General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT: The Many Problems With the Barr Letter (Neal Katyal)
The Many Problems With the Barr Letter
By unilaterally concluding that Mr. Trump did not obstruct justice, the attorney general has made it imperative that the public see the Mueller report.
(Mr. Katyal is a law professor at Georgetown. He drafted the special counsel regulations under which Robert Mueller was appointed)t.
Please go to the link to read the entire thing as I could not really capture all the points made
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/24/opinion/barr-mueller-report.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
But the critical part of the letter is that it now creates a whole new mess. After laying out the scope of the investigation and noting that Mr. Muellers report does not offer any legal recommendations, Mr. Barr declares that it therefore leaves it to the attorney general to decide whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. He then concludes the president did not obstruct justice when he fired the F.B.I. director, James Comey.
--snip--
Furthermore, we do not know why Mr. Mueller did not try to force an interview with the president. The reason matters greatly. Mr. Mueller could have concluded that interviews of sitting presidents for obstruction matters are better done within the context of a congressional impeachment investigation (perhaps because a sitting president cannot be indicted, the Barr letter says this legal argument didnt influence Mr. Barrs conclusion but again is pointedly silent as to Mr. Mueller).
Or Mr. Barr could have concluded that the attorney general, not a special counsel, should carry out such an interview. The fact that Mr. Barr rushed to judgment, within 48 hours, after a 22-month investigation, is deeply worrisome.
The opening lines of the obstruction section of Mr. Barrs letter are even more concerning. It says that the special counsel investigated a number of actions by the president most of which have been the subject of public reporting. That suggests that at least some of the foundation for an obstruction of justice charge has not yet been made public. There will be no way to have confidence in such a quick judgment about previously unreported actions without knowing what those actions were.
Aussie105
(5,434 posts)Barr has reworded some of what the actual Mueller report says, while omitting a lot.
Trump has taken the Barr summary and added his own interpretation.
So, two steps away from what the Mueller report says.
We really need to see what Mueller's report says, without intermediary steps in dilution and misinterpretation.
Both the Mueller report and legal flow on effects from the report are big question marks at the moment.
But Trump thinks he is in the clear . . . but, shouldn't be a surprise to him if he was blameless all the time? More the reaction of a guilty person thinking he has dodged a bullet.
BigmanPigman
(51,627 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 24, 2019, 10:41 PM - Edit history (1)
and they made a lot of good points similar to what you stated. We didn't even get a decent summary. We got a cherry picked memo to please his boss who hired him knowing this is what would happen. We must have the full report and it must be done ASAP. The few sentence fragments were taken out of a giant report in 48 hours is BS. Barr must speak to Congress.
John Flannery is the former prosecutor who made excellent points...Barr gave us an edited and biased partial summary which makes it worthless in my opinion and his.
triron
(22,020 posts)Hope democrats can ask some very tough questions.
Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)
Cetacea This message was self-deleted by its author.
watoos
(7,142 posts)Barr flat out said in the hearing that "a" president cannot be convicted of obstruction of justice. That means any president, including MF45. Why all of the surprise, Barr said what he was going to do.
The big problem that we have now is that the M$M is complicit with the GOP/Trump party.
We need a fucking hero to release the Mueller report. Congress can subpoena Mueller to testify but the Nazi courts will tie that up for years.
We need to vote out all of the Nazis, from Trump on down to the Republican dog catchers. This bullshit doesn't suppress my vote, it pisses me off.
I couldn't watch any news today, there are nothing but pump handles reading from a teleprompter.
I expect that msnbc will give Nicolle and Rachel vacation time, they are the only two who know what the hell is going on.
The bastards won't even say how big the Mueller report is, is it 10 pages, 100 pages, 1,000 pages? Freaking Nazis.
world wide wally
(21,755 posts)That is not how America was conceived.
SHRED
(28,136 posts)My prediction.
Azathoth
(4,611 posts)1) Barr never recused himself. Which means he's been getting briefed on the Mueller investigation since the day he took office. He likely knew exactly what the main conclusions were going to be, and he and Rosenstein probably had already agreed that obstruction wasn't going to be charged. The 48-hour timeline was nothing but a formality since Barr technically couldn't say anything until he had read the finished report.
2) Rosenstein is apparently onboard with Barr's decision. Barr might be a Trump toady, but is Rosenstein one as well? And if Rosenstein is indeed onboard, do we really expect Mueller to go before Congress and throw his comrade-in-arms under the bus?
That said, Katyal makes a strong point about the lack of a Trump interview. I had assumed the investigation had resolved the obstruction question, one way or the other, firmly enough that it wasn't necessary to go through months of trouble to get Trump's rambling lying under oath. But the report seems to be equivocal on the matter, which means that getting Trump on the record was absolutely necessary. I'm seeing shades of the Kavanaugh "investigation" that never bothered to interview either Kavanaugh or his accuser.