Access to Mueller's report and evidence can be guided by Congress, Clinton's e-mail

The Department of Justice and Democratic Legislators are preparing for a fight to gain access to evidence revealed by Special Advocate Robert S. Mueller III during his almost two-year investigation into the interference of the Russia in the 2016 election and to find out if President Trump obstructed justice.

Mueller's investigation is coming to an end, according to people familiar with the case, and Justice Department officials expect to receive a report from him in March. Democrats asked Friday that the report be made public.

A senior justice official said Friday that the report would not be delivered next week, as it may be the case just a few days ago.

[Justice Department preparing for Mueller report in coming days]

According to the agency's regulations, Mueller's report must be a confidential report of the accused, as well as those who have been investigated but not charged. Then, in accordance with the regulations, the Attorney General – William P. Barr – will summarize the work of the Congress.

Legislators are already asking the Department of Justice to hand over any other underlying investigative document produced during Mueller's investigation.

The task of removing these documents from the Department of Justice may fall into the hands of the House, where Democrats are the majority. On Friday, Jerrold Nadler (DN.Y.), Speaker of the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives, joined the presidents of five other House committees in urging Barr: "We are very much looking forward to the Department of Justice releases the special report. Lawyer Mueller submits to you – without delay and to the fullest extent permitted by law, according to a letter to the Attorney General from the legislator.

The Democrats said they were monitoring the speed with which Barr would present his summary to Congress after hearing Mueller's findings, warning that any delay could be interpreted as a reason to fear that Barr would conceal some revelations. Democrats also intend to instruct the Ministry of Justice to keep all documents related to Mueller's investigation, indicating to Barr that in his letter he should be ready to provide information on request "concerning certain actors foreigners and other persons who may have been the subject of a crime, counter-intelligence investigation "and other investigative material," including confidential and confidential information for the police services ".

[Barr vows to protect Russia probe but says Mueller report might stay secret]

The chairs of the House committees also asked Barr to clarify his reasoning for the non-disclosure of any part of Mueller's report that the Attorney General might choose to omit from the summary he submitted to Congress.

Ministry of Justice officials fear they will have little reason to withhold such documents, given the extensive information provided to Congress following the FBI's investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a server private e-mail while she was Secretary of State.

When the investigation ended in 2016, James B. Comey, then director of the FBI, made public the reports of the agents' interviews with the witnesses, held public meetings in Congress and provided additional information to the legislators during the meeting. private meetings.

Department of Justice officials, who were avenging themselves on this level of information-sharing and disclosure of confidential investigative documents, did the same after Trump dismissed Comey in May 2017. When lawmakers Republicans demanded additional information about the Clinton and Russia's investigations, the White House agency to comply. In early 2017, Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, declined to authorize the appointment of Rod J. Rosenstein to the position of Deputy Attorney General at the time. unless Grassley receives a detailed account of the FBI. about the investigation on Russia.

Grassley had the briefing.

The trend continued after Rosenstein became deputy commander of the Department of Justice. For example, when the President declassified a sensitive watchdog, a redacted version of the document was made public. This was unprecedented, and this could affect how Mueller, reputed to be silent, deals with future requests for information.

"The rules governing what the ministry returns to Congress are based almost exclusively on precedents, and now that the Republicans have created these new precedents, they are on the verge of finding themselves on their own turf," said Matthew Miller, who from the Department of Justice. during the Obama administration. The ministry, he said, "has no valid argument as to why he should not provide the same transparency for the Mueller probe as for the Clinton inquiry".

The senior officials of the Justice Department, however, do not think that the path traced by Comey after Clinton's investigation is the one they should follow when Mueller finishes his work. Barr said it during his confirmation hearing.

"If you do not want to indict someone, you do not stay there and publish no negative information about it," Barr said during his hearing before the Senate. "It's not the way the department works."

This poses a challenge for the Justice Department, which has long held that a sitting president could not be indicted.

Miller said the Justice Department had to hand over to Congress any incriminating information that Mueller had discovered about the president. "The Justice Ministry has made it clear that it was not the arbiter of presidential crime – it was the work of Congress," he added. "If this is true, it means any evidence of presidential misconduct or potential criminality, they must entrust to the organ of government that they have declared to adopt policies that lead."

[‘Enjoy your life’: Trump puts new attorney general in an awkward position from the start]

If Barr had to resist such demands, lawmakers have some options to respond. They can quote everything from Mueller's full report to the FBI's summary of witness hearings. They can call Mueller to testify about the contents of his probe and fill any gaps.

Members of the Judiciary Committee of the House believe that no information from Mueller's investigation should be disguised. But for the moment, they do not want to engage in a legal battle for every last document, saying they want to know first whether Barr plans to conceal everything.

They say they expect Barr to follow the established precedent when special prosecutor Leon Jaworski provided Congress with a "road map" in 1974 of the investigation he had conducted against President Richard Nixon. At this point, Democrats think they should be able to speak with witnesses denied access during Mueller's investigation, including former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and the former vice president. President of the Trump presidential campaign, Rick Gates.

According to Mueller's findings, several Democrats have said that ongoing investigations in Congress could benefit more from questioning these witnesses than waiting while lawyers seek to compel Barr to publish Mueller's notes – particularly in the Senate Intelligence Committee, which has not concluded its investigation. Electoral interference of Russia. This investigation began shortly after the inauguration of Trump.

On the House side, Democrats are reluctant to spend a lot of time waiting for the complete surrender of Mueller's documents, which may never happen before they continue their own investigations. There is even some reluctance to take instructions from Mueller if these documents are fully disclosed because the limitations of the special investigator's investigation – they were limited to the pursuit of criminal activity – did not occur. Do not apply to lawmakers, who can investigate any alleged or potential misconduct. abuse of power.

What the Democrats will be looking for more closely in Mueller's report, assistants said, is all evidence that he would have found evidence that could have led to an indictment of Trump. In their letter to Barr on Friday, Democratic House leaders warned of "the particular danger" of withholding any evidence of Trump's misconduct. "To support that a president in office can not be indicted, and then conceal the evidence of wrongdoing in Congress because the President will not be charged, that is, convert the policy of the department into one." means of concealment. The president, "they wrote," is not above the law. "