• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Full Mueller report to come out

esmith

Veteran Member
No, he does not.
Well suggest you read and pay close attention to the highlighted section as addressed in the letter to Congress
Dear Chairman Graham and Chairman Nadler,I write in response to Chairman Nadler's March 25, 2019 letter and Chairman Graham's March 27, 2019 letter, which addressed the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III, and the "confidential report" he has submitted to me pursuant to 28 C.F.F. § 600.8(c).As we have discussed, I share your desire to ensure that Congress and the public have the opportunity to read the Special Counsel's report. We are preparing the report for release, making the redactions that are required. The SpecialCounsel is assisting us in the process. Specifically, we are well along in the process of identifying and redacting the following: (1) material subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) that by law cannot be made public; (2) material the intelligence community identifies as potentially compromising sensitive sources methods; (3) material that could affect other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other Department offices; and (4) information that would unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties. Our progress is such that I anticipate we will be in a position to release the report by mid-April, if not sooner. Although the President would have the right to assert privilege over certain parts of the report, he has stated publicly that he intends to defer to me, and, accordingly, there are no plans to submit the report to the White House for a privilege review.Also, I am aware of some media reports and other public statements mischaracterizing my March 24, 2019 supplemental notification as a "summary" of the Special Counsel's investigation and report. For example, Chairman Nadler's March 25 letter refers to my supplemental notification as a "four-page summary of the Special Counsel's review." My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel's investigation or report. As my letter made clear, my notification to Congress and the public provided, pending release of the report, a summary of its "principal conclusions" - that is, its bottom line. The Special Counsel's report is nearly 400 pages long (exclusive of tables and appendices) and sets forth the Special Counsel's findings, his analysis, and the reasons for his conclusions. Everyone will soon be able to read it on their own. I do not believe it would be in the public's interest for me to attempt to summarize the full report or release it in serial or piecemeal fashion.As I have discussed with both of you, I believe it would be appropriate for me to testify publicly on behalf of the Department shortly after the Special Counsel's report is made public. I am currently available to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 1, 2019 and before the House Judiciary Committee on May 2, 2019.Finally, in the interests of keeping the public informed as to these matters, I intend to make this letter public after delivering to you.
Sincerely,
William P. Barr
Attorney General

See following for Federal Rule of Criminal Procedures 6(e)
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Fed. R. Crim. P. 6 - The Grand Jury :: Justia
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Well suggest you read and pay close attention to the highlighted section as addressed in the letter to Congress


See following for Federal Rule of Criminal Procedures 6(e)
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Fed. R. Crim. P. 6 - The Grand Jury :: Justia
My point was that he can not redact based on only personal desire, as @ecco seemed to imply.


And you should also know that there is precedent for Congress to receive grand jury evidence in similar situations, not to mention that the intelligence committee routinely receives classified intelligence information.
 

esmith

Veteran Member
My point was that he can not redact based on only personal desire, as @ecco seemed to imply.


And you should also know that there is precedent for Congress to receive grand jury evidence in similar situations, not to mention that the intelligence committee routinely receives classified intelligence information.
I direct your attention to the following section of Criminal Procedure 6e
(2) Secrecy.

(A) No obligation of secrecy may be imposed on any per son except in accordance with Rule 6(e)(2)(B).

(B) Unless these rules provide otherwise, the following persons must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury:

(i) a grand juror;

(ii) an interpreter;

(iii) a court reporter;

(iv) an operator of a recording device;

(v) a person who transcribes recorded testimony;

(vi) an attorney for the government; or

(vii) a person to whom disclosure is made under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) or (iii).

(3) Exceptions.

(A) Disclosure of a grand-jury matter—other than the grand jury’s deliberations or any grand juror’s vote—may be made to:

(i) an attorney for the government for use in per forming that attorney’s duty;

(ii) any government personnel—including those of a state, state subdivision, Indian tribe, or foreign government—that an attorney for the government considers necessary to assist in performing that attorney’s duty to enforce federal criminal law; or

(iii) a person authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3322.


Congress is not an attorney.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
I direct your attention to the following section of Criminal Procedure 6e



Congress is not an attorney.
I repeat, there is precedent for Congress receiving grand jury information. It happened. This is not my opinion, it is historical fact.

In 1974 Leon Jaworski asked the federal court to allow grand jury evidence to be presented to Congress, and it was.

And again in 1998 when the Ken Starr report was delivered to Congress it came with 36 huge banker boxes full of grand jury evidence, documents, transcripts, video and audio tape.

I don’t pretend to be a legal expert, but I am a little bit of a history buff. I was too young to be aware of the Nixon investigation at the time, but I do remember seeing news footage of those vans delivered those boxes full of grand jury evidence to Congress in 1998. It did happen. It could happen again.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Can't wait for absolutely nothing to happen to Trump and for liberals to act so surprised
I can't wait for people to realize Mueller has never been known for his readability, and regardless of what's in the report it's going to be strictly facts of what he found and it will be a very long, boring, and tedious read.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
I can't wait for people to realize Mueller has never been known for his readability, and regardless of what's in the report it's going to be strictly facts of what he found and it will be a very long, boring, and tedious read.
I’m looking forward to it.
 

esmith

Veteran Member
I repeat, there is precedent for Congress receiving grand jury information. It happened. This is not my opinion, it is historical fact.

In 1974 Leon Jaworski asked the federal court to allow grand jury evidence to be presented to Congress, and it was.

And again in 1998 when the Ken Starr report was delivered to Congress it came with 36 huge banker boxes full of grand jury evidence, documents, transcripts, video and audio tape.

I don’t pretend to be a legal expert, but I am a little bit of a history buff. I was too young to be aware of the Nixon investigation at the time, but I do remember seeing news footage of those vans delivered those boxes full of grand jury evidence to Congress in 1998. It did happen. It could happen again.
It all depends on how the Attorney General reads the law.
 
Top