OK peeps. AG Barr just testified he that he will not realease the full unredacted

[Ninga]

Mueller Report.

Now what?

[spanone]

1. sooo, even congress will be kept in the dark

[Ninga]

3. His strongly worded response said as much. Nt

[spanone]

4. I doubt that will stand with Rep. Nadler.

[Ninga]

10. Of course it won't. But so what?

[spanone]

33. Nadler can call Mueller before his committee...ask him directly.

[Ninga]

40. Yep. Until and waiting for that to happen, I reserve my opinion that we will never know all

the details of the Mueller Report.

[onenote]

45. Mueller is unlikely to testify in an open hearing about secret grand jury testimony

Not his style.

[spanone]

47. he's likely to testify before congress, whether it's in the open or not is up to them.

[onenote]

49. His testifying and his disclosing secret grand jury testimony are different things

And even in a closed hearing, I seriously doubt he'd breach grand jury secrecy absent a court ruling that disclosure was permissible.

[spanone]

52. Nadler may get that court ruling....all speculation at this point....we will see.

[Wounded Bear]

2. Fuck it...impeach Barr...

[notdarkyet]

19. Here for two months and wreaking havoc on a two year expensive report making it unavailable

To the people who paid for it. Impeach the little creep. Who does he think he is. He has no right to do this.

[Wednesdays]

30. Do you think we can get 17 repug senators to vote to convict?

If not, then impeachment would be an exercise in futility.

[maxsolomon]

61. Really sick of this comment. Impeach anyway.

Clinton's legacy is forever tarred by his Impeachment. Barr (and Trump) deserve just as much.

An Impeached President has never been re-elected.

[Codeine]

73. "An Impeached President has never been re-elected."

You’ve got a sample size of two, and one of them wasn’t even eligible to run again. Not a terribly meaningful statement.

[maxsolomon]

74. I'm stating that there is no precedent, so why do we think he'll gain support if it fails?

Because Clinton did?

He's maxed out. Everyone, even his voters, knows he's a pathological liar and a 24/7 narcissistic bullshitter.

Tar him with Impeachment. Take the gloves off. Punch the bully in the nose.

[FBaggins]

75. I doubt we could get anywhere near 218 Democrats to vote to impeach in the first place n/t

[samnsara]

5. it will be leaked...

[Ninga]

7. Until and if.......not confident it will happen. Grandpa Barr has the Dems under his thumb. Nt

[hughee99]

6. I'm not sure that releasing a completely unredacted report

To the public was ever one of the options.

[Ninga]

9. He said no one. Including Congress. No one will see the full unredacted report. No one.

[hughee99]

13. Yes, and I'm saying I don't think that was ever one of the options.

Certainly, the public would never see it like that and given that it probably contains grand jury testimony, some personally identifiable information about people not targeted in the probe, and information on intelligence programs, it was extremely likely that Congress wouldn’t see it fully unredacted either.

[OneGrassRoot]

25. What about Gang of 8?

Can they see?

[hughee99]

34. It's unlikely that anyone would in congress would get it all

Completely unredacted, given that some information is to protect the anonymity of people not implicated in any crime (witnesses, sources, contacts, etc). They could request some of it to be unredacted if there is a need for it, but I don’t think they’re ever going to get everything unredacted.

[Ninga]

44. The gang of 8 have security clearance. According to Barr, even they will not see the full

unredacted Report.

why is this ok?

[onenote]

46. A security clearance relates to classified information

It doesn't mean a thing when it comes to grand jury secrecy.

[Ninga]

50. A Fed judge can release all Grand Jury testimony. Barr said that right now he has no intention

to do that.

[onenote]

51. Exactly. None of the grand jury testimony is coming out unless and until a court rules on it.

Not in anything Barr gives Congress. Not in any testimony Mueller gives to Congress.

[bluestarone]

69. Could Mueller request the GJ release the info?

He and The DEM. house ask the GJ to release? to add here release it to the HOUSE only.

[FBaggins]

76. No. They don't.

Congress doesn't get (or need) security clearances. Those are for executive branch employees and contractors.

[Amishman]

31. Given the near certainty of it being leaked, some redaction is ok with me

I imagine there are some very sensitive intelligence sources referenced, especially ones in Russia. Those sources should be protected. Congress has leaked like a sieve.

That being said, such redaction would and should be very minimal. It shouldn't impact the readability and message of the report. If too much is censored, we need to raise hell.

[hughee99]

38. I agree. The redactions should be minimal, and this will be leaked.

But I think there’s no chance that it gets shown to anyone else without some redactions.

[Pepsidog]

43. I have heard so many conflicting statements about who gets to see what. The Gang of 8 hear our

most sensitive secrets so what gives with them not seeing.

[hughee99]

56. Even if they have access to the national security info,

They may still see redactions for privacy issues.

[Pepsidog]

60. That's my question. I have heard differing accounts about who is entitled to see the entire report,

redactions included. I am a criminal defense attorney in NJ and the first thing I do when representing a client is get the grand jury testimony to see if there is a basis to dismiss an indictment say for example the grand jury was not provided exculpatory evidence about the defendant. I do not handle federal criminal cases primarily because the discovery system is weighted so heavily in favor of the government. In State practice we are entitled to see the evidence after a case is indicted, including grand jury testimony. Got off on a tangent there.

[hughee99]

62. In this case, since there was no indictment, I'm not sure

How much grand jury testimony congress will get to see. There is also likely “intelligence sources and methods” issues that even the gang of 8 probably wouldn’t get by default (but could likely get if there was a specific need to know).

I know a lot of people aren’t going to actually read the report when it becomes available, so I’m saying that just because there are some redactions in it, it doesn’t necessarily mean there’s still hidden dirt in the report.

[Pepsidog]

64. Good point. I think the only logical conclusion we can make about Mueller's punt is that he thought

that Congress should be the ultimate judge an jury of the President. And you know that Mueller’s team wrote those summaries that were already redacted and ready for immediate release. There is zero chance he didn’t foresee what is happening and wrote the report so that at the very least his summaries could be released. That’s what the leaks suggest and makes sense.

[hughee99]

65. That does make sense. Someone above pointed out

That the grand jury testimony may only be released by a judge, and that Barr may not have the authority to share any of it (even if he wanted to), so that part may depend on some future court decision.

[Pepsidog]

70. The release has to be fit into an exception. Apparently, from what I read, the only exception that

may apply is the “judicial proceeding” exception which allows release of GJ evidence in furtherance of a judicial proceeding which impeachment or an impeachment inquiry would considered appropriate. Apparently, the DC court of appeals just decided a case where the decision narrowed the court created exception/custom that would allow the DC Head Judge (Judge Sirica during Watergate) allow disclosure for compelling reason.

[True Blue American]

82. mueller cannot indict

He gives the cases to others. That is why he sent the cases to other courts, guys do not get upset these cases are moving forward. Why do yu think Trump is so hysterical? Blabbering about sending 19 Investigators to jail?

[Pepsidog]

88. Let's hope

[triron]

53. You are deflecting and misleading.

[hughee99]

58. You know what I said is true.

Anyone who believes a “completely unredacted” report is likely, is fooling themselves. Although minimal and appropriate redactions shouldn’t impact the value of the report in any way.

[DontBooVote]

8. Now what? Nothing. That is what. The Mueller Report will become a footnote because our response is

weak and our leadership will not do what it takes to get that report and tRump's treacherous and criminal activity will be disregarded and will continue until there is no longer an America.

Our children/grand-children will pay the price for our collective weakness.

[SlogginThroughIt]

11. Aside from the legal avenues that our leadership is pursuing....

Aside from the legal avenues that our leadership is pursuing what else do you recommend they do?

[DontBooVote]

15. Question: do our evil enemies use legal avenues?

[SlogginThroughIt]

17. So we should participate in illegal measures?

Not sure that's going to work for us.

If we ignore the rule of law then we are doing their work for them. They are stacking the judicial branch and control the executive branch.... That's a trap they are just hoping that we fall into.

[DontBooVote]

21. So no fighting dirty for us. They steal away everything and we get hunted like animals. Great!

[SlogginThroughIt]

29. We have a system of government. If we abandon that then we have no system of government at all.

Anarchy is not a solution.

For the people to apply pressure by demonstration and protesting, sure absolutely we should be doing that. Asking our elected reps to engage in illegal activity is foolish.

[Ninga]

32. Our systems of government does not preclude civil engagement, civil demonstrations. Except

people do not have a stomach for it, do not see the value, do not understand that no action gives the GOP power.

[SlogginThroughIt]

36. But that's not what I was addressing.

It seemed to me what was being asked was that our Democratic Leadership engage in activities that are not legal. I was asking what the poster had in mind. I don't believe that is wise.

[DontBooVote]

37. It's cowardice! Courage does not exist and people will allow this coup to succeed.

[DontBooVote]

35. I'm not now suggesting, nor have I ever suggested, anarchy. But sitting by and watching this happen

to us is also not the answer.

How do you defeat EVIL, who cares nothing about legal means and will do whatever it takes to win, with goody-two-shoes responses? Please tell me how!

[SlogginThroughIt]

39. Can you just answer my question?

I asked you aside from the legal avenues our leadership is pursuing what do you suggest they do?

Let's take a look at your game plan and see how it might play out. I understand being upset and wanting something to change but what are you suggesting they do?

Edit: this whole exchange is mildly humorous given your screen name.

[FiveGoodMen]

71. Let me ask you a different question

Suppose there are no legal avenues to stop this treason.

Then what?

[SlogginThroughIt]

72. So then you won't answer?

I don’t want to sit and argue with you. That isn’t my intent at all. I get wanting ti take action. But what are you suggesting our elected reps and senators do that is outside the legal spectrum?

Our elections as far as I know have not been cancelled. As much as we talk about how the election was interfered with we have to continue to pursue winning in 2020.

If we let go of acting inside the lines of the law it will only be that much harder to put the train back on the track.

So I again ask exactly what are you suggesting that our reps and sens do that is not legal?

[kacekwl]

81. Elections might as well be canceled. Wisconsin

just had election for state supreme court judge and turnout was I believe in the twenties. As long as we accept 45% as a great turnout we should hand over the keys.

[SlogginThroughIt]

84. I don't think this sort of talk shpuld be allowed here.

Saying that elections might as well be cancelled is a talking point designed to keep people from voting. I am not saying that is your intent but that is what that talking point is meant to do.

[kacekwl]

86. No, that "talking point" is to

point out that unless we do something to excite or inspire people to vote then we lose.

[bearsfootball516]

57. You're still not answering the original question.

[treestar]

89. We could impeach him, but

the Republicans are evil. The solution is obviously vote Republicans out. And we have to get some red states to do it so they don't have a majority or a filibuster able minority. Convince people to vote and vote out the evil Republicans. What should we be doing that is not "cowardly" as the answer as to what to do is obvious. Maybe people should have voted in 2016 rather than being uninspired, blah blah.

[notdarkyet]

23. Yep.

[donkeypoofed]

12. Then it's time to grab pitchforks and take to the streets

You guys are the pressure. Demand it!

[DontBooVote]

16. Pah! There is a severe lack of courage on our side for that to happen. If you even mention such

a path, you are ridiculed and smart-ass-commented right out of any hope of any kind of push back.

[SlogginThroughIt]

22. It is one thing for citizens to put on the pressure.

Buyt asking our electeds to engage in illegal measures is a different animal entirely.

[notdarkyet]

24. I like you. I agree.

[DontBooVote]

26. The courage just does not exist. And we will continue to lose because of it. And, once their coup is

complete, they will hunt us down.

[Calista241]

67. Not going to happen.

The reasons Barr gives for the redactions are plausible to the politically uninitiated. I think they’re going to just give up.

[jalan48]

14. Exactly. So What? It's power politics and we aren't in power.

[Siwsan]

18. To me that translates to "trump* is up to his bushy eyebrows in deep, legal ca ca"

It confirms probably each and every corrupt, vile and scary thing we've been imagining.

And, I suspect it also confirms that a whole lot of GOP members of Congress are equally covered in the stank.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

20. Rep. Brenda Lawrence: Officially not having any of Bill Barr's shit. nt

[Ninga]

27. Yep. More questions from her in round two. nt

[Freethinker65]

28. Mueller knows what is in the entire report

Those that investigated and worked on the report can piece it together. It will be leaked one way or another.

[33taw]

41. Congress can have public hearings gathering the same info from the same people.

[davsand]

42. Can't the House just have Mueller testify in open hearing?

If the report is to be locked away in a file cabinet or something by the GOP, can't Pelosi as Mueller to testify in open hearing about the findings of the investigation? Let him loose in public and then the GOP can go pound sand--the information will be out in spite of what they want. If he thinks something is too sensitive to put out in public he can always say he can't answer that particular question due to (insert compelling reason for secrecy here.)

I'd think Mueller's testimony would go a long way toward blowing this particular stink bomb wide open.




Laura

[onenote]

48. Mueller will not disclose secret grand jury testimony in an open hearing

Hell, I doubt he'd disclose it in a closed hearing absent a court ruling that disclosure was permissible.

[MineralMan]

54. I never expected that he would, at least not voluntarily.

[Ninga]

55. Well, now he has said it out loud and in public. Yet we all "expected" he wouldn't and now what?

There is no " now what"

We have not learned from the lessons of the past. Moreover, it appears that we have been nutured.

Justice will be stolen from us exactly like the 2000 election was. Mark my word.

[MineralMan]

66. Not necessarily. This is a new phase in the situation.

What will happen next? I don't know. I do know that there's an election next year, though. That's my focus.

[jmellman]

59. Pentagon Papers time

... who will be the patriot that leaks the full report. Of course, then the GOP will just declare that it's FAKE NEWS.

[AncientGeezer]

83. There was no digital record back then....a leak now ...

Would be caught in a hours/days. This is not the Pentagon Papers era or tech.

[RANDYWILDMAN]

63. Things that make my blood boil ?

For a $100 please, Alex....

[CentralMass]

68. This is what I've suspected from the beginning. The Mueller investigation was another exercise in

futility and waste of money. The treasonous bastards known as the GOP and the billionaires both foreign and domestic who own them are above the law. In fact they own the law. They can do whatever the want. Iran-Contra, torture, and now this. Our governnent is corrupt and broken.

[Firestorm49]

77. This coverup is the grand conspiracy of the century.

Republicans have stolen two presidential elections, and brought a fascist into power. And yet, we sit here, fat, dumb and happy taking another hard left blow to the chin. Ridiculous.

[beachbum bob]

78. he can refuse a congressional subpoena, be found in contemp,be impeached.....

supreme court will have to way in or not but so far precedence does not exempt any one from a congressional subpoena

[Joe941]

79. Now what? Impeach tRump.

[tymorial]

80. It will need to go to the courts but there are no guarantees

I'm sorry to say it folks but the special counsel reports to the AG not congress. This is the fault of both the democrats and republicans. Congress allowed the ethics in government act to expire in 1999 which removed the office of the inspector general (who reported to CONGRESS not the AG). Instead the AG took over the responsibility to appoint a special counsel. When you have a corrupt AG, the special counsel is neutered.

[duforsure]

85. Barr will end up in prison

Or turn it over, but he's already in deep trouble for conspiring with trump to obstruct justice for him. He could be facing two charges, and this now will backfire on him, and trump badly.

[woodsprite]

87. Would love that, but I'm not holding my breath. n/t