March 30, 2019

AG William Barr Ruins Dems' Talking Points in New Letter to House and Senate Leaders

Dana Mathewson

You can color me hopeful. It appears that the new Attorney General has the stones that the previous one didn't have, or at least didn't have the opportunity to show. This dude obviously doesn't back down.

U.S. Attorney General William Barr effectively destroyed all of the Democrats' talking points about the Mueller report in a letter to lawmakers Friday, and took a swipe at Democrat members of Congress and media who mischaracterized his summary of principal conclusions.

In his letter to the top Republican and Democrat on the Senate and House Judiciary committees, Barr announced that he will release a redacted copy of special counsel Robert Mueller’s nearly 400-page "confidential report" into Russian interference in the 2016 election by mid-April.

"We are preparing the report for release, making the redactions that are required," Barr wrote, noting that"the Special Counsel is assisting us in this process."

The redactions, Barr wrote, will include:

(1) material subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6 (e) that by law cannot be made public; (2) material the intelligence community identifies as potentially compromising sensitive sources and methods; (3) material that could affect other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other Department offices; and (4) information that would unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties.

Barr pointed out that while President Trump has the right to assert executive privilege over some of the material, "he has stated publicly that he intends to defer to me and, accordingly, there are no plans to submit the report to the White House for a privilege review."

The attorney general took strong exception to claims made by certain lawmakers and members of the media that his four-page statement on Mueller's report, released on Sunday, was a summary of the entire report.

"I am aware of some media reports and other public statements mischaracterizing my March 24, 2019 supplemental notification as a 'four-page summary of the Special Counsel's review,'" Barr wrote. He cited a letter by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) as an example of someone who mischaracterized his letter.

For example, Chairman Nadler's March 25 letter refers to my supplemental notification as a "four page summary of the Special Counsel's review. My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel's investigation or report. As my letter made clear, my notification to Congress and the public provided, pending release of the report, a summary of its 'principal conclusions' -- that is, its bottom line.

The Special Counsel's report is nearly 400 pages long (exclusive of tables and appendices) and sets forth the Special Counsel's findings, his analysis, and the reasons for his conclusions. Everyone will soon be able to read it on their own. I do not believe it would be in the public's interest for me to attempt to summarize the full report or to release it in serial or piecemeal fashion.

In his summary Sunday, Barr said that Mueller’s investigation did not conclude that members of the Trump campaign conspired with Russia in its election interference activities. While Mueller left open the question of whether Trump obstructed justice during the investigation, the attorney general determined that no charges of obstruction were warranted under DOJ rules because there was no underlying crime to obstruct.

Barr said in his letter that he would be available to appear before both committees to testify about Mueller’s report on May 1 and May 2.

The donkeys are braying about demanding the whole thing by the middle of next week or so -- two days after their own national holiday. Barr doesn't seem impressed. Good for him. There are legal reasons and he's sticking to them. You'd think that the Democrats -- a party made up of lawyers rather than people who actually DO things -- would understand that. However, we all know that in their case, sauce for the goose is different from the sauce used on the gander, and is used only when THEY want to.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:41 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 699 words, total size 6 kb.




What colour is a green orange?




20kb generated in CPU 0.05, elapsed 0.3363 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.3209 seconds, 116 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Always on Watch
The American Thinker
Bird`s Articles
Old Birdblog
Birdblog`s Literary Corner
Behind the Black
Canada Free Press
Christian Daily Reporter
Climatescepticsparty,,a>
_+
Daren Jonescu
Dana and Martha Music On my Mind Conservative Victory
Eco-Imperialism
Gelbspan Files Infidel Bloggers Alliance
The Reform Club
Revolver
FTP Student Action
Veritas PAC
FunMurphys
The Galileo Movement
Intellectual Conservative
br /> Liberty Unboound
One Jerusalem
Powerline
Publius Forum
The Gateway Pundit
The Jeffersonian Ideal
Thinking Democrat
Ultima Thule
Young Craig Music
Contact Tim at bgocciaatoutlook.com

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 83580
  • Files: 20152
  • Bytes: 1738.1M
  • CPU Time: 610:54
  • Queries: 3124012

Content

  • Posts: 20591
  • Comments: 66954

Feeds


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0