeptical of any promised cooperation by the Department of Justice in releasing documents to which the House has had an absolute right to receive when they were first requested weeks ago.
Judiciary Committee Chairman, Jerrold Nadler of New York, has shown considerable restraint – perhaps too much – in awaiting compliance by Attorney General William Barr.
It seems likely that Mr. Barr and his staff will use the coming week, not to organize for compliance, but to formulate yet another pretense for stonewalling the Committee and the nation.
1
Makes getting teeth pulled seem easy. No obstruction here?
Get Republicans out of our government, out of our country, out of our world.
30
Dear Democratic Party:
Before you start jumping up and down and clapping your hands with glee, remember who you are dealing with.
You are dealing with Barr and the Republican-Right-Wing-Network.
Do you really think that they're ever going to give you ANYTHING that will help you?
Stop dancing around the Maypole in Golden Gate Park and pretending that it's the Summer of Love again!
You are dealing with the Republican-Right-Wing-Network.
They consider you as their ENEMY.
They will do anything - and everything - to destroy their enemies.
26
William Barr figured out the citizens of the US are a little brighter than what he thought!
7
Actually not. He’s just trying to avoid censure. The average American is apathetic and uninformed.
8
This is ongoing. He's still trying to obstruct justice in his daily tweets. The question, Mr. President, is what have you done to prevent Russian interference in future elections? Nothing as far as I can see. You seem to think it's fine, as long as it's working for you. This alone makes you corrupt and unfit.
21
This is beautiful news.
1
Donny may be more corrupt than most politicians, but the corruption infects both Democratic and Republican parties. Politicians should be accountable to the voters, not the people with the most money.
5
That’s true in other countries but not in the US.
2
I hope this development does not shield anyone from prosecution for having ignored congressional subpoenas. Subsequent non-bad acts do not nullify a prior crime.
8
We are fortunate to have President Trump and AG Barr.
They each have made huge familial and financial sacrifices to serve the country and working Americans. Due to their refusal to wilt under constant pressure and hostility, we will soon learn who truly interfered with the will of the voters
5
Try READING the Mueller report. Pay attention to evidence, not spin.
6
@Denise
I did.
Nothing that had not been reported before.
If this “obstruction” was so rampant and obvious, Mueller would have indicted those in his family or other who were also engaged.
In other words - there was no obstruction.
4
Wrong. Clearly you didn’t hear Mr. Mueller at his press conference. You also apparently didn’t read that more than 1,000 prosecutors would prosecute Trump on the evidence. There was clearly obstruction, more lies and more obstruction of Congress’s authority where Mueller intended the follow up to continue. Trump fancies himself a dictator. Apparently, so do you? Sorry, this is America and we don’t tolerate a dictator who thinks he is above the law. Je’s not and he will be prosecuted. Got it? No way you read the report. It is so clearly anything but exculpatory.
1
Why do I have this feeling the disclosure will be a ameliorated nothing-burger, reinforcing all minds and changing none?
5
The scope of the material is not immediately clear. Mr Barr is not going to offer incriminating information on his " client.
I'll believe it when I see it. This is a stall as far as I'm concerned.
I hope I'm wrong.
11
We Democrats are great at nuance, but we should accept that, notwithstanding the details of the Mueller report, thanks to the President’s brilliant choice of AG Barr, we have lost the narrative and are unlikely through all the various upcoming hearings in the House,to recover it. Best House can do on the issue is to continue to pass bills directed at preventing foreign influence in 2020 election and make Mitch explain why Senate shouldn’t even consider them. There is no path to removing Trump other than electing someone else.
6
Barr is playing the Democrats. Again.
34
And Lucy is definitely going to let Charlie Brown kick that football this time.
If you think Barr isn’t running out the clock while setting up Democrats to appear unsatisfiable...you haven’t been paying attention.
37
Maybe you are the one who is not paying attention. You are simply taking for granted that all this corruption, which over 1,000 prosecutors are on the record as saying they WOULD prosecute Trump, is the new normal and we can just get used to it. Well, that is not going to happen. We will keep digging and we will get the truth. Got it?
4
It would seem that William Barr has decided to try and save himself and not go down with Trump's sinking ship.
5
They’ve agreed to hand over the documents. But, “the scope is still to be” ...
Then they’ll disagree about the “nature” before agreeing.
Then they’ll disagree about the “depth” before agreeing.
Then, they’ll disagree about the “mode” before ....
Then they’ll disagree about the “core” before ...
sure sounds like they’re doing a lot of movement!!
10
Old news. This is not a new agreement. Everything was worked out months ago as to what would be turned over to House Democrats. There’s little new. It’s like what Mexico must do to prevent tariffs from being imposed.
3
Fake news. Nothing of merit will be turned over. It's all be "redacted" for fear someone may notice the DOJ is breaking the law.
8
Donald Trump today tweets "Can’t believe they are bringing in John Dean, ... " in his latest rant.
ashington Post/John Wagner today headlines :
"President Trump has made 10,796 false or misleading claims over 869 days" - "The president has been averaging about 16 fishy claims a day since he crossed the 10,000 threshold in April."
Trump is an extreme present hedonist, as readily seen by his narcissism, his lack of self worth (i.e., playing the eternal victim) and his pathological lying. Trump needs some professional mental assistance, stat.
23
His mental condition is not amenable to treatment. The only effective approach to character disorders such as borderline personality is containment.
The Democrats don’t do well with this.
We have to rely on the American voter.
Good luck with that.
2
This ongoing drama strikes me as a clear case of good vs. evil. On the side of good: our U.S. Constitution, every president and U.S. Congress who/that operated on our behalf in conformance with that Constitution and average Americans who vote for members of Congress, expecting them to obey that Constitution. On the evil side: Nixon, Trump and their gangsters who worked to violate our Constitution.
14
Right, now the wrangling starts over what the DOJ deems relevant material
6
It already has been agreed on. The timing is the only question.
The old saying applies here: better late than never. Would prefer better cooperation with the Congress as they do their job of oversight. If there is nothing to hide, why hold on to the complete contents of the Mueller Report? With so much public interest in the findings of the long awaited Mueller Report, the apparent strategy to dole out bits and parts of the report may well backfire.
7
Barr doesn't really care about a finding of contempt, and would just ignore it anyway. That's all just an act.
I get the impression Pelosi and Nadler are being had, and will get nothing of value, or only selective documents intended to obstruct further, or it will all be delayed again. Barr's DOJ is not suddenly playing nice, they're being just as strategic in defense of Trump as they have been up to now.
10
The DOJ and Congress are supposed to be on the same side, but in this case, the DOJ seems to be protecting President Trump, which is not part of their job description.
11
While all of this is unfolding, we witness ever more outrageous claims by Trump. After Trump backed off on the Mexican tariffs, he Tweeted that Mexico agreed to purchase additional farm products. The Mexican president retorted that wasn't true.
Today, Trump Tweeted that the Mexican agreed was signed, but the Mexican president replied that wasn't true either.
Essentially, Trump's delusion or deliberate lying is getting worse. As a resident psychologist, the presidential trolley is rapidly leaving the tracks.
20
There are two issues here:
1. The American people (that's EVERYONE) must see (and READ - ha) ALL of the Mueller documents. The issues that he investigated are critical to our national security and integrity of our government (such as it is). They have already revealed much more than the Watergate investigation and we're just getting started. There is a dead (orange-faced) fish here - there must be because of all the stink.
2. There is obstruction by the AG, via Trump, and in collaboration with Mnuchin and others. This rises to the level of HIGH CRIMES and must be dealt with NOW. There already exists enough unquestionable proof of such; now we must find the appropriate venue by which to prosecute accountability.
We are very lucky that the Democrats refuse to cave under Trump's insane attack upon our Democracy. Were they to do that, all of his already-committed crimes would pale in comparison to what would be coming.
We have a CRIMINAL EXECUTIVE, supported by criminal acolytes. This is unacceptable in our Democracy and must be dealt with. Our next election MUST be fair and truthful (which eliminates Trump from eligibility already).
12
I strongly feel that following Mueller spending two years on his report and convicting several people who have been incarcerated enough investigating has been done for the House Democrats to draw up a couple of articles of impeachment just based on the Mueller Report in and of itself. A vote is called for impeachment on, say, three counts of obstruction of justice and one other charge and the Mueller Report "is attached." Then, the public watches a Republican majority Senate argue against conviction running up to election 2020 and the Democrats hope to gain Senate seats. I am a friend of the President from our college years and wish him the best, but I do not see why the Democrat majority House should want or should be required to initiate any process whatsoever following the Mueller investigation and report except for a vote.
3
The request needs to be a subpoena for Mueller Team reports, making frequent use of the expressions ‘unredacted’ and ‘any and all’, sending investigators in to make sure a critical file or thumb drive isn’t left under a seat cushion.
6
The more information that is out there for public scrutiny (or at least Congressional scrutiny) the better it is for the maintenance of the "Rule of Law". Eventually the Congress may still need to subpoena people and investigative evidence. After all, the "Russia investigation" did identify Russian interference in the 2016 election. Maybe Senate Republicans don't care about American electoral misconduct since they still hold a majority in the Senate. But, just maybe there are enough Americans who do care about our national electoral process and the rule of law. McConnell and Graham may just have to answer to the American voters in 2020.
5
My first and continuing thought on reading this is that R. Mueller needs to receive a copy of whatever Barr sends to the House to verify that what Barr sends is indeed unedited, unredacted, or not the complete report. Barr is untrustworthy.
35
That’s one of the reasons Mueller needs to testify.
6
I know it’s off topic and no crime but WHY has Trump’s juvenile immaturity and his being less articulate than an average truck driver NEVER EVER mattered?
19
Attn Mr. Trump: Mr. Nadler has just made an ACTUAL deal. Not a double-super-secret deal that I might tell you about some day.
11
Hmmm.... Why do I have this picture in my head of Lucy assuring Charlie Brown that she will not move the football this time? ;-)
13
Another big "coverup" narrative fizzles.
2
Dear, way this works is, you don’t have to argue for a month or so and threaten a contempt proceeding with people who’re cooperating.
6
Amazing how interested the dems are in a subpoena. Didn't Eric Holder withhold documents subpoenaed by congress and didn't they hold him in contempt? And didn't Hillary Dillary Dot.com destroy emails on her server subpoenaed by congress?
Oh the humanity, the humanity.
When will the left finally recognize they lost in 2016, Trump won. It's senseless to keep trying to overturn those results.
1
Interesting points but irrelevant. This inquiry is only with respect to alleged criminal conduct of the POTUS.
13
@Ralphie Actually, the Russians won in 2016. The nation lost.
14
Hillary Clinton never destroyed an e-mail.
She, like the rest of us erased ones before they were requested.
Her e-mail was not subpoena’d by Congress but requested, don’t remember if subpoenaed by the DoJ.
Holder was not part of the loop.
Otherwise the comment is accurate.
3
Trump is the new Nixon
4
Most intriguing of all, Trump was the new Nixon even before he became elected to POTUS!
On the other hand, look at the #1 alternative of 2016, in Hillary Rodham. Even today there are people who shudder at the thought of what might have happened...
Please explain?!? Why diabolical info do you have on Hilary that the rest of us don’t?
3
And I doubt Nadler will read any of it.
In the end, this will all peter out with a whimper.
The Democrats need to do what the Toronto Raptors did...use the opponents’ playbook.
4
This is just a stall tactic and I'm upset the House is playing along. A bank robber doesn't get to negotiate how much stolen money they get to return and then scamper away scot free. The DoJ is clearly still in contempt and the House should pass the resolution already to get everything they asked for.
11
I predict that once the first leak to the press takes place within an hour of this material being shared with members of Congress, Bill Barr will have no choice but to end his cooperation.
And that, indeed, may be the purpose of this exercise in the first place.
4
I have been listening to the Congressional hearings on this today and find it disappointing. Anyone who has read the report can see that there was plenty of coordination between Trump and Russia. Multiple attempts to lie about meetings, set up back channels, obstruct investigations. We have an attorney general continuing to distort facts and obstruct. And the only thing the Dems can do is call in people for expert opinions. Nobody will listen. We need Mueller. We need Barr. We need McGahn and Lewandowski. These guys all need to provide public testimony. The country is missing the point here. Volume 1 shows very large and concerning problems. Volume 2 shows crimes. And the obstruction is not over. Dems must respond more strongly than this.
8
Doug Jones’s comment that this very belated and very limited deigning to supply the committee with documents somehow proves that the Democrats were being unreasonable is at best disingenuous, and more realistically yet another example of the cynical disregard for the constitution that the GOP has displayed in the last two years. The case against the president is plain to see from the freely available Mueller report, so withholding evidence at this stage merely confirms those who have read the report that AG Barr is engaging in a cover up for which he eventually should be punished.
6
If obstruction of justice occurred, President Trump did not do it alone, and Mueller had the power to indict the accomplices
Why didn’t he?
2
@Dr. John He did.
9
@Steve C
No he did not charge anyone with conspiring with trump to obstruct....
Moreover, mueller found that there was no underlying conspiracy with Russia: as Barr concluded correctly, there was no corrupt morive here, i.e. no no reason for trump to obstruct. It is reasonable to conclude that this was a .partisan smear, abd he has a first amendment right to fight back.
"House Judiciary Committee members said [material] could shed light on possible obstruction of justice and abuse of power by President Trump, the House Judiciary Committee said on Monday."
More likely: this tantalizingly parsed-out update might shine some real light into exactly what House Judiciary Dems fear most: revelations about what Mueller avoided and flat-out lied about: the background behind the dossier, the Obama DOJ crimes and the extent to which who knew what when.
Buckle up.
1
Yes, it matters that this evidence will be available to Congress. But does anyone seriously believe that further findings, however incriminating .. will change the perspectives of the Trump electorate? These folks are all-in .. and that is truly sad.
4
I can't imagine a single thing they would give up that wouldn't be tainted already. Barr has shown he isn't acting in good faith when he gave the summary of the Mueller report. it's unlikely the justice department is going to hand over anything that isn't already heavily filtered.
4
This all started when Mueller refused to clear the president and Barr did not support those statements.
It is possible to mislead without lying and to be dishonest before Congress without perjury.
One can convey sweeping untruths without substantial factual misstatement.
This is what the Attorney General has been doing since his first letter.
3
So the headline reads "Key ... Evidence"; not " All Evidence". Does this mean Barr and trump are still picking and choosing what they share? And if so, what is to prevent them from cherry picking, and only sharing the evidence which does not implicate trump? If this happens, trump could claim he was open (while he wasn't), the Dems would have to state that the evidence cleared him (even tho they didn't see all the evidence), and trump could continue to whine about the "witch hunt". Seems like this could be a big loser for the Dems if they don't have some way of getting the evidence they need, not just the evidence trump decides to share.
4
Yep, Congress better hurry up summer vacation is in about two weeks see you again In September .
Part time government workers getting full time benefits, know wonder they want to keep getting re-elected.
1
I want to believe this will make a difference. I want to believe (enter music) . . .
1
I want them to give Richard Neal Trump's tax returns.
There is a reason that makes Trump so nervous.
6
@Independent
Sure. It makes all tge sebse in the wirld to force Trump to hand over tax returns for his private business to his politucal enemies, who spent the last three years claiming he was a Russian asset and traitor....
"The exact scope of the material the Justice Department has agreed to provide was not immediately clear.."
Sounds like the start of a sketchy story, like one you might hear on the Rachel Maddow show...
Seems fairly clear that this all part of the Administration's strategy to run out the clock:
1) Refuse a House committee request
2) Wait until committee threatens to hold one or more Administration members in contempt
3) "Negotiate" over some period of time, then promise to provide more info in the coming weeks
4) Loudly self-congratulate your demonstrated "good faith" commitment to "transparency"
5) Provide less info then promised
6) Accuse Democrats of being unreasonable
7) Rinse & repeat
Before long, it'll be "too close to the election" and "up to the voters to decide." Said "deciding voters" will have been deprived of the detailed information on Trump's criminality and corruption that would have come out in impeachment proceedings - and, thus, have enabled them to make an informed choice - but, hey, at least no one will be able to say that the Democrats in Congress behaved unreasonably.
32
It's somewhat concerning that the Justice Department deciding to obey the law is now considered a victory.
20
Remember when Trump Taj Mahal Casino filed for bankruptcy?
Before that it was fined nearly a half million for several violations, including but not limited to failing to report suspicious transactions, failing to properly file required transactions in foreign currency, failure to conduct periodic external audits to examine money laundering activity, the list went on and on.
Now our government is being run the same way he ran his casino and real estate practices.
NO WONDER Russia's Vladimir Putin and the Saudi Prince Prince Mohammed bin Salman were seen high-fiving each other.
Barr should not only be held in contempt of Congress, he should be charged with committing perjury.
And after buying his way out of 3 class action lawsuits accusing Trump "University" of fraud and racketeering, on that alone, Trump should NEVER have been endorsed for President in the first place.
Read the Mueller Report.
And don't forget to read the footnotes also. In several instances, conspiracy couldn't be verified because Trump's answers to specific incidents were: "I don't recall".
Honestly.
At least when Nixon stole from the DNC, he didn't use Russians to break in.
18
Clearly administration tactics(they have no strategy} is to drag things out as long as possible to create public perceptions come Novmber 2020 that the Ds are ineffective and obsessive about Mueller related issues. Barr will not honor the current agreement in substance Nadler and Pelosi will have to go after him again in the near future.
4
As long as Attorney General William Barr violates an authorized subpoena to appear before the House Judiciary Committee investigating allegations of criminal wrongdoing by President Trump, he must be voted by the full House of Representatives for contempt of Congress, immediately without further delay!
William Barr is the attorney for the people of the United States, not President Trumps own personal legal counsel.
He brings great shame to the whole Department of Justice, for his conduct to be a shill for President Donald J. Trump!
11
Barr has shown his hand and given the House considerable leverage. I guess a pardon from the boss doesn't do it for him.
1
Land Ahoy.
The approaching 2020 election may be causing a weakening of resolve amongst those in the moat surrounding President Trump. As more is revealed by his own behavior as well as his pursuers the impending consequences of blind loyalty to a vulnerable despot gain traction.
1
Uh-huh.
Meanwhile, Mr Barr is slowly getting to the bottom of the malfeasance that resulted in the greatest political scam/scandal in American history.
1
Thie seems to be an example of "Holding someone's feet to the fire" and thank God it seems to be working. This whole attempt to block the committee from doing its Constitutional duty is of course another obstruction of justice it seems to me. Is anyone else getting fed up with the White House's actions?
519
@seniordem
I understand the urge to feel optimistic that some real progress to getting at the truth is happening, but until the details of what is being released and the content of it and what is still not being released is known and told to the public, in at least general terms if not classified specifics, then I am more than skeptical and suspect that this is just more of the delay and stonewalling strategy of the White House.
I don't yet see much (any?) reason to believe there is any real capitulation or good faith negotiations until we know more.
54
@seniordem I think what you are seeing is the Democrats realizing that the Mueller report already gives them everything there is.
The Mueller team picked out the highlights that make the best case for obstruction. There's nothing hidden in grand jury testimony (which the Democrats will still not get) or underlying evidence that changes or even adds to what is already public.
The Democrats have many people believing that there are still hidden truths to be found. After a two-year investigation by a powerful group of lawyers and investigators using every tool available, what could still be hidden that some committee is going to be able to find?
11
@seniordem
In the old country it’s called tie him to the tree and put the blow torch to his feet.
It never failed.
9
Legal/personnel question:
If Barr is held in contempt and subsequently found to be in contempt of Congress, that is a crime subject to a fine and a substantial jail term (up to 12 months).
As a convicted criminal, he would be subject to disbarment, losing his license to practice law in any and all jurisdictions where he holds said licenses.
If disbarred, can he even legally serve as Attorney General? Or would the House need to impeach him to remove him?
Or am I way off the beam here?
358
@Tanner
More importantly, does a conviction disqualify Barr from being considered to serve on the Supreme Court, which is Barr’s intention.
100
@Tanner
Yes, because this would never make it to court. Justice Dept would refuse to prosecute.
10
@Tanner
He cannot serve as Attorney General without a law license. I can't imagine Barr pushing it far enough to allow himself to be criminally charged with obstruction. In all worlds where normal laws apply, he would have to resign.
Technically, he couldn't serve as a judge either. But with Trump in office and republicans still controlling the senate, I can't say for certain that they wouldn't appoint him to the Supreme Court anyway.
71
There is a huge vacuum to be filled and that is the public's lack of knowledge of what went on especially after Barr's one month propaganda barrage. Every American needs to learn, each in his/her own way, what is in the Constitution regarding removal from office and what volume 2 of the Mueller Report said. The more the public is educated, the less imposing will the dilemmas facing the Democrats be. The public must realize that the House is doing its duty under the Constitution and their oaths of office and that political considerations, mostly from the bias of the Republican majority in the Senate, make it very difficult to get a conviction. But politics and public service are loaded with dilemmas and it takes great wisdom to know which side to come down on. Like many other Americans, I favor duty over political advantage.
264
@Phil Levitt.... It does seem that without reading every word of 400 pages plus, most of the public does realize the implications of the Mueller report---and why it was even necessary, and disapprove of Barr's propaganda barrage.
On many issues the govt is simply unresponsive to the public will --health care, fair taxation, gun safety, economic equality, abortion rights, education financing, etc.. Big power doesn't give up easily.
It's not dilemmas and lack of public wisdom. It's that we the people can't get representation for our taxation. The same demand by the colonists who overthrew rule by King George and his colonial elites. Just taking new form and redefined as something else, in the 21st century.
37
@Phil Levitt and @Meredith, I agree with all you have said. The phrase, "no taxation without representation" has occurred to me, too. The concept of politicians as "public servants" is completely lost, and the power of our votes stolen from us. Commenters continually ask why Americans aren't protesting en masse; I think it's because we think it will be ignored. We're still waiting for our politicians to do their jobs. If Americans refused, en masse, to pay taxes, would that get results?
23
@GWoo
I think we Americans are protesting en masse.
3
Much of the reaction here to the contrary, this is a good development. The Justice Department has recognized in this agreement that the House Judiciary Committee has a right, enforceable in court, to the substantial information listed in this article even though the President and the AG had previously claimed Executive Privilege for anything remotely connected to the Mueller investigation.
The information is particularly useful for the key task, explaining the Mueller report, which spoke for itself only up to a point, to the significant portion of the American public which has not paid close attention to the Mueller Report.
Long range, this is also significant because the Justice Department, in agreeing to a major document dump for the Judiciary Committee, has cut the ground out from under its preposterous claim that it can order, under the guise of Executive Privilege, private citizens to defy lawful Congressional subpoenas.
A good day for the rule of law, so long as the Justice Department promptly delivers the promised material to Judiciary Committee. "Trust but Verify" (President Reagan's oft quoted Russian proverb).
189
@Frank McNeil No, the Justice Department did not recognize any right to the materials that will be provided. They agreed to provide them, but did not agree that they were required to do so.
9
@Frank McNeil
It is not clear from reading this article what will be made available. It does not state the full report will be made available.
Despite the assertion of Mr. Collins, the White House and the Justice Department have been stonewalling the investigation. Failure to comply with a congressional subpoena is a serious matter, unconstitutional and possibly criminal.
Failure to comply with the Congressional requests fully needs to be followed with a swift contempt response, without hand wringing and without dithering, and have Mr. Barr experience the 'fateful lightening of Our terrible swift sword' forcing him to comply immediately.
It's time to move on.
177
@Paul Zorsky
He's probably very aware of this (NY Times, July 4, 1975)
"John N. Mitchell, the former United States Attorney General who was convicted of perjury and conspiracy to obstruct justice in the Watergate scandal, was disbarred yesterday from practicing law in New York State.
His disbarment was believed to be the first in the history of the United States of, a lawyer who held such high office. According to Justice Department officials, no other person who held the office was ever disbarred."
26
@Paul Zorsky As an ex-patriot Amarillo native, it is refreshing to see that it still falls short of being 100% dyed-in-the-wool, Right Wing aligned. Though I realize you are not alone, I still have to admire your courage living there!
And thank you for your comment, it is a serious matter, and one that merits watching very closely.
4
I fail to see this as much of a victory. Bill Barr gained a month of time, a month that allowed Pelosi to continue to argue against an impeachment inquiry, despite the growing number of house reps calling for it.
Anyone who hasn't yet read the lead article on William Barr and his role in consolidating power in this DOJ would be well advised to read it. It's pretty clear this AG will do whatever it takes to slow, defer, delay, or stonewall until it's no longer possible.
I hardly see this as respecting Congress, more like grudgingly conceding a point here and there just to look like he's cooperating, when he decidedly isn't.
527
@ChristineMcM,
A move to quickly impeach is a move to acquital which is how Senate non-conviction will be sold to the public. (A reminder: Senate conviction requires a 2/3 vote.)
18
@ChristineMcM....but also during that month, more of congress came out for impeachment. Pelosi's prestige is reduced. And her 'jail Trump' remark was on Trump's low level and then he fires back---etc.
5
@carol goldstein there is a vast difference between an impeachment inquiry and impeachment itself. There is lag time between the two to analyze the data and draw up articles if warranted. The entire process takes time. By doing nothing, not even holding the inquiry, Congress is abdicating its duty.
71
Anyone that's just above being in a vegetative state knows this is not going to be what it appears to be.
Trump's tax returns should have stayed on the front page of every media and broadcast station since he became POTUS.
That's where a treasure trove of criminal acts will be found.
I think the IRS is somehow involved or complacent over the decades of Trump's crimes and that would be overwhelming for politicians to deal with. At least all the good for nothing politicians that occupy DC now that is.
12
I don't share in your conspiracy theory. The IRS can't just ignore privacy regulations and release Trump's tax returns. It's up to the president to do-so voluntarily. To suggest that the IRS is somehow protecting him is nothing less than outrageous.
3
@PeteH - "To suggest that the IRS is somehow protecting him is nothing less than outrageous."
I find it quite plausible.
5
@tom harrison
You drank the fool aid...
So now Nancy gets to continue to slow walk impeachment and both sides protect power, instead of the Constitution and the people who rely on them to do so. This game is disgusting. IMPEACH NOW!
10
Why is our Justice Department hiding information for our Congress??
27
The Justice Department didn’t agree to turn this information over to Congress, Bill Barr agreed to turn it over to avoid a contempt citation and possible jail time.
30
Why did Mueller choose not to look at Trump tax returns and other business dealings to see if he could be blackmailed?
16
@Sean Casey junior A simple accounting of the Russian oligarch dirty funds laundered by the Trump Organization will tell the tale.
12
@Sean Casey junior
It is believed that he was told if he went in certain directions he would be terminated.
7
They seem to have forgotten on whose behalf they are working.
I say we ALL remind them.
1
If a burglar robs a home and is apprehended two days later, do the authorities agree to drop the charges if he agrees to return the stolen goods? Why is the House going so soft on this ... this ... "Trump official"? He showed contempt of Congress, indite him for contempt of Congress. Then demand again the same materials Congress is entitled by law to see. Chances are very strong that the next ... umm ... "Trump official" will cooperate with Congress. Otherwise, indite him too. Where is the law here? Why is Congress negotiating with a criminal?
24
@qui legit - I totally agree with you. The Dems are weak, weaker, and weakest.
2
This really is a shambles. Seen from the outside, beyond politics, the evidence is clear. A foreign power interfered in the election, an inquiry was called, and evidence discovered of apparent obstruction of justice. This is a crime. Congress takes that evidence and has an impeachment trial. Everything else is politics and a manipulation of the system for partisan gain. Seemingly the American system is broken, there is no moral compass anymore, just a vacuum where greater, more deadly misdeeds can occur.
26
“Republicans cheered the agreement. Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said ‘today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.’”
Which Republicans are cheering? About what?
Their glee isn’t based on events that decrease the president’s apparent vulnerability regarding charges of obstruction of justice. The president’s vulnerability is only increasing.
As Attorney General Barr manages to avoid being held in contempt of congress by agreeing to release materials that should have been made available to the house judiciary committee weeks ago, why the cheering? Because the AG obeyed the law?
The president, who claimed that the Mueller report had “completely exonerated” him when the report was released, only appears more and more guilty as congress manages to pry relevant documents from the grasp of non-compliant executive branch officials. In some cases, officials who were instructed by the president not to comply with legitimate congressional subpoenas.
I claim no particular ability to predict the future, but here’s my guess. Future historians will record a curious characteristic common to many members of the Trump administration and its supporters — an irrational tendency to declare political setbacks to be victories.
There’s no reason to cheer, Mr. Trump. The more factual information congress is given, the more precarious your situation becomes.
17
One would hope for any sign at all as justification for continued faith in the strength of the system of checks and balances and our Constitution.
1
On April 28,2019, Barr waived executive privilege with a letter from President Trump and further agreement from his personal lawyers that waived executive privilege at a news conference available on U-Tube and releasing the redacted report itself. Since March 27,2019 when Barr first received the Mueller report there has been an obstruction of Justice by Atty. Gen. Barr.
It should not be so easy to wiggle out of his actions by reversing the refusal a day before a contempt citation by the House six weeks later. Justice delayed is is justice denied.
9
" possible obstruction of justice ... by President Trump"
There was at most an aborted attempt at obstruction (the direction given to fire Mueller).There was never any actual obstruction. When Nixon ordered his AD to fire Archibald Cox and the order was not followed; Nixon replaced him with someone who did the deed. Trump did nothing of the kind. Pretty thin as a basis for impeachment, and pretty shoddy reporting.
2
Again, Democrats aren’t going to find what they’re looking for, unless what they’re looking for are cherry picked facts that they can use out of context to slander. What should have been a sigh of relief that the Trump Russia scandal turned out to be a nothingburger got drug on and on by obstructionist Dems with all the same fury, fueled only by hatred for this President and Republicans, and disregard for the policies and day to day functioning of the legislature and this democracy. With impunity, congressional Democrats are allowed to peddle debunked conspiracy theories from on high with the help and shelter of the media. Every policy issue is going down the drain because they’re mad that they can’t prove the President has committed any crime above being a loudmouth. Again it rages on. Just keep in mind that this sets a precedent for taking down a president just because she/he rubs you the wrong way, including any that happen to be elected in the future by the Democratic Party. Congressional Democrats have proven their aim is not to pass legislation, but to spend staggering amounts of time and resources clawing at the President, trying to make a case for obstruction despite no underlying crime.
6
@AQ We the people found that an adversary of the United States successfully invaded and secured, by corruption, the executive branch of our constitutional government. This act of war involves traitorous political and government officials aid to effect and maintain. Now is the time for patriotic United States citizens to "Protect and defend the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic" Generations of American blood and treasure shall not be shed in vain for fools. This cannot be. And will not.
"...can a government of the people, by the people and for the people exist..."
A. Lincoln, Gettysburg
3
Here is Barr’s statement in a Q/A period after he gave his “summary statement” before the Mueller report was released. He LIED to the public.
Reporter: "Mr. Attorney General, we don't have the report in hand. So could you explain for us the special counsel's articulated reason for not reaching a decision on obstruction of justice and if it had anything to do with the department's long-standing guidance on not indicting a sitting president? And you say you disagree with some of his legal theories. What did you disagree with and why?"
Barr: "I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel's own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense. But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o'Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime."
https://www.axios.com/bill-barr-transcript-mueller-report-press-conference-42a9fb6a-741b-4af8-adb1-0693b8f15c25.html
4
@Bob That's what I remember too.
1
It is hard to tell if the DoJ will really do this, or it is simply another bait and switch play. Time will tell.
I do know one thing for sure... if Trump was really free and clear of any crime.... both he and Barr would demand everything be released to the public to prove it. Yet they go the other direction.
People who are guilty of a crime.... they try to hide, delay, obfuscate, and obstruct. Actions clearly show.. the president has something serious to hide.
15
Do not trust a Bill Barr under any circumstances.
He has been deceitful before.
He has proven himself to be unethical and disingenuous on too many occasions.
This is probably another stalling tactic.
The only possibility that he is finally being honest is to save himself from possible impeachment.
21
@Grove
correct. under absolutely no circumstances.
4
It's difficult to not feel as if the JOD is playing and merely placating the Democrats. All mouth but no chops.
Mueller's report was a three-step waltz. The JOD is trying to turn this report into some kind of "hootenanny" - all noise and sound but no real substance.
1
The person to hold in contempt is Treasury Secretary Mnuchin. His refusal to submit Trump's tax returns as requested by Congress despite the clear and unambiguous power of the latter body to possess them fairly demands a stern response. The US Constitution and the co-equal status of Congress is at stake.
Congress must press its case for the president's tax returns and refuse to compromise. If Mnuchin will not hand over the returns, he should be charged with contempt and, if necessary, arrested and detained.
21
I want to hear directly from Mueller. I don't care how he feels about it.
I want to hear from McGhan whether Trump likes it or not.
I want to hear Hope Hicks under oath.
I want to hear what all of these cowards have to say.
We need to hear from these folks as we can't trust one word from the White House.
148
@Johnson
...Adding: Can't trust one word from the White House OR the Attorney General Barr.
8
To the commenters complaining that this endless scenario "created by the Democrats" is a "nothingburger" and we need to move on - it doesn't occur to you that's precisely why the WH/DoJ has been avoiding subpoenas for months now? Avoid it long enough and nobody will care anymore. You should have learned something about how your president operates by now.
Your high tolerance for abuse and disrespect from this administration is unfathomable.
116
@James
Indeed. If it actually was a "nothing burger" one would think the White House would order everything released to Congress and to the press.... you know.. to finally put it to rest in a timely manner. This is what innocent people do.
People who are not innocent and have something to hide... they obfuscate, delay, lie, and condemn endlessly.
19
Why Michael Cohen is in jail and Donald Trump in White House for the same violations they did together? Where is the justice?
73
@Trevor Diaz
Cohen has a law license and knows what's illegal, but did it anyway. Trump has the excuse that he's a dumb_ss who relied on Cohen's expertise as a lawyer to guide him.
2
@Trevor Diaz
Barr clearly obstructed justice as well here. That is why.
6
The missing tapes! Woodstein, where are you when we need ya?
3
What a distinguished way for Barr to end his career: being called Trump's new Roy Cohn.
43
Another false flag to direct our attention from the truth.
1
@Southern Boy - Can you be at all specific? What is the false flag? And what is the "truth" Who is hoisting this false flag. What side of this debate are you on? What are you trying to express? More words please, use your words. I feel your passion, but I can't decipher your position.
8
@Southern Boy We haven't heard the truth yet since we haven't been able to see the Mueller Report. We only got the Barr Report which is NOT the same as the full Mueller Report.
What is the false flag?
5
You can also get the audio book from audible.com for FREE. No need to start a free trial, Audible are making it free to the public. Thank you Audible!
9
@George - I second that! I'm listening - it is captivating. There is NOTHING like reading/hearing the report for yourself. The scope of the shenanigans, and the amount of effort on the part of the Russians AND the campaign to do bad things is really quite impressive.
4
@NotSoCrazy where is the actual factual evidence of Russian interference.I haven't seen any all I've seen is supposition and accusations and lies. This has been a hoax a long time. And guess what , since he's been in office the economy is doing well the unemployment rate is down. So explainexplain why someone who has done more good to this country than Obama did would go out of their way to commit a crime like it is alleged he did to get into office it doesn't really make sense does it.
@John, it's clear you have not read or listened to the report. Get back to us when you do and we can have an intelligent conversation on this based on the facts in the Mueller report.
2
Mueller Report ... a big nothing, no smoking gun. DOJ Documents to be released ... a big nothing, no smoking gun. Get over it Democrats, and focus on real stuff.
7
@BD
If what you claim is true... an innocent party would not try to delay and obstruct the release of information that when placed in public view would clearly put things to rest.
The fact that the White House and DoJ under Barr are doing the opposite..... raises sincere questions as to what they are afraid to let the public know.
8
@BDThey are, and Mitch McConnell continues to block any legislation to help the average American. Just waiting to scream "Look at the national debt, we must cut SS, Medicare, and Medicaid. We really have not choice." Then see him spring into action.
6
Have you read it? Probably not. Republicans in Congress have not. I read both volumes of the Mueller report very thoroughly. There is a lot there. You Trumplicans don’t WANT there to be anything in the Mueller report so you’re quite happy to have Trump-Stooge-Barr tell you there is nothing to worry about.
6
This is an error. His report should stand as the final report.
2
@N. A. Gallo
There are multiple issue that make the release of the hard copy 448 page Special Counsel Report too limited. I offer the following an d incomplete listing to help you appreciate what I mean:
- The Attorney General (AG) has exhibited many reasons to suspect he is not an independent arbiter for pure justice. Instead he has shown a fealty to the office of the President and the current occupant's desires.
- In the initial verbal report that was made roughly 2 days after it was delivered to the DOJ AG made a very questionable verbal report of the result of it.
- The report was then scrubbed over multiple weeks. - - The AG again made a similar questionable verbal report prior to the its release later that day.
- This extended period of time prior to the release afforded the opportunity for creating a strong and highly questionable sales pitch of No Collusion - No Obstruction.
I have read the report and the Special Council's two letters to the AG casting a negative light on the verbal reports made by the him, the AG, prior to the report being released.
The report has not been read by most Americans and many only know the No Collusion - No Obstruction.
In general I find the Obstruction currently being done to retard the House's Investigation as defined by the Constitution and was expected by the Founding Fathers all the more reason to proceed and hopefully find the truth.
3
Wanna bet the DOJ - read Barr- still won’t turn over all the evidence?
21
@Grey Nobody turns over "all the evidence" until forced to do so - it's the American way.
1
Forget the Mueller report. Publish Trump's tax returns and you'll find the reasons behind his deference to Putin. In short, he's up to his eyeballs in nefarious deals with Russian oligarchs (can you say money laundering?) most of which are likely of a criminal nature. One thing leads to another but in the final analysis, Trump realized that if his dealings saw the light of day, his whole shtick, just like his presidency, would unravel like a string ball, Follow the money!
41
That is the beauty of the whole thing: even if he is not prosecuted federally if he indeed is laundering money for the Russians, his business is based in New York where conversations and meetings and transactions very likely happened. As it is there are already a couple of criminal investigations going on in New York. Thank goodness for the power of states.
6
Hoping this Justice Department really contains the needed material!
Or all they stalling for time, again.
5
This face saving announcement from House committees seems vaguely similar to Trump's announcement of Mexico's immigration control concessions in exchange for tariff relief.
3
I won't count this a done deal until it actually comes to pass. It's almost too much to believe. Hopefully Barr has backed down for good from his commitment to serving Trump rather than We The People.
May it be true.
Amen.
3
Interesting. My guess is that Trump haters are in for another disappointment. We'll see soon...enjoy the anticipation phase...;-)
6
Americans, who are interested, can get a copy of the Mueller Report: Part I and Part II from the Justice Department on Amazon.com for $9.00 and change There are others listed but they are not from the Justice Department. Here is the blurb:
Available IMMEDIATELY as a print-on-demand book, this letter-sized facsimile edition includes every page of the MUELLER REPORT, with no supplementary or explanatory texts. All redaction marks are in place as well. What you get is what the Department of Justice issued online, on April 18, 2019.This is part one and two of the 442-page Mueller report. Part two "addresses the President's actions toward the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and related matters, and his actions toward the Special Counsel's investigation. Volume II separately states its framework and the considerations that guided the investigation."
Hopefully this is helpful to those who are interested in how US Attorney General William P. Barr came (or did not come) to his conclusions as stated to the American public.
6
@kkm
Problem is.. the people that really need to read and understand it... won't because it does not fit their narrative of support for the liar-in-chief.
Those that are actually interested in the truth... have already largely reviewed the Mueller report (which is available online from many sources for free).
3
"Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said 'today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.'” What is Representative Collins smoking? Whatever it is, it is making him delusional and weakening whatever grasp of reality he previously had. The Justice Department/Administration's quasi-capitulation had everything to do with House Democrats pressing their Constitutional rights as a co-equal branch of government and nothing to do with the Administration's "good faith." This is one Administration that is sorely lacking good faith in any area. Barr and the two or three people in the Administration who understand our Constitution knew they would lose the legal battle.
9
This is taking WAY too long. The White House is playing the Democrats for fools who think that the rule of law can withstand this asymmetrical assault.
Nadler is taking baby steps when, at this late date, it would be appropriate to be in an all out sprint. Trump is securing more and more of our political system, driving out those who follow the rule of law.
This is a crisis for our democracy and Nadler (not to mention Pellosi and Schumer) need to get moving NOW!
10
@Richard K
I'm more of the opinion that they have two underlying objectives beyond finding out the real truth:
1) Give the fools enough rope to hang themselves with lies and obstruction.
2) To not act in a hasty manner and make a mistake. Trump and Barr only need one mistake to pounce on and begin to try to unravel the credibility of Congress... much like they have successfully done with some of the press outlets.
2
I think AG Wm. P. Barr was trying to provide cover, and more of a distraction by T/W/E/R/K/I/N/G before the cameras and to the public for any number of reasons:
1) to stall while people loyal to Barr and $45* try to cover their tracks;
2) maybe to work out the terms of a SURRENDER, without total humiliation to those who have served this administration;
3) there is so much classified material, if the American public — and therefore the rest of the world — would know about intelligence sources and methods used by us and our allies, it would be extremely dangerous and disastrous for this nation’s security and self-image...!
2
I have no reason to believe the No Justice Department.
5
Obviously AD Barr is on a mission to not only dis-credit the Mueller report, but literally bury it along with “friend” Mueller’s reputation. He’s already setting up the scenario for shutting down all related Mueller-prompted investigations (some 14 of them). Meanwhile back at the ranch the EPA is being gutted, the CFPB is being dismantled, Dodd–Frank is being compromised, the deficit is going through the roof, huge chunks of public lands are being sold off, world free trade commanderis being seriously assailed, the justice department is being revamped with a slew of GOP biased judicial appointees, and all while the FBI is being disemboweled. A shift to a truly authoritative regime in the WH is in the making, and now being shoved into high gear, no question.
9
Why is Nadler striking deals with people who should be held in contempt of Congress for defying subpoenas? They don’t care about deals. Tare just buying time to cover up their lies.
Enforce the subpoenas. If laws don’t apply to the Attorney General, then they don’t apply to any of us. Jail Barr until he hands over the legally requested documents. All of them.
7
@T. Rivers
By analogy.... This is a game of chess.. not checkers... so the tactics and approach are more complex then some would like it to be.
Enforcing the subpoenas would delay things even more and give Trump what he wants... another chance to role play as a victim. So.. threat of subpoena and threat to enforce a subpoena works as leverage, because those placed under subpoena do not know for sure if they would prevail in a court challenge.. and if they lose... they lose the narrative and any power to continue to refuse and to obstruct.
Ultimately they may be forced to enforce subpoenas... but in doing so.. it will force a number of court challenges... because one thing is certain... Trump can and will sue to delay.. it's what he has been doing in his business empire for decades.
Personally... my bet is on Congress winning the chess match here... because the other side is trying to win with checker rules of engagement and will fail.
4
@Chuck
Good points. Thank you for your level-headed discussion.
2
First take is GOP/DOJ blinked. But the article also states the GOP cheered the announcement which immediately casts a shadow on the agreement. Let's see how it plays out. Democrats still hold a strong hand.
1
@Citizen 0809
Some in the GOP want more information released... so that they can try to spin it and distort it. Nunes is one of these GOPers.. and we all know how he can and will spin and distort facts through selective release and slathering it with enough narratives to confuse the public.
2
"After weeks of objections, the Justice Department said it found the proposal reasonable and would work with the committee to share the materials in question, but only if the House would back off holding Mr. Barr in contempt of Congress for his defiance of the subpoena in question." So, if the House had refused to back off on the contempt charge, the Justice Department would not agree to share the materials in question? The Democrats are making bargains with the Justice Department to get them to comply with the law?
7
@gf A contempt charge against Barr would be the last thing I would take off the table. I'd keep that right in front of his nose the entire time.
1
In his report and subsequent public statement, Mueller made clear that because justice department rule forbade the indictment of a sitting president, he "carefully preserved" the evidence of obstruction of justice for Congress, the only body "other than the criminal justice system [that could] formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing." What legal basis does Barr have for withholding of any of this evidence from that body? If he does not or cannot articulate one, how can the public conclude his selective production is anything but purely political?
5
In the words of Ronald Reagan - trust but verify. How do we know that what is being turned over hasn't been tinkered with by Barr's wordsmiths? First we need to have a sworn statement by Barr attesting to the fact that these are the originals and then Mueller needs to verify and vet what is turned over as being what his group wrote. Mueller needs to do in an open House hearing. Then we need at least one more verification. Any altered text will be considered a felony.
8
I would have held out for the full redacted report and associated backup. I think the Courts would have concurred with Congress's legal position. I will , always wonder if Bill Barr/Donald Trump will be fully compliant with the agreement or will they hold back or doctor the information. It would be fully consistent that Barr and Trump would do something like this. It would be atypical for them not too.
6
I suppose that the House wants to give the DOJ every oppurtunity to comply with their orders for information. However, it's a near certainty that Barr is merely playing for time and is holding back the most incriminating material. Odds are that Barr will ultimately have to be held in contempt to get any material of real merit.
5
In Mueller’s only public appearance regarding his final report (his “testament”) , he
started and ended with with one message ... that the investigation’s mission and focus concerned russian intervention in the 2016 election, that such was confirmed to have happened, that it was estensive and deep, and its purpose was to |support trump’s election victory over Clinton.
He emphasized that it is still on-going and warned that the 2020 election was vulnerable.
The electorate is a sitting duck! It’s so clear what’s happening in plain sight! trump is ignoring the raw evidence of russian meddling, and more than that ... when pressed he denies it. He is recklessly and deliberately doing absolutely nothing to stop the Russian cyber attacks, and more than that ... he eliminated the key role of a cyber-security director while real evidence mounts that russian cyber meddling is proceeding apace at this very moment. And the GOP (ie McConnell) keeps blocking legislation to fund the bolstering of Cyber-attack defenses. WHY? Essentially the GOP is counting on a repeat Russian disruption in the 2020 elections that put them in power in 2016. That’s why. A shift to a truly authoritative regime in the WH is in the making, no question.
10
Conclusion of CBS Poll is as follows:
"More than half of Americans want congressional Democrats to drop the Russia matter and move on to other issues, but partisan divides on this have grown since March, and a large majority of Democrats wants Congress to keep investigating.
1
How sweet of the nice justice dept ! They gave the branch of government, Congress, material they need to do their job. Whats next are they going to acknowledge they have a legal duty to congress generally?
Or maybe this is just a trickle approach-slow enough to slowly deflate public interest in what has transpired in our country, or perhaps signs of the wait out the clock strategy until the public makes its next fateful decision concerning the president in November of 2020.
Given the fact that Barr is calling the shots I am certain the most partisan, devious strategies are afoot. He will go down in history as super villain # 2 in this most horrific horror show.
4
I am reminded of a 'blues' song that asks:
"How Many More Times,
Treat Me the Way You Want to Do?"
I for one am not quite sure what material is being supplied by The Justice Dept but I would guess this is not the end. Nothing Trump and his 'personal' attorney, Bill Barr, have said or done inspires any confidence from me.
4
Mr. Fandos, It may be a small criticism but, did the follow up questions for Representative Collins hit the cutting room floor or, did you take his loaded and facetious quote at face value? I hope it was the former because the impression the paragraph about Collins left was wrong, in my opinion.
Representative Collins is a mega-partisan Trump apologist. If it was plural, how many Republicans did you actually speak to in assessing your conclusion? If indeed "the Republicans cheered" the agreement, they certainly were not serious about applauding this decision as a verdict of not-guilty of stonewalling. It was a rhetorical grasping a straws. Obstructive stonewalling obviously continues.
It seems to me if you're going to report on a complicated and emotional situation, you should at least be clear as to what the antagonists in this story are saying. You left hanging the idea that the "administration" was the one who makes the Justice Department's decisions, thereby tacitly agreeing with Representative Collins, who it also seems you let off the hook.
4
The fox's attorney has agreed to provide some information about administration of the henhouse.
3
An average citizen ignoring a court subpoena would be cited for contempt with possible jail time. Congressipnal subpoena carries the same weight as that issued in any court. Yet the Trump gang is ignoring Congressional subpoenas with no consequences.
Why are Democrats hesitant to throw these gangsters in jail? Yes, Congress has the powers to order an arrest of any person ignoring its subpoenas. If they had done so to the first violator, the rest of them would have complied.
6
The scope of none of this is clear...
The House seems to keep wasting time and will stop at nothing to get what they want.
1
If you're curious about the lawyer who William Barr most resembles, do a search for Bruce Cutler.
Birds of a feather.
1
When Congress demands a report/they want ev'ry blemish and wart/If it's redacted/there's fussing protracted/and threats of a kangaroo court.
1
Congress needs to pass a law making it mandatory for a President to be deposed if he/she is the subject of a special investigation. Clinton’s lying under oath is what provided political cover for his impeachment. Reading -at random- various parts of the Mueller Report, it’s obvious that Donald Trump would have perjured himself countless times in an interview. The guy should be impeached 10, 20 times over if we use the same standards as applied to Bill Clinton. A slow-motion , slow-walk cover-up. Totally despicable.
50
Good grief, Impeach Barr already and hold him in civil contempt. This is ridiculous. Even if he ends up giving them every single note in Mueller's files, he still lied to Congress under oath, which is a crime. Start putting guys like Barr and Mnuchin in jail, and I bet we see a whole lot more cooperation with all the rest of these subpoenas.
185
Trump hires the best to perpetuate his coverups.
21
I am hoping that all the new Socialist Democrats are observing and learning how experienced congressmen like Mr. Nadler get results.
11
@Tonjo . Social Democrats as opposed to Asocial Republicans - a fair and balanced comparison.
2
As soon as the public gets a chance to hear the details of the Mueller report, the TV cuts to a huge helicopter distraction. TV?!?!?!
6
@David I know can you believe it, same coverage now for nearly 30 minutes.
1
not not guilty does not equal exonerated
time is ticking
13
More stalling by Barr. If the Democrats don't hold these people in contempt for disobeying lawful requests from Congress, and continue to pursue the most vehement legal action against them, there will be a lot of people who will give up on the party.
Barr and the GOP are not our "friends", they are traitors who are attempting a coup-d'etat by fiat.
42
@Chicago Guy The coup-d'etat has been in the public for some time. Each move made by the GOP is a strategy of dismantling democracy and the public sector. I can't imagine the scope of the outcome. For some unknown reason, I just finished a book on the Black Plaque. What could have possessed me?
2
Like everyone else who sought to protect their reputation, Barr is now in line to be fired. He was hired as an AG who would protect Trump, and releasing evidence of obstruction, which exonerates the Department of Justice, will sink Trump...and when he is faillng he first issues threats, and then when they fail, he fires someone (but not personallly..he is too senstiive).
7
I'm sad that my very first reaction upon reading the headline was to think "Yeah, SURE they will, what's the catch? What's the game going to be this time?"
Let me be clear that I've never been a "do not trust the government" person. This is solely an emotional reaction to what I'm witnessing from the current administration.
Even worse, I find my mistrust spilling over into any dealings I might have with the federal government. I start worrying that my SS check won't come, and then when I call they'll tell me "Oh, we don't do that anymore".
I know this isn't rational, I know it's silly, and it's just a tiny, tiny voice in my head. But it is there.... "Am I the one they come for next? Am I going to have to get papers?How is my government going to intentionally ruin my life?"
Funny thing is, I'm a mature, white, heterosexual male of Scandinavian heritage. And I'M starting to think this way?
Russia's "Active Measures" works to sow distrust and confuse the populace. Authoritarians take control by spreading fear, by obfuscating the truth. Whether intentionally, or simply due to his own pathology, Donald Trump is following those playbooks perfectly.
18
How about hearings on Trump's beautiful and cheap health care? Or the defunded stem cell research that could save lives? Dems offered 25 Billion last year for border security including a wall in exchange for DACA. Trump refused. Why not hold hearings on issues that affect people's lives?
10
If the scope is not know how is the evidence "key"? Asking for a friend.
"After weeks of objections, the Justice Department said it found the proposal reasonable and would work with the committee to share the materials in question, but only if the House would back off holding Mr. Barr in contempt of Congress for his defiance of the subpoena in question."
And this is why the Democrats don'e get much respect. Barr already defied the subpoena, and he should have been held in contempt then.
What do we think the Republicans in Congress would have done in this situation if it were a Democratic president who stonewalled the turnover of documents and told witnesses who were subpoenaed not to show up for congressional testimony?
Half of this fight is about what Mr. Trump has done as president, especially his obstruction of justice.
The other half of this fight is about the importance of checks and balances in our constitution and the right of congress to subpoena records, tax statements, etc. and hold an abusive president accountable. That was straightened out and clarified by law in 1924 when Harding was president and charged with scandals.
The Trump administration is one of the most lawless and unethical administrations this country has ever seen. Given the Republican Party's enabling and support for their corrupt president, then it is even more important that the Democratic party stands tall to support the constitution and seek truth and justice for the sake of the future of this country and history.
25
I hope they settle this matter ASAP. This is clearly a waste of time. Democrats should be focusing on Infrastructure and the economy. This "witch hunt" has to stop. The arrests and "crimes" (bank fraud and taxes problems ) discovered by the special counsel are unrelated to the scope of the investigation: collusion with a foreign government and obstruction of justice.
Four years ago when Mr. Trump announced his candidacy nobody took it seriously (a joke). Now he is being treated as the most corrupted Politian on earth by the democrats.
By the way: I voted for Hilary in 2016.
6
@Wendel The House, under Democratic leadership, has passed a number of very important bills that the "grim reaper" Mitch McConnell simply won't bring to the Senate for a vote.
4
@Wendel They were willing to start working on infrastructure and Donnie Boy just walked away. Remember that meeting where he said he wouldn't even discuss infrastructure unless they stopped investigating him ? That was him refusing to focus omn those things, not the Democrats.
4
@Wendel
..." Democrats should be focusing on Infrastructure and the economy'...
Trump just nixed that with his latest temper tantrum
3
The problem with dealing with AG Barr is he can’t be trusted. It’s clear he publicly misrepresented the content of the report as already confirmed by Mueller himself. He is also hiding things. It’s very disconcerting for example how trump keeps asserting that his son (Don jr.) is totally exonerated by the Mueller report. How does he know this? We know already that critical parts of the report related to Don jr. are being covered up by AG Barr through redactions. And trump apparently hasn't even read the report! This is why it is important Mueller himself be more proactive in ferreting out the truth.
19
With the Nixon administration, Deep Throat said: "Follow the Money."
With the Trump administration, Mr. Throat would say: "Follow the Obstructionism."
7
The future of Democracy hangs in the balance. Not only should the people have access to Mueller Report documents that don’t breach state secrets, but also deserve to have Mr. Mueller testify in public, and soon!
It seems that Alan Dershowitz, author of his very appropriately titled book “Chutzpah”, is making a case on Fox News for obscurity and obfuscation of the Mueller Report as well as the Justice Department in order to help Trump’s re-election. Wonder why?
9
@Ted. They both flew Air Epstein.
3
Another mistake by Nadler.
Barr and Trump would not have agreed to the release of the docs if they feared them. There’s no smoking gun.
Barr feared being in Contempt of Congress. Short of jail that’s the Scarlett Letter for an Attorney General.
Even under the “ witness protection program “ offered by the cultish Republican Party and it’s “think tank” the Federalist Society - the GOP outsourced it’s critical thinking and policies to the highest bidders a long time ago - Contempt is an indelible smear. Even the odious , pathetic Sessions avoided it.
Trump does not care about Barr who will eventually go under the bus . But Barr blinked and Nadler let him off so another Trump official learns there are no consequences to their servitude to “leader” and disregard for the Constitution.
12
It is mind-boggling that it wd take so long for this info to be turned over to the Dems!
Are there ANY Republicans of integrity left who aren't Trump's minions? Peter Werner is the only one I can think of.
7
This latest "agreement" by the Justice Department will be just another teaser sampler to merely appease the Democratic masses. At this rate, these dribs and drabs of "meaningful information" will be drawn out way past November 2020, just in time for the next election.
The Attorney General nor the Justice Department are serious about giving up any real, meaty material. Sure, they put out their "agreement" in a nice world news column sporting a pretty big bow headline on flashy shinny paper, but in the end, the information will no doubt prove out to be flatter and emptier than a deflated helium balloon over the Potomac.
The Attorney General has ALL the leverage and information at his cryptic fingertips. Perhaps the Democrats shouldn't be quite so eager to "strike" a deal without seeing what they are getting in return first! For the AG to get a pass on a contempt change in exchange for information sure smells, feels, and looks more wrong than right. Am I the only one who senses that?
I guess that means the Department of Justice has suddenly sunk to the ranks of "Let's Make a Deal" and William Barr is the new Monty Hall.
Disgraceful, despicable, and deplorable.
8
Of course this is another stalling tactic by Cover up Barr. He will decide what "key" is and will continue his pattern of obstruction of justice and lying.
He knew the House was going to vote him in contempt today or tomorrow and is pushing back the inevitable.
He will give nothing critically important, selective release, then when the House comes back and says so he will claim "Democrats are just fishing."
They should demand EVERYTHING or hold him in contempt. He has proved to be acting in bad faith and cannot be trusted
11
Barr was hired on the promise that he'd hide the dirt. The dirt will be suppressed.
Nothing probative will be revealed to Congress, and no guilty party, or witness, will be allowed to testify. Ever onward toward the contempt charges.
7
This entire scenario is getting so bizarre and twisted as time passed by, I almost wish Judge Judy was the Attorney General.
How much worse could things really get? Really?
4
I hope this is legit and not just "selected" material.
439
@pbsweeney
My fear is this will be a charade, filled with "selected" material, as if the JOD were taking "special requests" for members of the Democratic radio audience.
14
@pbsweeney Maybe we will get the Table of Contents or Index this time. My faith in the WH and Barr is nonexistent.
20
@pbsweeney
My first thought along with 100 million+ other American voters!
Guess we'll need Mueller to testify whether Nadler got full and complete evidence from Billy Barr.
6
Bob Mueller expressly declined to exonerate Trump on obstruction of justice because he believed that he could not indict and that the ultimate decision was one for Congress. So Bill Barr himself exonerated the president, mischaracterized what Mueller's had said and then withheld providing even a redacted copy of the report to Congress until his exoneration and mischaracterization had enough time to get traction with the American public.
Why would we have any reason to believe what Barr now provides Congress--on charges he himself has said Trump is innocent of--would be anything other than cherry-picked pieces supporting his position?
822
@Steel Magnolia
BINGO!
I do believe you hit the proverbial nail on the head with your astute assessment. Well done.
35
@Steel Magnolia
Exactly! I fail to understand how a few select Congressmen and Senator's have not had the opportunity to read the entire document unredacted (no aid's and read only). These are the representatives that the people elected to govern, why does William Barr get the last say on what they get to see?
47
@Steel Magnolia
Trump clearly committed crimes thus Mueller could not exonerate him. Knowing what was at stake, Mueller should have been explicit and unequivocal that crimes were committed but that could not indict Trump under the rules.
If Mueller erred in failing to be explicit in his report, he had the opportunity to set it straight in his public statement. Instead, Mueller failed a second time, enabling trump and his gang to continue to spin the report. Mueller failed the nation, period.
29
We now await the pertinent information that's been withheld from us for months. The drama created by Barr and the Justice Department was untimately unhelpful to Trump; to the contrary, it has only brought more scrutiny and focus to Mueller's report.
Bring it on. We're ready to receive confirmation of what we already know: obstruction of justice by a sitting president.
643
@NYCtoMalibu
“Republicans cheered the agreement. Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said ‘today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.’”
It does not debunk the claim at all. This evidence should have been made available from the get go. What has happened to the Republican Party? Their politics does nothing but obstruct. Where is their sense of decency? Who reset their moral compass?
108
@Julie, not sure in what order, Trump, money, oil, self preservation, corporate greed. (may all be one thing).
16
@Julie
If Republicans cheered, you gotta worry that nothing important will be provided to Congress under the agreement.
30
I will make it simple:
Anyone who votes forTrump in 2020 after all this is a traitor.
Why? Because the definition of traitor is someone who betrays his country or abets someone who has betrayed his country.
286
@Blunt
Yes.
Trump and his supporters want a dictatorship to replace our Constitution and the values that it sets forth.
That is not the “patriotism” that they claim it to be.
It is the exact opposite.
17
@Blunt
And anyone who gives money to Trump is a criminal collaborator.
18
Why are we keep going over this day after day. Mueller found no collusion. No one in the campaign was indicted. The Democrats need to focus on lowering prescription drug costs, health care, climate change, prison reform. Sadly they have fallen into an easy trap.
17
“No one in the campaign was indicted”? Why are some of Trumps pals in prison and others are awaiting trial?
103
@Julia
It sounds like you have read the entire, unredacted Mueller report.
I have not.
I don't know anyone who has.
Could you please share it with the rest of us so we can be sure you have come to the correct conclusion?
23
@Julia Manafort?Stone? Flynn? et al?
42
Mueller did not throw down on Trump.
Advantage: Trump.
Pelosi does not want to throw down on Trump.
Advantage: Trump.
Mueller refuses to testify in open hearing . . . unless subpoenaed, and no one has issued the subpoena.
Advantage: Trump.
Nice guys finish last.
Trump understands that.
The Democrats don't.
Advantage: Trump.
Pelosi is playing by San Francisco rules.
Trump is playing by no rules at all.
Advantage: Trump.
18
While it is hard to trust that Barr will turn over all of the requested documents, this is a very good sign the Democrats and a very troubling sign for Trump. I would bet that every individual now under subpoena by one of more of the House Committees to either testify and/or turn over documents now understands just how serious a Contempt of Congress charge can be. I suspect compelling others to comply with their subpoenas just became a lot easier.
7
I have to wonder why a "negotiation" is even considered. The Constitution dictates that Congress has the right to know the who/what/when/where of official actions. This worsening destruction of Constitutional dictates is going to take a long time to repair, if it ever does get fully repaired ... and it's repair is even more important than the impeachment.
9
@Bob
"The Constitution dictates that Congress has the right to know the who/what/when/where of official actions."
This is simply not true. There is nothing in the Constitution that says anything like that.
2
@GMooG - "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress" ...
... "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
... Congress can't legislate unless they know what it is they are legislating. The implication that Congress has the power to create laws implies, more than implies, that they must have the power to understand. THEY made laws to allow them to investigate and oversee.
Feel free to disagree with that view ... but that's something you'll need to take up with SCOTUS.
2
@Bob
No, in fact, you've proven my point, thank you.
What perhaps concerns me the most about this entire ordeal is the constant jockeying by different parts of the government to 'control the narrative'. It's a sad commentary on our electorate that so many have lost the desire and/or patience to review the plethora of evidence available on their own, instead preferring to have summaries spoon fed to them by the sources they feel most politically attuned to. I'm truly concerned that 'lazy' will be what ends the great American experiment.
10
@Derek Martin
I'm hoping that the take away from this time in American history will serve as an historical record of what constitutes a flashing red light on the threatboard to democracy from the far right elements in American democracy.
1
This is like a criminal and his lawyer being in charge of what the police investigation found at the crime scene, and subsequently is revealed at trial! The redacted Mueller report already makes a strong case for obstruction. What is holding up the trial in the House?
9
All of a president's business dealings in or out of the Offal Office should be recorded on devices like black boxes on planes operated by the U.S. Dept. of Archives.
Trump did however try to deny that the voice on the recording was his.
2020
7
Prepare for a whole new genre of denial, distortion and misrepresentation.
5
“After weeks of objections, the Justice Department said it found the proposal reasonable and would work with the committee to share the materials in question, but only if the House would back off holding Mr. Barr in contempt of Congress for his defiance of the subpoena in question.”
It seems threatening the AG with a contempt citation was effective. Mr. Barr does not want that on his record. Democrats should take note, and be willing to carry out a serious threat, unlike the posturing performance in the Oval Office.
5
@MG
Let's hope it is a truly serious threat - ike threatening to take away trump's Adderall.
1
@MG
I'm sure you'd like to believe that...
The Dems were never going to hold Barr in contempt.
Others, who have been subpoenaed now know, all they have to do is make a deal for themselves and the Dems will cave.
Just as they did in this case.
Especially because the Dems know they had this access to the Mueller report (and supporting documents) but didn't want to take advantage of actually going to the Justice department to read them because subpoenas make better optics for them.
The Dems believe they are winning...they are not.
1
A lot of what we are watching play out is the profound disagreement between Bill Barr and Bob Mueller on the law regarding the crime of obstruction of justice.
Barr believes--as set out in detail in his 19-page memo auditioning for the job of attorney general--that because the department of justice reports to the president, the president has the "absolute" right to control and direct all of its activities, up to and including closing down any investigation, even one into his own possible wrongdoing. Under that reading of presidential power, the president cannot obstruct justice as a matter of law.
By contrast, Mueller--along a thousand-plus former U.S. Attorneys and other highly placed federal prosecutors who recently went on the record (and likely most, if not all, current federal prosecutors if they were free to speak)--believes that even the president can obstruct justice, a crime that "strikes at the core of the government's efforts to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable." Indeed, the Constitution itself requires the president to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
I find it hard to believe that Barr will not cherry pick whatever he gives Congress to support his "man." But given his previously stated (and oft-repeated) position, the fact he has agreed to give any evidence at all on the obstruction of justice issues may indicate he's not as sure of his legal position as he would have the president believe.
5
It's been over two months since the Barr report was issued and we didn't get to see the Mueller Report. Barr should be held in contempt and impeached. Why is he above the law?
9
@Jacquie
Because he went ahead with it most likely at trump's urging.
1
According to the Muller report, Trump told White House counsel Don McGahn to call Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and “tell Rod that Mueller has conflicts of interest and can’t be special counsel.” When McGahn refused to make the call, Trump could have picked up the phone and called Rosenstein himself. But according to Mueller, he called Chris Christie and asked for advice. Christie told him removing Mueller would cost him the support of congressional Republicans.
Trump decided to drop the matter, but asked McGahn to call the New York Times and asked for a correction to an article that said Trump ordered McGahn to fire Mueller but backed down when McGahn threaten to resign. (The Mueller report establishes that Trump did not tell McGahn to fire Mueller and that McGahn never threatened to resign.) When McGahn refused to ask for a correction, Trump asked him to write a memo saying the article was inaccurate.
Deciding not to replace Mueller wasn’t obstruction of justice. Asking McGahn to write a memo stating the New York Times article was inaccurate wasn’t obstruction either.
2
And how do you know these things happened in this way?
1
@Anaboz
It is in the Mueller report.
1
The Democrats in the house are not only going against Nancy Pelosi's measured response but they are making themselves look so pathetic. After 4 FBI investigations including the Mueller report the Dems still think they can find an i not dotted or a t not crossed. Nadler is a disaster both in his appearance, his demeanor and how he has decided not to serve his voters but to spend all of his time in Washing just trying to get Trump. Such a sad man.
1
@P McGrath: Your comment is, of course, only your opinion. Personally I find Mr. Nader very professional in both his appearance (though why that should matter I don’t know) and his demeanour. His committee is working hard to save your democracy, or doesn’t that matter to you if it might mean that Democrats might sometimes be in power?
this corrupt autocracy must be stopped or we can say adios to democracy and the America we have known
6
Alan Dershowitz called out the "double standard" he's seeing from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler and other Democrats in advance of the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report.
Monday on FNC's "America's Newsroom" Monday, Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard Law professor emeritus, talked about how Rep. Jerry Nadler and other Democrats were furious with then-FBI Director James Comey when he cleared Hillary Clinton of criminal wrongdoing in her handling of classified information but are now angry with Special Counsel Robert Mueller for similarly clearing President Trump.
"People like Nadler and others went after him, saying, 'That's not the role of the prosecutor. The role of the prosecutor is to say indict or not indict,'" Dershowitz said. "You don't start expressing opinions about the bad things people did about which there wasn't probable cause or proof beyond a reasonable doubt."
"The double standard is unbelievable," he added. "Now, we want to hear everything about everybody who was in the report, even though they haven't been indicted. Where does that double standard couple from?"
Host Bill Hemmer responded, "That's Washington, D.C."
2
@ron
Context, laddie. Context. Were the two situations in any way resonant, Alan might have a point. They are not.
8
Something has happened to Dershowitz in his old age. He used to be intelligent and rational. His alliance with Trump is truly intriguing and disturbing. I refuse to respect him, but I guess he just wants a lot of attention.
14
@ron The circumstances are quite different and Congress has quite a different role. For the 10,000th time, Mueller did not do anything at all like clearing President Trump. You didn't read the report.
19
Just press the button. "That was easy"
3
He is just successfully avoiding Congressional censure
11
Why did the Democrats led by Nadler allow the Contempt to go unpunished when it actually did happen? The Democrats probably lost millions of votes today because the fight sure looks fixed to me.
2
“We have agreed to allow the department time to demonstrate compliance with this agreement."
It's already been about two months. How much time do we need to give Barr to decide whether or not he wants to comply with the law and his duties as AG of the United States? Enough with this "give him time" nonsense. It's called stalling. Put your foot down on the cutesy obstruction-light b s.
34
I think this is simply stupid. Barr is not acting in good faith.
Vote (and win) contempt charges against Mr. Barr and make it clear that this is only the first.
This grossly failed and inept "administration" is playing games with the Constitution and the rule of law. Slap them up side the head and pursue an aggressive strategy of impeachment inquiry right up to the point of referring it to the Senate which has already decided their vote without evidence.
The impeachment inquiry will provide all the damage necessary.
Quit playing games with an opponent who cheats and chisels!
28
This type of thing gives the lie to electoral claims made in today's Bouie column. Unless, of course, the alleged Democratic base is larger and more stupid than I think.
1
These documents have been sanitized for your protection. Vote the Trump/Putin ticket in 2020!
10
I am sorry to see the Dems cave. They should go ahead with slapping contempt charges on Barr, we will get the report items anyway.
23
@Bombadil
But that's exactly why they are settling. Because the Dems, unlike you, know they will lose in Court
1
@GMooG
How so?
No Federal judge would decide against a Congressional subpoena rewusting anything and anyone in the DOJ.
Keep it up Democrats! Please do, you’re doing great!
You will fail to jail Trump, but you will fuel his rallies with chants of ‘witch hunt!’ only making his ranks larger and more solid.
Did you forget Kenneth Star? Because we did not. He’s the dude that made a career of harassing Clinton, and at the end NOTHING happened.
Now you’re doing the same, and no one will let you forget.
Keep it up, please do.
1
@AutumnLeaf
trump is no Clinton
1
I'll believe it when and if it actually takes place. Words are cheap, especially from the republicans and fools like William Barr.
11
It is amazing that the Times now describes Mueller's investigation as the "obstruction of justice investigation". I thought it was the Russian collusion investigation. The Times is certainly making it much easier for Americans to agree with the Presidents assessment of the Times.
2
@John Gilday It was both.
7
@John Gilday Even in the sanitized redacted version of the Mueller report the conclusion was clear - a specific conspiracy investigation was critically hampered by the obstruction of justice. There was obviously a conspiracy, but Republicans lied and destroyed evidence - including emails and sanitizing phones. EXACTLTY what they lied about Hillary Clinton doing.
Mueller also said Russia continues to work to elect Republicans which is why Republicans are refusing to take up any legislation to secure our next election. They are really hoping Russia will be able to further crush our system of government by hacking them back into office
4
@John Gilday: It was Trump who incessantly used the word 'collusion', knowing it is legally meaningless. What you 'thought' has no legal definition.
As we know, Mueller produced two volumes in his report, the first devoted to conspiracy (a word that does have a legal meaning) and the second devoted to obstruction (also a word with a legal meaning). Trump is in no way exonerated of conspiracy, but it seems more readily can be convicted of obstruction, an equally serious crime. The Times uses a word Mueller also used. This makes it much easier for Americans to agree with the Times's assessment of Trump.
1
Citizens of this country: you own it. Act accordingly. Why do you have to beg for what belongs to you?
7
"The Justice Department, after weeks of tense negotiations, has agreed to provide Congress with key evidence collected by Robert S. Mueller III..."
More sound and fury signifying nothing if Pelosi continues to believe that political strategy for 2020 eclipses all the evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors and their Constitutional duties to hold a President accountable for those actions.
@Mr. Bantree
I don't agree. Pelosi will govern her self accordingly. Saying she didn't want to impeach trump but instead put him in jail was a message to the animal part of trump's brain which is the dominant part thereof.
2
Given what is presented in vol.2, I remain completely
baffled by mcgahn's unwillingness to comply with the
subpoena to testify to the Judiciary committee. He appears
to still hold some type of confused loyalty to his former employer that has neither a moral nor legal rationale.
Or to put it bluntly, after what he went through in 2017, why in the world would he want to remain obedient to trump's dicta. How can he not yearn to testify openly and of his own volition so the whole world can appreciate what he went through as someone with a conscience being put through the ringer by a sociopath with zero conscience?
This seems both very odd and inexplicable to me.
11
@bl He may want to work in future administrations and wants to show that he didnt just roll over. He will show when ordered by the courts to do so.
3
@bl
OR...
Why would he, after sitting through multiple hours of questioning and giving testimony, want to go through all of that once again? Especially, since he would just be abused by the snarling, vicious, hate-filled House Dems.
"Get Trump...no matter what. He has to pay for beating us in 2016" - the standard mantra for the Dems.
But no matter, our President will win again in 2020.
1
@bl It does, especially since his role was one of protecting the institution of the presidency, not the president himself. He has gotten confused as to who his client was. If he continues this line, could he not be disbarred?
1
Sorry Representative Doug Collins but when the head of the Justice Department has to be subpoenaed and the courts petitioned to release the documentation the administration is stonewalling. What else would you have called it. Last I checked the Justice Department was part of the US government just like the congress and both reported to the People of the US. Neither is the private arm of trump.
10
Well done to Nancy Pelosi. This is what she wanted from the start, the full release of Mueller's report to Congress. All it took were a couple of well-placed threats and for cooler heads to prevail.
Of course the Republicans will try to frame it as a win for themselves; that's politics and it really does not matter. The point is that Barr was forced to concede that he had no legal basis for withholding information and to comply with Congress's request.
Now, our lawmakers will get to determine if Barr's characterization of the Mueller report was blatantly contrived. Bring on the headlines - even if the public doesn't get to read the full report, I expect members of Congress will be happy to share their reactions.
7
@Mr. Adams
Gee, where does it say "full release"? Am I missing something?
2
An innocent person turns over all evidence to prove their innocence.
And then there's Trump.
15
Friendly reminder to all: The Mueller Report is available to download for free on Audible.
6
It is very sad that under Donald Trump the various departs like the Department of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services as well as the EPA have come to take on the same meaning as the Ministry of Truth from 1984 - where the title is cruel joke?
5
We have to consider the possibility that the full weight of evidence in the full Mueller report is not enough to impeach Trump. Thinking from that angle, Barr et all can stonewall till the end of time knowing he has minimal exposure while he's doing the president's bidding.
Is anyone else tired of this dog-and-pony show?
The Mueller report says that conspiracy could not be establish beyond a reasonable doubt and that he could not indict a sitting POTUS for obstruction of justice because of a OLC policy.
Trump said "No Collusion. No obstruction."
Barr exonerates Trump "based on the Mueller report"? Then both Trump and Barr do everything possible to prevent making this "exonerating" document public.
Bottom line: Trump and Barr are lying and it's way pass time to stop messing around and take care of business. If you are the children of "The Greatest Generation", then do your duty and stop embarrassing your parents.
7
@John
Lead the charge, John!
1
One more time the Dems get outflanked by Barr. He's playing hardball. They're playing tee ball. How many times do they have to learn, the rules have changed? Time is the friend of those who would further obstruct. Any presumption of good faith, at this point, is worse than misguided; it's willfully blind.
7
@Josh
The game is long.
Once the material leaves the DOJ, before it arrives in the House, Mueller and crew should proof it against what was submitted. At this stage, I wouldn't believe anything Barr send over.
8
"Democrats asked for summaries..."
One of the major points of contention is Barr's perjury in response to his initial misrepresentations. Why would anyone trust Barr's summary of key testimony? He is held in contempt for lying to Congress about withholding evidence and misrepresenting the evidence he did present. Democrats are wasting time. They should just pin Barr to the wall and ask for the next contender. Barr already violated the accommodation process. Why are Democrats accommodating him?
7
Of course the Republicans are cheering this. Yet again, House Democrats have followed the Republican playbook to delay and deny their use of the only meaningful act of oversight that the Constitution provides them. Trump and his cohorts waste no time in their destruction of democratic institutions. Why do House Democrats waste all of their time (and ours) by using half-measures to try to defend the nation against this? Why do they hesitate to wield their Constitutional authority to open an official impeachment inquiry into the criminal behavior of a rogue President? Absent an impeachment inquiry, the House Judiciary Committee will continue to bow, beg, scrape, compromise, and accommodate. Nadler never should have had to ask for these documents from America’s lawyer. Why does Pelosi continue to enable Barr to act as the President’s lawyer rather than as the people’s lawyer? If a muscle is not exercised, it withers. To allow the Constitution's strongest protections to fall into disuse is a grave offense against the nation. It will render the impeachment mandate obsolete: if it isn’t employed against a president such as this one, then no Congress will use it in the future. If not now, when? Trump, Pence, Barr, McConnell, and the Republican Party are trying to do some redacting of their own: they want to redact the impeachment clause from the Constitution, to make vacant the space it currently occupies in the document that is supposed to be our greatest protection.
6
Barr is worried about his law license. He doesn't want that pesky contempt issue to be hanging out there.
6
This is ridiculous. We have to fight the DOJ in order to get to the truth? The Justice Dept is not eager to reveal truth?
I'm wrong: it's not ridiculous, it's an utter travesty.
8
Much as I despise Trump and his corrupt administration, I'm tired of this saga. The Senate will never convict Trump, and even if it would, then we'd have Pence, a much more likely candidate for reelection than Trump. What is the point? Principle? Sometimes that does more harm than good.
The democrats should hold hearings on the republican policies that actually harm all Americans. They should pass legislation and then call out McConnel for not voting on them. They should hold a press conference every day with legislation that will help AMericans, and that the republicans refuse to pass.
Otherwise, we'll lose the House and the presidency in 2020. We need independents and moderates to win the swing states in the middle for the electoral college. I'm certain that they are sick of this too, and want to see what democrats can actually do. How about starting with an immigration plan, instead of whining about how cruel we are. Present a viable plan, or Trump will control the narrative. Like it or not, most Americans are not that sympathetic to immigrants.
1
@dba The House has already passed 150 pieces of legislation which McConnell has shelved.
2
@dba: "Like it or not, most Americans are not that sympathetic to immigrants."
Then they can go back to wherever their ancestors came from. I am done with sympathy for those who "are not that sympathetic."
1
@rdb1957 All you have to do to see where Mitch McConnell's priorities lie is glance at the statistics about the state he has helped govern since the mid-1980s. By any measure, Kentucky is a mess*. It is poor, unhealthy, under-employed, non-competitive, poorly educated, addicted, and despairing. While Mitch has been off playing tactician, his state has continued to sink. McConnell is a heartless, cold, ruthless man who is out for himself. Maybe the chickens are finally coming home to roost.
* Kentucky:
/ #46 in Educational attainment..
/ #46 in Poverty.
/ #43 in Employment.
/ #43 in Medicare quality.
But #5 in receipt of federal subsidies & #1 in obstructionist politicians
2
My personal politistress is lower, just slightly, after reading about this agreement. Of course we'll see how well it works in practice.
However, I have to think that the unredacted Mueller report gives the House Judiciary committee 95% of what they need to decide whether to recommend impeachment on obstruction of justice. They should finish their homework by viewing evidence, but they should also give credit to Mr. Mueller for a thorough, apolitical investigation. Rep. Nadler, et. al. need to make a decision, soon.
7
"...would work with the committee to share the materials in question, but only if the House would back off holding Attorney General William P. Barr in contempt...."
Although Congress may not hold Mr. Barr in contempt, I'm afraid that much of the nation will. Whatever he was before, he's joined the large group of people tarnished and tainted by exposure to Trump.
Meantime, Representative Jerold Nadler goes about committee business in an orderly and dignified manner that's worthy of our respect. “These documents will allow us to perform our constitutional duties...." No "privileges," whether executive, legislative or judicial. Just responsibilities, duties, as defined under the law of the land.
44
@sing75 Unlike, ahem, John Dean, who is unblemished. (tee hee hee)
@sing75
In the most recent survey, 56% of people said they do not support impeachment. So "much of the nation" does not in fact hold Barr in contempt.
Congress's disapproval rating is at 75%, and stayed around that number since at least 2007. It seems they hold Congress in contempt.
What I find surprising is, that even though it took much longer than it should’ve taken, they actually approved it! I still have negative thoughts regarding the content of WHAT they’re handing over. Will it be complete, like unredacted? That is the document that both the House and Congress should be able to review. Especially since there is information in it that obviously can incriminate trump and others, and suggests that obstruction was found, not just once, but several times.
14
Why didn’t Mueller look at the tax returns and banks? Wouldn’t that be crucial to seeing if trump was colluding with foreign investors?
24
I think the tax issues were outside of his original authorizations unless he had found enough proof through other investigations to pursue it.
5
"The exact scope of the material the Justice Department has agreed to provide was not immediately clear, though the committee signaled that it could be a breakthrough..."
Adam Schiff also reported a DOJ agreement to provide his committee with specific materials and that was three weeks ago.
Mr. Barr is doing a lot of "agreeing" but when will he begin the actual "providing" the materials? And exactly what materials will DOJ provide? Will they provide 'everything' all at once or will there be more negotiations as they learn the materials are incomplete?
You have to hand it to them: The stalling and delaying tactics are strategically executed.
7
" weeks of tense negotiations"
Why is it that negotiations even came to occur?
This man Barr may envision himself as something much grander, but weather he likes it or not he is still a law enforcement officer. He is not a judge of any court, and he is certainly not a maker of laws in the duly elected legislature.
If the representatives of the electorate tell Barr to jump , he should darn well jump or be discharged to follow his true calling ,whatever that may be.
27
This modest progress may be helpful, but it’s for sure that more delay, obfuscation, and “bargaining” are ahead with Barr.
It may be the best that can be done for now on obstruction of justice, but it’s way past time for Congress to play hardball in getting Trump’s tax returns. No negotiations; no deals; just a court order compelling the IRS to turn over Trump’s tax returns NOW!
9
The devil's in the details: Barr will probably withhold just enough of those details and drag out the process--the idea being to keep everything muddled just enough to prevent anything from being decided "beyond reasonable doubt." It has worked for Trump very well so far, and will keep working for him. This is the bait, Democrats. Keep your eye on the real issue: 2020.
8
I think Barr has just blinked. Let's hope that the material turned over to the House portends the breach of the stonewall that Trump and Barr erected. While the information is currently available only to House members, the American people have a right to see this information, and perhaps we will get to see it in the near future.
8
Does anyone have any doubt that this is going to be Lucy pulling away the football?
If the parties were reversed, there would be 9 contempt votes and 5 lawsuits by now. Stop being patient with people that would never be patient with us.
23
@Matt Agree 100%
3
By pretending to act, but doing nothing, Congress has aggravated the demise of constitutional democracy here and now, and for humanity going forward. Emoluments, inauguration financing, conspiracy w/Cohen payments, 150 contacts with Russians, 12 independent charges for obstruction, etc. and they do nothing. It is very simple: 1) call them impeachment proceedings, and 2) issue subpoenas, then 3) imprison every person who fails to comply for contempt of Congress. If they can do it to Manning, they can do it to Barr, McGahn, etc. Why not? Because in case anyone has not noticed, there is only one political party in this country, Donald J. Trump.
5
Per "People Are Trying to Figure Out William Barr," in today's paper, AG Barr is playing a long game and no one is certain what it is. Despite some of the brazen positions he's chosen to defend, he seems too smart to simply follow Trump down the yellow brick road.
2
This is not even a Pyrrhic victory getting documents means nothing. Anyone who can read knows from the Muller report that Trump definitely obstructed justice and very likely was working with Russia in some non-criminal ways. The whole point of this was to get Barr and Mcghan to testify in public under oath about Trump's crimes. Mr. Nadler, what is wrong?
4
Finally, the Just ice Department is doing what it is suppose to do up hold "rule of law". They should have done this weeks ago. The reason they did not should not only add to charges of obstruction of justice against Trump and Barr, among others.
I hope Congress brings Mueller in to testify, under oath, and do a Q&A. That Q&A session will determine the future of Trump, Pence and his cabinet. Based upon what we already know, unlike Nixon, Clinton or Johnson, the scandal runs much deeper in the Trump Administration, including his vice president and various officials in his cabinet. Additionally, it may go to various members of the Senate, House and the GOP. Things could get very ugly, and all these people deserve what they get. Because, in teh end, "rule of law" is paramount.
9
Barr knows that the Senate is not go to go with the House on impeachment so it really doesn't matter if House of Representative have full access to the Mueller report and find out that Trump did obstruct justice.
I can't help but speculate that the reason the Justice Department agreed to this is because they are planning on investigating the intelligence agencies regarding how they went about the Russia investigation (Benghazi redux).
While the administrations hypocrisy seems boundless, to refuse this and force all kinds of declassification of security information for their absurd investigation (all 17 agencies dealing with national security concurred that Russia was interfering with our elections) might be problematic for Trump vis-a-vis the courts.
2
Trump could not have asked for a better roll out of the Mueller report. First there was the misleading summary. Then the misleading presser prior to the partial release of the report that was selectively redacted. It seems like eons later and nobody has seen the unredacted report aside from Barr, Mueller, and presumably the White House. The Democrats have failed our country by proving gullible time and time again, as the fallout from this criminal behavior is slowly defused and normalized by the GOP enablers. To think that Nadler and Pelosi continues to give the benefit of the doubt to a corrupt, hand-picked AG, and believe he is capable of acting in "good faith" is astounding! Total fail. We need new leadership!
3
Unless the House sees the complete unredacted Mueller report they cannot be certain that they have all of the pertinent information.Voters waited patiently for the final report by Mr.Mueller.Little did they know that Barr would spend weeks redacting and then summarizing the report.We either have to take his word(not) or purchase a hefty 400 page report with a lot of material blacked out.The representatives of the people have every right to know Mueller’s conclusions and the material upon which he based them.Here’s hoping that the Judiciary committee will at long last have the Mueller report.If Barr continues his foot dragging,the committee will have to hear fromMr.Mueller directly.So far the Mueller report has been a story with a plot line, interesting details removed, some of the plot summarized and then a final conclusion written by someone other than the author.
3
The justice is dribbling out the evidence demanded by Congress because it knows that the more evidence Congress has, the more certain the impeachment will become. They are hanging on by their finger nails trying to protect themselves and the President. The House should definitely censure the President and all the members of the Justice Department who are trying to keep the public from seeing all the wrongdoing that is going on in this White House.
I agree with Nancy Pelosi. I do not want him impeached I want him jailed.
7
All supporting materials and unredacted report was due to Congressional committees and Gang of 8 months ago.
What's the rush?
Wow the end must really be near now. Soon the Democrats will impeach Trump for obstruction (whatever that is) Then, the Senate Republicans will surely be so horrified by his heinous crimes that they will have no choice but to convict. And then President Pence will surely resign so that Hillary can be crowned President of fantasy land.
1
The secret, unrevealed information that will finally reveal the crimes committed by this President? The information that no one has seen finally coming to light? Or did Mueller and his entire team not only see all of that information, they are the ones who gathered it and came to what conclusion? Oh, right, they could 'not exonerate' the subject of the investigation. How many people would be free today if prosecutor's had to prove them innocent? Knock yourself out that nugget is there you just have to find it. Maybe its in code? Better get a supercomputer to aid its there just not in plain sight.
4
Barr is the Attorney General and oversees the DOJ.
He just cut himself a deal to not be held in contempt with Congress in exchange for "some materials to be shared".
And yet how is that NOT an example of obstruction of justice or power?
10
Trump and Barr were completely stonewalling. AG Barr took the threat of a criminal contempt citation in Congress.
It worked. Keep up the threat because AG Barr does not listen to the rule of law or reason, just Trump.
A step in the right direction for the moment. When Barr informs Trump that further information requested will be 'damaging' expect more stonewalling.
It's an ugly dance and the music is way off key. Full transparency is required no matter what Trump wants.
5
In a "Nation of Laws," the House Judiciary Committee has to "negotiate" with The Justice Department to receive vital investigatory information. Do you know how crazy that sounds? Even upon "reaching an agreement," is there anyone who expects complete cooperation?
6
Let's wait to see what, if anything, Trump has to say about it on Twitter. If he whines like a little baby, then I'll believe that Barr is acting independently. If he remains silent on the topic, then I'll have all I need to conclude that Barr sought out his boss's permission first.
Trump is as easy to read as a comic book.
7
I used to think some members of the JOD were laughing behind the backs of the Democrats.
After this "light on possible obstruction of justice and abuse of power by President Trump" was agreed to, I am convinced more than ever that some members are laughing directly in their faces.
4
Does Barr realize his legacy, as he sees it, is ruined forever more.
2
“today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.”
Actually this statement seems to validate those claims, since you would not have been able to make this statement prior to today...
2
From here, is the full public disclosure of the unredacted Mueller report far behind?
2
Perjury, obstruction of justice and contempt of Congress.
Slap him with all three and banish him from ever being considered for the Supreme Court.
His hope is to get on the Supreme Court, everybody knows it.
5
This is just more slow-walking by Barr to run out the clock, to make a show of "good faith." Release the full, un-redacted Mueller Report. Then we'll talk.
4
Proceed with the Contempt Charges! This is another Barr stalling tactic. Mr. Nadler, Mr. Schiff and Ms Ms Pelosi you have prevaricated too long. It is time to show some spine befire you're shown the door.
1
Barr has learned from his master. Create a crisis, let it stew a while, then do what any principled person would have done in the first place and escape the consequences of creating the crisis.
1
Smells fishy. What was on the table for reaching this agreement?
1
Far from "debunk[ing] claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress" -- the spin put on it by Doug Collins -- this development shows that the threat of a contempt vote was effective. Barr blinked. Pressure works. Dems: don't let up!
3
Reminds me of Nixon's capitulation on producing subpoenaed transcripts of recordings he made of conversations in the Oval Office during Watergate. We all remember the POTUS sitting in front of the bound tomes of transcribed recordings. But...he didn't include "the good stuff". The House Committee rejected the heavily edited transcripts saying they didn't comply with the subpoena. And when the unredacted transcripts were finally released Nixon's support evaporated and, facing certain impeachment, he resigned. So...we're off to the races again.
126
@Harley Leiber Can't happen soon enough. Trump has done the impossible. He created peace between Russia and China because they have a common foe, the US.
The bloody Sino Soviet war is now forgotten. If Trump remains in office long enough, our former allies will join their pact.
4
@Harley Leiber. It is possible the incidents of "obstruction of justice" in the Mueller report have been "sexed up" and when the underlying evidence is reviewed they will melt away. Mr. Solomon has found an instant or two where what is in the report does not agree with is in the underlying evidence and the evidence quoted is in Trump's favor. How can you say justice was denied when 2 million pages of documents were provided and no witnesses were denied to the Special Council? No restrictions were placed on Mueller by anybody, no executive privilege was invoked. There was no obstructions of any kind. What a person says to his advisors should not be obstruction if nothing came of it. Obstruction would have been to stop the investigation or at least hamper it
@Harley Leiber Except in this case, it is clear that Trump has absolutely no sense of shame. Nixon, as bad as he was, realized when his time was up and left office. Trump will never do that. He will have to be hounded out.
2
All of the report and the evidence should be on-line for all to see.
192
@Joe B. Here's the mueller report https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5955316-reportOCR.html#document/
6
@Joe B.
There are legitimate reasons for limited redactions of material made available to the general public. These involve national security, intelligence gathering, and ongoing investigations (in the sense of not tipping one's hand). However, there's no legitimate reason to deny this material to members of a congressional committee constituted for overseeing precisely the areas affected by redactions--if we have members of Congress who can't meet the level of security clearance required to do their job, we have bigger problems. Of course, much if not all of this information is already available to unqualified people in this administration who don't deserve the level of security clearance they have.
17
Negotiate? The Constitution gives congress the authority to review reports, testimony etc. in its oversight capacity. Will congress have to negotiate other responsibilities that the Constitution gives to congress if the white house complains. Was there a negotiation when this administration announced it would sell the Saudis military hardware in contravention of congress's objection. The three branches of government are coequal and a check on each, act that way.
136
Can you just imagine for a moment if the tables were turned and it was the Justice Dept. sending demands for evidence or even an FBI raid against a House member. And Speaker Pelosi uses the Capital Police to deny entry or refuses to turn over evidence.
Then she makes them negotiate the release of evidence or oversees the FBI raid. Can you just imagine for a moment that scenario? Really? Do you think Justice would have put up with that?
Nadler should have gone to court immediately following the first hour after the subpoena was ignored. Trump and his Republican minions aren't playing and neither should the Legislature.
174
The compromise reached is limited and documents released at the discretion of DOJ, waiving the right to hold Barr in contempt. It also does not address the multiple subpoenas outstanding or the refusal of witnesses to testify before Congress.
Yes, the Supreme Court may have ultimately weakened one or the other branch of government with their decision, but having testimony run on every channel to counteract Trump’s “State” run media arm is still absolutely necessary. This just looks weak.
12
Rep. Nadler and other House committee chairpersons need to follow the Trump rule book. Back off holding Attorney General William P. Barr in contempt of Congress for his defiance of the subpoena in question but make it very clear that a future vote to hold AG Barr in contempt of Congress will proceed if he makes any attempt to ignore future subpoenas.
22
It's not difficult to see what happens next. The DOJ slowly dribbles out some documents, holding back the most incriminating. More months pass until the House complains that the DOJ is not delivering what they promised. DOJ claims to have provided endless reams of documents, and Trump loudly proclaims he's being victimized by a witch hunt. Fox will gin up the outrage, while legitimate news will haplessly repeated report the claims. Repeat ad infinitum.
71
@syfredrick
You are correct.
3
Barr's loyalty is to Trump. This has been demonstrated repeatedly in the short period he's been in office. And Trump's loyalty is entirely to himself. Neither of them seem to understand that when you're a public servant, you serve the public.
79
@A They know very well that when you're a public servant, you serve the public. They laugh at that quaint belief. They believe they're above the law. The law is for peons as far as they're concerned.
1
@A
They understand it. But think that is a misreading. In their it should be the other way around.
Grand Jury information will not be part of this release.
2
I wish that grand jury testimony was released in confidence to congress. Then, congressmen who release it would be subject to criminal sanctions.
1
"I am not going to do anything that I think is wrong, and I will not be bullied into doing anything I think is wrong, by anybody. Whether it be editorial boards, or Congress or the President. I'm going to do what I think is right." --- William Barr
But yet William Barr is okay that his contempt of Congress charge is being dropped if the Justice Department "shares materials in question".
Barr has chameleon ethics - they change when they best suit him and his predicament.
53
Doug Collins said; “today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.”
He meant to say that the the White House is no longer stonewalling Congress.
How quickly republicans forget what trump did and said yesterday.
12
Republicans cheered the agreement and said that it "debunks" Democratic arguments that the Trump Administration DOJ was stonewalling Congress.
What kind of fantasy land is it that the Republican member inhabit? The Judiciary Committee has had to resort to subpoenas and a threat to hold the AG in contempt of Congress to pry these documents out of this Department. That is the very definition of stonewalling.
39
Oh gee, how NICE of them to do the right thing. How much more can we tolerate of nearly EVERYONE connected to the trump administration doing everything except the right thing? The corruption would make ancient Rome blush. And why is trump STILL violating the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution? Why is there no person or office that is compelling him to stop immediately? Why is he being handled like some omnipotent king?
50
‘Republicans cheered the agreement... the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said “today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.”’
This reaction by Republicans and no corresponding cheers on the part of Democrats implies that the Democrats might have compromised more than they needed to in establishing the House’s constitutional power as an equal branch of the government.
What happened to the alternative ‘solution’ whereby the House legislates a law that anybody who does not submit documents to the House or does not appear in person when subpoenaed must pay $25K and jailed for each day of delay in doing so?
19
I'm sorry, but the Honorable Mr. Collins' statement should not be taken at face value. Properly parsed with events of 2019, it would re-read like this:
"[...] today's provision from the White House, after weeks and months of White House stonewalling, finally provides further evidence that the White House is not stonewalling Congress."
I'm not letting that go unchallenged, Mr. Collins.
22
@Jacob Sommer Sadly, he doesn't care. His seat is safe in GA.
1
One step forward from the previously three steps backwards. I hope this is good news. Keep that pressure up, Chairmen Nadler and Schiff. Let the impeachment inquiry begin without delay. We can not allow Trump and his Attorney General to make their own rules and blatantly defy the Constitution. Trump is a frightened child. And Barr knows the consequences of protecting a corrupt man. He realizes that he is on shaky ground. Indeed the floor beneath him is caving in, as it is for his boss. Importantly keep on informing the public of the Mueller Report. If many don't read the obstruction of justice section, read it, write it, or whatever, for them. Just like with Watergate, persist, persist, persist.
20
I hope the Democrats don't fold and settle for half a loaf. I hope they have the fortitude to insist in getting everything they want. The American people deserve nothing less!
Future generations will thank you for making decisions that are in the best interests of protecting the viability of our precious democracy!
14
Hopefully this will be real information and not something the AG and the DOJ are putting together just to appease the House Judiciary Committe.
Either way you know that both Trump and Barr will be gaslighting whatever information is sent and as always Trump will continue to deny, deny and deny.
9
@BTO
I share your thoughts completely.
The Judiciary committee should verify ALL information with Mueller, or else we'll certainly have more obstruction of justice.
4
Now that AG William Barr has tragically politicized the Department of Justice and turned into an arm of the Trump defense team, I have a great deal of skepticism that the documents will be complete, accurate and undoctored.
21
"Justice Dept. Agrees to Turn Over Key Mueller Evidence to House"
"The House is expected to proceed with a vote Tuesday on legislation authorizing the Judiciary Committee to seek court enforcement of its subpoenas. The committee said Monday that further action could be necessary to secure documents and testimony not covered under the new agreement."
Excellent news. I'm glad the committee is going forward on the vote tomorrow, just in case it's needed it will be ready. And the committee must proceed to get Donald McGahn in to get his testimony.
72
The case for obstruction would be much stronger if Trump had ordered someone to fire Mueller, that person refused and then Trump appointed someone else who was willing to carry out his request. Absent that, a successful impeachment in the Senate will be a tough sell.
5
@Never Trumper
Trump did fire James Comey.
Then he fired every FBI employee to whom Comey confided, with the single exception of Rosenstein.
Then he fired Sessions for rightfully recusing himself from the investigation and replaced him with the one man who would, under no circumstances, hold him accountable.
These facts aside, Robert Mueller laid out multiple clear cases of obstruction in his report in volume 2. You can read them by downloading the report for free, as can anyone in the Senate.
Impeachment is a “tough sell” in the Senate, but it’s not for lack of evidence of obstruction.
4
'Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said “today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.”'
So the Justice department is owned by the White House? I thought they were supposed to act independently?
And yes, the WH is still stonewalling.
463
@Steve Do you mean stonewalling like the Democrats are when it comes to Barr's investigation of how the whole Russia accusations started. I will be looking forward for all that evidence to be revealed to the American people. Unlike Adam Schiff who swore he had evidence of collusion (crickets anyone), Mr. Barr will show what the DNC and previous administration are capable of. BTW, I didn't vote in the last election as I thought neither major candidate worthy of the office.
1
@Gary looks to President Obama’s administration for the genesis of the Russian-Trump campaign collusion to defraud American democracy. It began then. Sources and means of obtaining intelligence about an enemy nation are involved, by people who will be threatened and shut up when Russia again degrades our democracy. It takes FoxNews level duplicity and oligarch sourced funding to confuse the electorate with this distractive dust storm. And it threatens our democracy to have Gary insist on finding the sources of this sneak attack. With the family of the president still sitting in the White House, and Steve Mnuchin and oligarch friends sucking our tax money and treasure dry. Leaches and thieves, con men and grifters. Their day is done.
26
@Gary, please present evidence that Adam Schiff said what you have accused him of saying? Mueller didn't use the term "collusion" and I don't believe Schiff did either.
30
How magnanimous was it that the Justice Department would deign to provide the Congress with the requested documents, as if Article III of the Constitution didn’t even exist?
224
@Christine M.
Yes, Republicans cheered that the AG of the United States finally followed the law!
They must be so proud.
2
Were only this little back-and-forth worthy of all the attention it seems to get... How about we all take a deep breath, reset and reboot, stop assuming the other side is malevolent, and work together for a bit...
7
@Critical Thinking Please
The other side isn't malevolent so let's work together? This isn't exactly 'critical thinking'.
Why doesn't the other side work for our democracy and public interest--at least a bit?
4
@Critical Thinking Please
I must beg to differ. Malevolent is a strong emotional word. There are people who will do whatever it takes to get what they want or win at any cost. They will lie and cheat and burn down the stadium that the opposing side is currently residing in, forgetting that that stadium houses all necessities for the league. And that lying and cheating renders the game and championship meaningless.
A lot of people can’t see the big picture, they can only see their lonely old self, sad and weak, desperately needing the prize. If you let them do whatever they want, you only encourage them to do worse.
You will be surprised at how worse things can get and unfixable.
2
@Critical Thinking Please
Work together? Really? Should your police department find compromise with the criminals in your neighborhood?
There are over 100 bills passed by the House, languishing in the senate due to Mr. Stonewall, McConnell.
6
A little bipartisan agreement.
Trump will hate it.
10
"Mr. Nadler said ... all members of the committee would be able to view it privately."
What -- no public disclosure? Nadler agreed to private viewing?
That's the same thing Lindsay Graham said about the Mueller Report. He said he'd seen the whole thing -- unredacted -- and it's fair to presume that any other Senator could have too.
12
This is a good step to de-escalate the stand off; maybe the Judiciary Committee can now have something to move this process forward.
However, I am disheartened that the republican response was not that they were looking forward to getting to work with this new material, but rather use it as an opportunity to spin this into defending the White House:
" Republicans cheered the agreement. Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said “today’s good faith provision from the administration further debunks claims that the White House is stonewalling Congress.”
8
I can'tt bring myself to monitor the Twitter storm that is about to come from Trump.
But I assume it will be a doozie.
31
Barr seems to have a conflict of interest here. He is holding up a public agency's record production under a subpoena to negotiate a deal that gets him off the hook personally for contempt of Congress. I hope his bar association(s) are taking notice and take action.
110
@Carol
The failure of state bar associations to step up to the plate when members in positions of power flaunt their distain of the associations’ rules, is becoming all to obvious.
12
Remember the scene where Lucy pulls the football away just as Charley Brown is about to kick it, this very well could be a Trump set up.
23
this is a start, but when (yes, when) the DOJ stops cooperating, withholds any documents, refuses to provide the full (not redacted) Mueller Report and all requested documents and other material, then full contempt should be immediately taken up on the floor for a vote.
30
Is it just me or does the eagle in the background to the left of Mr. Muller look as if he/she is being restrained and screaming for justice?
9
I take exception to one thing in your lede, and I think it is an important distinction:
The Justice Department has agreed to "provide Congress with key evidence collected by Robert S. Mueller III that could shed ADDITIONAL light on possible obstruction of justice and abuse of power by President Trump...."
Even the redacted Mueller report already has ample evidence of obstruction of justice and abuse of power.
To have the documents and other data behind the report will only enhance the prosecution of the president's already obvious flaunting of the law and the Constitution, often in plain sight.
12
@avrds
True, but so far, the Republicans mostly refuse to hold the President accountable for his More information could help even the Republicans to face the arrogance and actual crime we are living with day by day during the
Trump administration. We need more support to correct the destructive behavior of Trump administration. If the House is going to try to impeach the President, it must have evidence, lots of evidence.
2
"After weeks of objections, the Justice Department said it found the proposal reasonable and would work with the committee to share the materials in question, but only if the House would back off holding Attorney General William P. Barr in contempt of Congress for his defiance of the subpoena in question."
Are you kidding me? Seriously, the JD is "swapping" one favor for another? Can't anyone do something simply because it is the RIGHT and HONORABLE thing to do?
Unbelievable.
But I guess, aside from this "tic for tat" degree of deal which protects Barr from a "contempt of Congress" charge him, the bigger issue is seeing what the ‘substantial evidence’ of obstruction of justice" was/is all about.
12
Apparently the inconvenient theory of “the rule of law” has rushed up the ragged, rock-strewn trail to overtake Donald Trump’s and William Barr’s runaway stagecoach.
These folks have yet to fully understand that they are servants of “We, the People.” They are not lords over us. If we demand papers and documents from them via our elected representatives, they have to comply. They are doing us no favors. They’re supposed to be doing their jobs.
70
The compromise reached is limited and documents released at the discretion of DOJ, waiving the right to hold Barr in contempt. It also does not address the multiple subpoenas outstanding or the refusal of witnesses to testify before Congress.
Yes, the Supreme Court may have ultimately weakened one or the other branch of government with their decision, but having testimony run on every channel to counteract Trump’s “State” run media arm is still absolutely necessary.
7
The fact that the DOJ had to negotiate what to release is an indication of how far Barr intends to continue his active obstruction of the process. Congress needs to hold Barr accountable for his blatant perjury in regards to conversations with Mueller.
1190
Does DOJ now stand for Department of Justification?
38
@Blue In Red Republican Congressmen have not even read the Mueller Report. Impeach Donald Trump. Ray Sipe BTW GOP WILL take away your healthcare; Social Security and Medicare
45
@Ken L
Yes, but only in the minds of Trump and Barr and their sycophants.
11
I have read the Mueller Report (you can get a copy from the Department of Justice). I’ll keep this comment simple: Attorney General Barr lied to the American public.
The Mueller Report very specifically, very intentionally and very purposefully does NOT exonerate President Trump of anything. A plain reading of the introduction of part 2 of the report makes it clear that Mr. Mueller was abiding by DOJ policy in not pursuing an indictment of a sitting president, but that the constitutional resolution of the allegations that President Trump committed obstruction of justice is action (or lack thereof) by Congress. For the DOJ to then try and keep any supporting or exculpatory evidence of such found by the special counsel is what one would term a “coverup”.
1612
@Mike
Thank you. I guess as long as you can broker a deal which will save one's behind, the real act of lying is "forgiven" or worse, not held accountable.
I guess when one has all the cards and is controlling the scenario, they can deal and play any hand that best suits THEM.
80
@Mike,
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/18/us/politics/mueller-report-document.html
Make it easy for the late arrivals.
47
@Mike
Which Article of the U.S. Constitution provides that trump's Article II appointee as Attorney General shall be the Overseer of the oversight of Article I offices and officers that Congress -- pursuant to Article I -- is empowered and duty bound to 'provide'?
67
so certain somebodies ARE afraid of something...
Note to Dems: keep this in mind
29
@Addison Steele Yes, I was surprised that Barr actually came down from his high and mighty perch sitting on Trump's shoulder. Perhaps he does still admit there are in fact 3 branches of government and he is not always above the law. He certainly is proving himself the Dick Cheney of this administration.
3
You can bet that Trump's lead defense attorney will selectively release only the least damning evidence, while claiming full transparency. After all, he singlehandedly exonerated the President a month before the report was released, the report that says almost the exact opposite of his memo and presser. Oh, and he lied how many times that Mueller didn't use the OLC opinion on indictment of a sitting President when forming his conclusion?? Just a minor discrepancy, right?
81
@Character Counts
Call me old fashioned, but it I find it truly ironic when you mention "Trump's lead defense attorney", I assume you are referring to the Attorney General of the United States; a man whose job is to work on behalf of every citizen in the country. That in itself shows how low the bar has been set in the White House by Trump.
15
@Easy Goer...yes Trump sets a very low Barr. And Barr is just the guy to conform to it. Barr should be barred from the office of attny general.
4
@Character Counts
This is exactly right and explains first, the delays and stall tactics and, second, the sudden turn toward "transparency" by the AG. There will be nothing transparent about any of this, you can rest assured. They will delay, deny and obfuscate til the very bitter end. It's the Trumpian way.
3
The Watergate Special Counsel immediately turned over all the evidence and the report to Congress back in ‘73. Barr’s refusal to turn the full Mueller Report to the Judiciary Committee has been an attempt by “Trump’s Cohn” to whitewash the Mueller Report, and mislead Americans!
The Mueller Report does not belong to Trump nor to the Department of Justice, but to US, the American people.
Speaker Pelosi, time to open an impeachment inquiry!
277
Hardball is what the Republicans use and understand.
Enough of the Democrats play wiffle ball, put down the plastic bats and take out the hardwood!
260
@cretino, I prefer the Aluminum bats. Love the sound it makes on contact.
10
@cretino
Get what Barr will give you, then demand the rest under penalty of contempt again. Hardball. He is a traitor and deserves no less.
14
@5cretino
If politics is analogous to a game of dodgeball, then the Democrats lob beach balls while the Republicans hurl hand grenades. They need to fight back as strongly as their opponents fight against them.
1
trump will allow this? I dont think so.
3
Let the sun shine in...the Mueller report!
8
Barr doesn't seem to know that his job is not Trump's personal defense lawyer.
130
@Erik Frederiksen
That may not be his job, but I think that's why he was hired.
To be Trump's personal defense lawyer.
11
@Erik Frederiksen
Barr has taken Michael Cohen's place as trump's new fixer. Same job, same sleaze.
12
About time! Trump may never get his “big, beautiful wall” on our Southern Border but his own shaky wall of obstruction and lies is beginning to crumble! 🤞
12
Jerrold Nadler is doing a tremendous job taking on a corrupt President and his equally corrupt Republican sycophants. William Barr was clearly in contempt. How do you make a deal about defying our constitution ?
35
Considerable skepticism here:
"I'll believe this after it happens."
If the DOJ turns over only less than it has promised, I'm all but certain that Mueller or someone on his staff will point this out.
Not clear why that would happen in any event. Mueller DID say, after all, that he would not be indicting anyone who hadn't already been charged, and that he didn't find enough evidence of either collusion or obstruction to recommend that Trump (or anyone on his campaign team) be charged with anything.
All that being so, I can't see any upside in not turning over every shred of evidence. The House can, of course (and almost certainly will), reach the opposite conclusion from Mueller, but let's not forget that Mueller himself didn't recommend that Trump (or any Trump campaign official) be charged with anything at all.
I think many readers are unaware that Mueller's charges against Manafort and Gates had nothing at all to do with Trump or his campaign. They involved entirely unrelated conduct that had occurred many years earlier.
@Commenter
You are mistaken when you say "Mueller himself didn't recommend that Trump (or any Trump campaign official) be charged with anything at all."
If you were to read the Mueller report, it explicitly says that Trump is not exonerated of obstruction. Trump was not indicted because of a 1973 DOJ policy which prohibits indictment of sitting presidents, and Trump was not accused because it would not lead to a trial where he could defend himself. Instead, it is up to Congress to act.
12
@Bob I'm flabbergasted that you authored this reply, since it was you (unless there's another "Bob," which is quite possible) who posted Barr's comment that Mueller made very clear to Barr and Rosenstein that he (Mueller) wasn't relying at all on the DOJ policy you refer to, that he (Mueller) simply hadn't found enough evidence to recommend that Trump be charged with anything.
The House of Representatives should have been given access to this months ago. We should not be wasting taxpayer dollars on two or three sets of lawyers all being paid by the government. Trump needs to realize he isn't the Queen; he is just part of a government and is not above the law.
743
@Joe Barnett
Nor is he IN Queens...
15
@Joe Barnett
Exactly Joe.
We all realize that, but the Senate is perfectly happy to let the delaying tactics drag on and on. The more it drags on, the better it is for those who blatantly act out and act above the law without fear.
19
@totyson Well played.
2
Who does this Justice Department think they work for anyway? What happened to the American Citizenry, what about them and the Representatives they elected?
The Justice Department is an oxymoron, and should be renamed the Disinformation Department.
Can't wait until November, 2020.
667
@cherrylog754. According to the 19-page memo Barr sent to the White House auditioning for Attorney General, the Justice Department reports to the president, who has the "absolute" right to control any and all investigations, including those of himself or his family. The rest of us apparently don't have a say.
66
“According to Barr...” — exactly.
27
@cherrylog754, Please don't bad-mouth the entire DOJ because of the actions of Barr. You may be hurting the good folks who happen to work there and their supporters..
10
Was there even a basis for a contempt charge?
"... but only if the House would back off holding ... Barr in contempt of Congress ... "
Maybe I'm missing something (NOT), but if someone asks you for X and that person says "OK, I'll give you X," what is there to complain about?
4
@Commenter Getting half of X.
11
@Cmmenter. Barr is only agreeing to give selected parts of X.
10
@Commenter Because "X" was asked for long ago. The Justice Dept is only handing "X" over because of the threat of being held in contempt.
11
Mr. Trump has made it absolutely necessary for the American people to study just what he did. He has told over 10,000 lies to us, has been less than transparent with his patriotic duty to the IRS (his own branch of government), and has made it clear that he wanted to obstruct justice by giving his opinion of the investigation before it had been allowed to conclude. If Mr. Trump had not been his own worst enemy, the nation might have allowed him to eschew scrutiny. In democracy, each citizen is king, not just the guy who lives at 1600. Let the real games begin!
288
@Maxine and Max, well said. Thank you for commenting.
10
How about: I'll believe this after it happens.
263