[ad_1]
WASHINGTON – Rumors surrounding the investigation of Russia often presuppose that the special council, Robert S. Mueller III, will publish a report on its findings, which will serve as a definitive explanation as to how Russia intervened in the 2016 elections and whether President Trump or his associates coordinated their activities with Moscow.
But this guarantee does not exist. The law does not require the Department of Justice to publish a report, and Mr. Mueller has been silent on the matter. Trump's candidate for the position of Attorney General, William P. Barr, said at the confirmation hearing held on Tuesday that he wanted to divulge as much as possible what Mr. Mueller had found possible. But he said that he needed to know more about the report and the regulations that govern his disclosure of information before deciding what to do about disclosure of the results.
This answer does not satisfy the Democratic leaders of the Senate, who said Wednesday that they were going to do it. oppose the appointment of Mr. Barr does not agree to publish the entire report produced by Mr. Mueller, with the exception of deletions of confidential information relating to national security.
Why Is It Assumed That A Mueller Report Is About
The government has published extensive information as a result of major investigations into disasters and national scandals. The commissions that investigated the attacks of September 11 and the impossibility of finding weapons of mass destruction after the invasion of Iraq, for example, issued public reports of the war. a book length that became part of the historical record.
Similarly, Ken Starr, Independent Chair The lawyers who investigated President Bill Clinton over the scandals of Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky presented Congress with a lengthy report that legislators voted in favor of advertising. He provided a detailed narrative description of the evidence, including disturbing sexual details, and a thorough legal analysis of potential crimes committed by the President.
This does not always happen. Nearly half a century ago, Leon Jaworski, a special board charged with investigating the Watergate scandal, sent a grand jury to Congress a brief report containing factual statements, citations of evidence and no legal analysis. This report, known as the "road map", was kept secret until last year
but Mr. Mueller is subject to a different set of rules than those of investigators.
What are the current rules doing?
In 1999, partly in response to Mr. Starr being out of date, Congress allowed the law on independent lawyers to expire. The Ministry of Justice has drafted new regulations authorizing special counsels to investigate wrongdoing by senior officials with day-to-day independence, but under the supervision of the Attorney General.
The regulators sought to prevent the kind of "extravagant" moves that Mr. Starr made in his report, according to Neal Katyal, a former justice department official who drafted the regulations.
"There is no doubt that when you write a settlement like this in the In the middle of a really public thing like the Starr report, it will influence your thinking, and that's all." is what has been done, "he said. "There were concerns about the privacy breaches that occurred in the Starr report."
The Department of Justice's explanation regarding the Special Councils Regulation, filed in the Federal Register in 1999, criticized the former independent attorney law system, in which prosecutors filed reports directly with the Congresses, which were generally made public, as in the Starr investigation.
The General's report to Congress must constitute a "brief notification" indicating that the inquiry is closed and why.
Admittedly, Mr. Mueller has already revealed important investigative findings in drafting and unveiling long indictments, particularly of Russians involved in the operations. manipulate American social media and hack Democratic e-mails. But this method has little use in understanding the actions of people he does not accuse.
How does Barr view the question?
He said he was still trying to understand it.
While Mr. Barr repeated repeatedly He emphasized that he wished to make public as much information as possible about the special council's investigation, he refrained from taking Commitments – stressing that some rules may be inconveniencing him and that he has not yet been informed of Mr. Mueller's investigation. He also indicated that he wished to speak to Mr. Mueller and Rod J. Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General who had appointed the special advocate, to see what he was already thinking.
"I do not know what, at the end of the day, what will be released," he said in his confirmation hearing. "I do not know what Bob Mueller wrote."
Barr left possibilities, including writing his own summary of findings, though he was to be confirmed Attorney General, as expected.
"There are different relationships at work here," Barr said. "Under the regulations in force, the report of the special council is confidential and the report made public would be a report of the Attorney General."
This answer did not appease the Democrats and left some confusion as to to his ultimate intentions. On Wednesday, one of the witnesses at the hearing, Neil Kinkopf, a law professor at Georgia State University and former head of the Justice Department of the Obama and Clinton administrations, pointed out the following: ambiguity of concern, stating that Mr. Barr seemed to interpret the settlement means that the Attorney General must publish his own report and not hand over that of Mr. Mueller.
What information could Mr. Barr conceal?
If Mr. Barr ends up relaying a redacted version of Mr. Mueller's report or instead writes his own, he will most likely have to keep the grand jury testimony secret.
He may also keep classified information that could reveal sources of information and methods still used to spy on the Russian government, such as moles or phone tapping.
million. Barr also noted that the Ministry of Justice generally kept so-called confidential memos in which prosecutors explained what they had discovered about those they decided not to prosecute.
On Wednesday, Mr. Kinkopf noted that the Department of Justice had held that incumbent presidents can not be charged during a term of office. If Mr. Barr strictly applies the view that the Ministry's policy prohibits the dissemination of negative information about persons whom prosecutors have refused to accuse, he said, this would prevent officials of the Department of Justice from disclose information about Mr. Trump's actions.
Katyal said that there was a way around that. The Special Councils Regulation requires Mr. Barr to inform Congress of any case in which he has canceled a measure proposed by Mr. Mueller. Therefore, if Mr. Mueller suggested that Mr. Trump be charged, the Attorney General's report should discuss it. [19659030] If not, how can we know what Mueller has learned?
First, information could leak in the media. If a Mueller report is disclosed, it would likely result in a firestorm, especially if it contained unredacted classified information and evidence under grand jury secrecy.
The Judiciary Committee of the House, now controlled by the Democrats, could also seek to summon. The report. If Mr. Trump claims the privilege of the executive to avoid giving it up, the House could ask a judge to order it.
Democrats in the House could also ask to subpoena Mr. Mueller about his findings. Mr. Trump could also seek to gag Mr. Mueller by invoking the privilege of the executive, although it is not clear that he would succeed.
Could Trump block or change a report to Congress?
The president's personal attorney, Rudolph W. Giuliani suggested that in addition to potentially invoking the privilege of the executive, the White House might attempt to revise a report that will be forwarded to Congress "so that we can correct it if it is wrong".
Barr said Tuesday that he would not allow such an approach: "This will not happen."
Source link
