Brad Sallows said:
The first instance I could find of what seems to be at least a partial transcript of Barr's testimony is
here.
"On March 5 I met with Bob at the suggestion of the deputy and the principal associate deputy--Bob Mueller, I met with Bob Mueller--to get a readout on what his conclusions would be.
On March 25--and at that meeting I asked--I reiterated to Special Counsel Mueller that in order to have the shortest possible time before I was in a position to release the report, I asked that they identify 6(e) material. When I received the report on March 22--and we were hoping to have that easily identified, the 6(e) material,
unfortunately it did not come in that form, and it quickly became apparent that it would take about three or four weeks to identify that material and other material that would have to be redacted. So there was necessarily going to be a gap between the receipt of the report and getting the full report out publicly."
Color highlighting mine. Are we done with redactions?
No. But thanks for highlighting. And I appreciate the link to Barr's testimony.
I will ask again, why would the Special Counsel redact his own report for release, when, under federal law, the authority to release is held by the AG. If the AG decides to release it, then it is entirely up to his office to redact it. Is there a flaw in my logic?
§ 600.8 Notification and reports by the Special Counsel.
(a) Budget.
(1) A Special Counsel shall be provided all appropriate resources by the Department of Justice. Within the first 60 days of his or her appointment, the Special Counsel shall develop a proposed budget for the current fiscal year with the assistance of the Justice Management Division for the Attorney General's review and approval. Based on the proposal, the Attorney General shall establish a budget for the operations of the Special Counsel. The budget shall include a request for assignment of personnel, with a description of the qualifications needed.
(2) Thereafter, 90 days before the beginning of each fiscal year, the Special Counsel shall report to the Attorney General the status of the investigation, and provide a budget request for the following year. The Attorney General shall determine whether the investigation should continue and, if so, establish the budget for the next year.
(b) Notification of significant events. The Special Counsel shall notify the Attorney General of events in the course of his or her investigation in conformity with the Departmental guidelines with respect to Urgent Reports.
(c) Closing documentation. At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a
confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.
Feel free to highlight where federal law provides for the Special Counsel to redact his confidential report for release. I will state once more, that I'm not criticizing Barr in any way. I am refuting your claim that Mueller delayed the release of his report by failure to follow the rules. A request by the AG to perform work outside of his mandate is not within the rules, would you not agree?
And once, again, I will ask you to kindly provide evidence that Mueller publicly complained or "*****ed" about the delay of the release. A reminder that Mueller submitted his report 22 Mar, and responded to Barr's summary 25 Mar.
I assume the letter below is what you base your claim that Mueller failed to "follow simple instructions to produce a report with redactions identified, and not "*****" when release is delayed because clear instructions were not followed" on.
Kindly highlight where Mueller complains about a late release. Members of congress already have the 4 page summary. Mueller clearly states that he understands any delay in releasing a redacted report to the public, and encourages the AG to release associated materials in the interim. You'll note that Mueller's team did include 6e redactions despite not being required to. These redactions have no impact on the summary that AG Barr delivered to Congress - again, the chief complaint of Mueller's is the content of Barr's 4 page summary.
"March 27, 2019
The Honorable William P. Barr
Attorney General of the United States
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C.
Re: Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election and Obstruction of Justice (March 2019)
Dear Attorney General Barr:
I previously sent you a letter dated March 25, 2019, that enclosed the introduction and executive summary for each volume of the Special Counsel's report marked with redactions to remove any information that potentially could be protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e); that concerned declination decisions; or that related to a charged case. We also had marked an additional two sentences for review and have now confirmed that these sentences can be released publicly.
Accordingly, the enclosed documents are in a form that can be released to the public consistent with legal requirements and Department policies. I am requesting that you provide these materials to Congress and authorize their public release at this time.
As we stated in our meeting of March 5 and reiterated to the Department early in the afternoon of March 24, the introductions and executive summaries of our two-volume report accurately summarize this Office's work and conclusions.
The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation.
This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017).
While we understand that the Department is reviewing the full report to determine what is appropriate for public release — a process that our Office is working with you to complete — that process need not delay release of the enclosed materials. Release at this time would alleviate the misunderstandings that have arisen and would answer congressional and public questions about the nature and outcome of our investigation. It would also accord with the standard for public release of notifications to Congress cited in your letter. See 28 C.F.R. § 609(c) ("the Attorney General may determine that public release" of congressional notifications "would be in the public interest").
Sincerely yours,
Robert S. Mueller, III
Special Counsel"
Once again, Mueller acknowledges that AG Barr has the authority to release or not. Again, I don't see any evidence of rules not being followed, or any complainints about a delayed release. In fact, Mueller has complied with redaction requests and is encouraging the release of associated enclosed materials, not the report itself. And his concern for output legitimacy is evident.
Maybe now we are finished with redactions.
edited to remove unrelated hyperlinks