Yes, the House can run their own investigation. They always could, regardless of what happens to Mueller.
The question is, can they get anyone indicted? Somehow I doubt it.
In your nightmare scenario, then, it really doesn’t matter what’s in Mueller’s report, whether Barr has truncated it or not, or anything else.
So…OK. Whatever, I guess.
I actually think this is the most likely case. We’ve already heard everything that’s in the report. What are the chances that there’s a real bombshell in there, something more than just “individual 1” type stuff?
The problem is that it’s all too complicated to sum up in a tweet, so people won’t really get it.
So all the Senate needs to do is turtle and run out the clock.
But, again, my fear isn’t so much that the investigation is being truncated — Mueller is smart and may well have planned to wrap up once a new AG was appointed— but that the decisions to be made regarding appropriate action in response to the investigation seems to lie solely with Barr.
The report goes to Barr and he decides how much of it to present to congress. He will have the final say in whether or not we break with the tradition of not indicting a sitting President. And if he chooses the small c conservative option of not breaking with tradition, does he then consider Trump an uncharged individual and follow the other tradition of not publishing damning information regarding uncharged individuals?
All of Barr’s past statements have suggested that he considers the investigation to be a case of over reach and that he believes Presidents should be protected. Is he really going to break with those past views when is alone is in a position to bury Muellers findings?
I vaguely recall an earlier mention of an ace Mueller had up his sleeve if he felt the results were being buried but I don’t remember exactly what it was. And Mueller would have to break tradition and go against chain of command and his friend to do so which seems out of character.
If Mueller has damning information regarding an uncharged individual, and Congress asks for it, then Mueller has to give it to them regardless of what Barr thinks.
And again, none of that stuff was likely to matter under Rosenstein anyway. There’s no way a Deputy AG is going to indict a sitting President…and no way that Mueller was going to put a deputy in that position anyway.
Congress will very, very likely get to see the full report (which, once again we likely have already pretty much seen), one way or another and at some point. They’re also likely to find out anything of substance that may have been omitted from what the AG gives them and the submitted report from the SCO to the AG when they talk to Mueller.
EDIT: what magnet said.
Close it down. We have a winner.
Of course. It’s other indictments that could be suppressed, e.g. Junior.
What we haven’t seen is the evidence that Mueller is keeping under wraps (as well as any indictments not yet filed openly). We know the allegations (thus far), and some of the evidence (thus far), but he has to have much, much more. Thus far, he has declined to file anything relating to Obstruction of Justice (for which it appears that there is plenty of evidence), and I could see a slew of those at some point.
E.G. Trump’s Tax Returns, if he felt they were relevant, as well as all of his banking information, as well as that information for others who haven’t been indicted as yet.
The other thing is that the legal way to deal with high crimes by the President, is Impeach (or wait until they are out of office) and then Indict. Please note that there may still be sealed indictments for crimes discovered by Mueller for which the statute of limitations would run out before January 2021/2025 (or Impeachment), the evidence for which would likely be a part of any Impeachment process.
In a counter universe, does a Democratic House investigation get the goods on Manafort and secure an indictment from the Trump DOJ? I’d say no way. Government agencies would drag their heels and they’d get nowhere.
Barr is absolutely going to shield trump (and the Republican party) from any damaging information in the Mueller report. For those saying “we’ve already seen the Mueller report” - really? We know what all the redacted information is in the various indictments and court filings? We’re aware who was involved in the sealed indictments?
One thing is a near certainty: The Mueller report will land with a thud and trump and his sycophants will endlessly crow about how the investigation really was a witch hunt (notwithstanding the indictments already handed down or all the lying about contacts with Russians etc et al) and the headlines will become much like the NYT headline just before the election
Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia
Ok, so then what is Barr going to do when House Democrats ask Mueller if there was anything he wanted to put in the report, but couldn’t?
I agree - regardless of when the Mueller report lands, the result is going to be underwhelming. The GOP and Barr will shield Trump from any repercussions, and most of the media will put GOP operatives on their show who’ll repeat endless “no smoking gun, no smoking gun”.
The big questions are: does the American people care enough, that this will have an impact in 2020? In any rational timeline, everything Mueller has uncovered ought to guarantee that Trump and the GOP lose big in 2020, but then again, in a rational timeline Trump would never have been President.
The other big question is - if Democrats win in 2020, will they use the power they then gain to bring Trump and his administration to justice? It wouldn’t surprise me at all if they fail to do so.
Yeah, I mean, his birtherism completely disqualified him as far as I was concerned, and from there it was just, keep tacking on other stuff. By the time the Access Hollywood came out, I was like, “okay, there’s reason #25 not to vote for him… throw it on the pile.”
Failure to acknowledge climate change is a failure of leadership of historic proportions, for which alone he will be damned in time and eternity. Running on ‘lock up my opponent’ is banana-republic stuff and repeatedly calling a free press “the enemy of the people” is grotesque. Never mind the corrupt cabinet, the grift, and oh yeah separating kids from their families, inflicting lifelong trauma, in favor of a fake-emergency-narrative about evil brown caravans.
The Russia thing is simultaneously the most egregious issue (because it means a subversion of our democratic process), and merely the button on top of a hundred other reasons he never should have been president in the first place. And if he somehow comes out unscathed, the right wing will scream “see, you libtards were wrong!” as if that was the only critique of him all along.
It gives one a migraine to think on it.
[Edit: See link below.]
It’s not that Mueller couldn’t put something in the report, rather that the AG didn’t give it to withheld details from Congress. And Barr will say “by regulation the release of the report details are made at the discretion of the AG” and there’s fuck all Congress can do about it. Maybe they can subpoena it, or maybe it can be revealed if impeachment proceedings begin. I suspect there’s probably details in there that are politically damaging but don’t rise to the level of criminality (or more accurately insufficient evidence to use in a court of law), but that’s not the same as exculpatory evidence. However it will get spun as the later, both by the trump regime and much of the corporate media.
I suspect that will be largely dependent on who wins. If that’s a ‘mainstream’ Democrat, than I would agree they won’t pursue it in the name of “healing” or however they’ll choose to label it. Republicans keep getting away with this (see the administrations of Nixon, Reagan, Bush 1 and 2, now trump and the GOP at large.) Their voters don’t care either just so long as they win and can stick it to the libtards. And as soon as there’s a Democrat in office, we’ll see the absolute outrage with bullshit scandals like IRS and Benghazi (or stupid shit done by some random idiot somewhere that Republicans will use to paint all Democrats.)
Ding!
Edit:
Mueller’s endgame is obscured because no one really knows exactly what he will report and the information that Barr will choose – or feel compelled – to share with Congress and the public on a scandal that has polarized the nation.
The uncertainty is almost certain to spark a new struggle between Congress, the White House and the Justice Department that could lead to litigation and has every chance of reaching all the way up to the Supreme Court.
Barr can say that if the House subpoenas him, and perhaps he won’t be found in contempt.
But then they will ask Mueller the same question: what do you know that you didn’t put in this report? And Mueller can tell the House whatever he wants (in a closed hearing if necessary).
Regardless of DOJ policy, there is simply no way for Barr to prevent Mueller for telling Congress what he knows. Mueller is a government employee, it’s his job to answer to Congress, and he is shielded from retribution from any other government employee who doesn’t want him to testify.
There’s going to be some serious shady $$$$$$$ to be made by whomever leaks the full report. I suspect that we will eventually see it for that reason alone.
I’m getting somewhat confused. This isn’t about Mueller filing an incomplete report.
It’s not what Mueller didn’t put in his report, it’s the AG keeping the details of that report from the public and Congress as he said he might during his confirmation hearing and which he is allowed to do due to the regulations with the SCO (largely in response to Ken Starr whose report was released simultaneously to the public and Congress.) I assume the committees get to see the full report but even there I’m not sure. The issue is detailed in that CNN piece.
So if the AG refuses to release details about X, Y, Z but Congress asks Mueller about X, Y, Z how does Mueller respond? He answers to the AG, not Congress. (I mean, I honestly don’t know.)
That’s a distinct possibility. :)
My wording was just an example. The point is that the House can ask Mueller anything, including “Is there anything you want to tell us?”
He responds with X, Y, Z.
And he ultimately answers to Congress, not the AG. More generally, the AG cannot discipline its employees for testifying before Congress, regardless of internal DOJ policies.