Congress has just voted to hold AG Barr in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with their subpoena of the unredacted Mueller report?

I have heard conflicting stories about the legality of this proceeding. I have heard that AG Barr can not be ordered to break federal law by Congress, and that by providing Congress with unredacted materials relating to ongoing Grand Jury information Barr would be breaking the law.

I have heard that ALL information in the Mueller report is available to Congress except for protected Grand Jury information.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

MistyCee

Well, just to keep up to speed, this prompted Trump to "protectively" assert attorney client privilege."

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mueller-report-executive-privilege_n_5cd2e536e4b0a7dffccfb38a

We'll see how this plays out, but keep in mind, the entire House needs to vote on Contempt, so the Committee voting on it really doesn't mean much.

Also, I don't think you're right on this point:

I have heard that ALL information in the Mueller report is available to Congress except for protected Grand Jury information.

Although I've seen this rumor here on SW and on some conservative sites, the last time I checked, it was only a "less redacted" report that was available to certain leaders in Congress, most of whom haven't bothered to look at it.

Keep in mind as this plays out, its all posturing, for the most part, on both sides, really.

From the big perspective, it looks like they sent Barr an overly broad subpoena, and when, instead of offering to comply with pieces and parts and negotiating from there, Trump/Barr stalled and said no, they moved forward with the Contempt thing.

This does not seem to me to be the Democrats finest hour, as opposed to say, the tax returns thing which seems to be fairly cut and dry, but they're starting to try to fight every battle with Trump since he's not giving on anything.

As I watch this stuff play out, personally, I'm trying to look for the correspondence, because statements from both sides tend to be pretty misleading and the press doesn't quite seem to be up to the task of distilling what's really happening very well.

4meAndyou · F

@MistyCee I heard that 92% of the report was available unredacted in a secure location for the Dems to read if they so wished, and that only the grand jury information had been withheld. The Dems apparently believe that the golden ticket to the candy factory is buried in the redacted 8% of the report.

MistyCee

@4meAndyou That's the kind of thing I'm talking about about no one being clear. Grand jury info is one thing, and it could quite easily obtained by asking a court to release it (or by both Houses amending Rule 6 for that matter), but the pending investigation and sources and methods stuff is stickier.

I doubt there's a golden ticket, tbh, and I also think that Democrats wouldn't be satisfied with even the unredacted report, but will want the underlying materials and a chance to question Mueller and Barr (although I think the latter will be pretty much a waste of time other than for show).

There's probably no way they'll get all of the underlying materials, though, and at the end of the day, I think this fight is about what they're going to need to question Mueller and whether they'll be able to do it.

4meAndyou · F

@MistyCee Nadler could have subpoenaed the unredacted document directly from the court himself, but did not. Instead, he insisted that Barr had to join him in doing so. When Barr refused, the contempt citation followed.

I believe that his purpose in doing so was to smear Barr. We are looking at a potential investigation into the beginnings of the Fusion GPS mess conducted by Barr, and I believe this is a political move designed to cast doubt upon Barr and upon his character before the investigation begins.

MistyCee

@4meAndyou I'm not seeing the Fusion GPS thing as a primary motivator, tbh, but you're probably right that he's jamming Barr and discrediting him because of what he might do in the future.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying Nadler could have subpoenaed the unredacted document from the Court, though. What Court has it?

4meAndyou · F

@MistyCee The grand jury is separate from the courts. My error.

MistyCee

@4meAndyou Well, I supposed Nadler could have filed a suit with the Court to release the Grand Jury stuff himself, but it would be pretty lame and a waste of time, since he doesn't know what's in it.

Overall, while I think Barr has been doing a really slimy thing by protecting the message for Trump and with jumping on the obstruction thing, I do think he's been, for the most part, pretty good about redactions.

4meAndyou · F

@MistyCee I don't know what you mean when you say,

by protecting the message for Trump

. I don't think there is any doubt that Mueller works beneath the AG, and that it is up to Barr to make the obstruction determination based on the information in the report. Mueller needs to testify before the House, but it will not end with that. No matter what Mueller says, the Democrat House invested a LOT in the Mueller investigation. They are trying, now, to save face, and leap from the sinking iceberg onto an icecube that still might float.

MistyCee

@4meAndyou I doubt your first point, and see what you're saying about the democrats trying to save face, but the bottom line is, no matter what the Report might say, its the House's job to figure out what, if anything, needs to be done with it.

4meAndyou · F

@MistyCee You haven't explained what you meant.

This message was deleted by the author of the main post.

MistyCee

@4meAndyou Sorry.

On Barr making a prosecutorial judgment on contempt, I don't think he did the right thing by making that conclusion, 1) without even reviewing the evidence, and 2) without a well reasoned legal analysis. I've posted on this before, and don't want to go through it again, but it would be a moot point (other than for propaganda) if Congress didn't take the bait and do it's job, as Mueller's report pretty much said it should do.

Barr got cute, basically, by adding his two cents, but no matter what Mueller or Barr may have concluded, Congress is not bound by it, and I think, has a duty to look at the report and decide if Congressional action is appropriate. I'm talking about impeachment, but not just impeachment. Could be legislation is warranted, and I'm still not clear on the counterintelligence angle.

MistyCee

@4meAndyou Wait... Sorry again. If you meant by protecting Trump, what I meant was that Barr, by a short "non-summary", by his "prosecutorial judgment" on obstruction, and by his subsequent conduct, is working for Trump's interests politically.

I don't think he's the devil, I think Nancy was nuts to say he lied to Congress, and I do think he's being consistent with his views on executive power and the unitary executive thing, but I disagree with him on them.

4meAndyou · F

@MistyCee Thank you. I thought I must have cobwebs in my brain, because I just didn't get what you were trying to say.