Certain members of Congress to get a less redacted Mueller report
13 replies, posted
A limited number of members of Congress will get to see a “less redacted” version of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report, U.S. prosecutors told a federal judge in
The Justice Department plans to give those members of Congress a version of the report that will include information related to charges against Roger Stone, President Donald
Trump’s sometime adviser who’s charged with lying to Congress, witness tampering and obstructing justice, the prosecutors said.
The copies of the “less redacted report” won’t be disseminated to all members of Congress or their staff “in the first instance,” the prosecutors said. A more redacted version of
the report on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election is due to be released publicly on Thursday.
It shouldn't be "less" redacted. It should be fully unredacted. Subpoena's are going to fly over this.
Grand jury testimony is protected and has to be redacted from public release, and anything handed to Congress is going to be published.
Nobody should trust this administration to properly redact the report into their own wrongdoings, but there is a damn good reason the fully unredacted Mueller report would be bad to publish publicly.
I don't think there's a valid argument to with-hold such testimony from the Gang of Eight.
"It's sensitive" - they deal with matters of national secrecy regarding informations that could destabilize or deplatform the United States and/or leave it open to attack
"It's not legal" - Congress has the universal authority to check the Executive on such matters and as such has unlimited license to request any information the Executive would rather withhold. It is legal for them to request it and legal for them to receive it.
"It pertains to ongoing investigations" - If the Gang of Eight can oversee ongoing intelligence matters I feel they can handle criminal investigations
"But it'd be leaked" - If the Gang of Eight is leaking things, even through their interns, then something is seriously wrong and whatever was leaked was probably leaked for the good of the nation.
Nunes and McConnell getting top clearance info is a gamble tbh
Congressional leaders absolutely should be given access to an unredacted version of the report in classified, secured settings, with a redacted copy for comparison, I'm not disagreeing. However, look at the James Comey letter, he wrote it and sent it to Congress because he was doing his job, even though he knew it would be immediately leaked. And of course it was, with Jason Chaffetz seeming a likely actor if not one of several, the shitty little rat.
You can't deliver the unredacted report to all of Congress unless they're dragged into the same secured settings, because anything the entire Congress gets their hands on will be leaked for partisan damage, these days. Mueller's report is likely to include tons of classified intelligence source information and grand jury testimony, and revealing this publicly would be fatally damaging for so many reasons, even if it also revealed the President and his men to be a pack of gangsters unfit to serve anything but 25 years to life and impeachment proceedings kicked off.
If it's the whole report, the entire report is arguably entirely in the public's interest.
CI pulled from Military Intelligence : sure. Literally anything else: Doesn't outweigh the public interest, especially if it reveals the President is a gangster who has routinely put the country in danger and intends to continue doing so. And I'd argue even Military Intelligence should be released should the public interest be served by it -- much like how Snowden leaked classified sensitive military intelligence ... about how we were spying on our own citizens.
Grand jury testimony is protected to protect American citizens (and others) from being afraid to testify. We already have a thread about White House staffers losing their shit in fear that the administration will read the unredacted report and then deliver personal retribution against anyone who testified. There's little anyone can do about that because you can't stop the White House from reading its own Justice Department's report, but you can prevent burning sources and betraying witnesses among the wider population. And this is before getting into classified intelligence gathering and sensitive sources within other countries and the potential risk of life and limb if these sources are burned.
At what point does the public interest justify exposing innocents to potentially fatal risk in the name of holding accountable an unaccountable administration when the public's own elected representatives are unwilling or impotent to hold the administration accountable? This mess is not the informants' fault but they're apparently totally worth sacrificing because the American people fell asleep at the wheel and let the swamp monsters take over everything and people are impatient for retribution.
I want to see the corrupt house of cards come burning down just as much as you, but let's think about the real impacts of the things we're saying.
At the point where the public is put in danger or when the government becomes so dysfunctional that it is laid bare that it no longer wishes to represent its electorate.
At that point the only people who could bring anyone to proper justice would be the nation - and the only means the Nation would have to legitimately do so would be in being properly informed.
If the President is literally selling nuclear secrets to unstable territories for profit then the real impacts of the things we're saying dramatically outweigh the loss of ten or even a hundred lives and a twenty-years setback on our military intelligence gathering methods.
If things are that bad why hasn't the DoJ been stormed and the report seized and dragged out into the sunlight by the hands of the people yet?
Oh right, people are still comfortable enough to wait for Mueller's report to be released by Congress. The same Congress they're supposedly incapable of trusting to look out for them.
If you're going wait for the system to do its job, let it do its job properly, even if that job needs to be verified by the House by comparing against an unredacted copy so they can call out any improperly-hidden information. If the system fails to reveal the truth after being given the chance to do a proper job and protect the innocents the redaction laws are supposed to protect, even Pelosi's House, then there is no other option but to burn the sources and leak the whole report -- but that should be the last resort and if you believe we're at the point of last resort I'm seeing a lack of discussion about imminently mobilizing in the streets so wtf.
There are many indications that the system is not doing its job properly which is why it is in the public's interest for the full thing to be disclosed. If Americans can't trust the system why bother protecting it? The core foundation of Justice in the United States relies principally on the trust of the electorate: trust that the 'system will do its job properly if you let it'.
Because nobody wants to pull that trigger so long as we don't know for sure what is in the report. The only thing we know about the report is eleven words selectively taken from a by-reports some 300 page document by a man who is known to lie his ass off, misrepresent things, and effectively tap dance the line on treason against the United States. That's not enough to justify a raid - but it's enough to come close to considering one.
The system already failed to reveal the truth when Barr pulled back his own commentary and said 'that summary wasn't an actual summary so don't put any stock in it' after he tried to take the report to the President before it was released to Congress which he testified, to Congress, that he would not do. The processes are already failing; people are simply hoping against hope that it will miraculously re-align itself. The fact that the report being given to Congress is still redacted is a corpse-stench coming from the casket labeled 'the Justice System' that I imagine most people now are starting to begin to run out of excuses to dismiss the smell of.
Barr has been given about a month to do a proper job and has failed to do so at every step along the way. You are asking for leniency and mercy for a man who has shown he does not deserve it. The laws meant to 'protect innocents' is being abused to 'protect the guilty' with equal measure. The substance of the law is being abused and perverted to project 'my pet theory of the law, which is that the President can't be charged with crimes or even investigated'.
If we were to expect 'the truth to be revealed' then someone impartial would be handling the release of the report: not literally someone who concluded before they were even interviewed for their job that they would 'disagree' with the presumptions others would make about the law and ethics, including and up to him directly stating that he would ignore the ethics committee if they told him he had to recuse himself because he 'had better ideas'.
I don't know if you know you're kinda strawmanning me or if you just missed this
but you keep on harping about how Barr can't be trusted when I already know that and my argument is that Congressional oversight needs to happen but it needs to happen carefully to safeguard those who should be safeguarded by redactions -- people who have not conducted themselves criminally in conspiracy with the President. Show it to the Gang of Eight and wait to see if Pelosi forces the DoJ to be honest (when she has no reason not to), fine, but that's not the same as releasing the unredacted report to all of Congress who'll leak it all the way to the front page of the NYT before Trump even has a chance to tweet about it.
You are so fixated on the idea that I'm advocating waiting for Barr to release his hack job and taking his word for it that you missed what I'm actually saying. If you aren't already at the last line of defense then you're on my side of the argument even if you didn't understand it. You are either waiting for the last bastion (Congress holding the DoJ accountable for redactions and communicating the contents of the report to the public) to succeed or fail, or you should already be in the streets unless your response is instead dejected complacency. If you're not in the streets then you should not be at the point of demanding maximal declassification of the report because there is no other opportunity for an untainted report to hit daylight because the last bastion will have not yet fallen in its task.
Democrats rejected the offer.
I don't want the unredacted Mueller report to be released to the public. I DO want it released to the House intelligence committee, though
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.