Dems send Barr a letter regarding the "reputational interests of peripheral third parties"

[Miles Archer]

In a letter to Barr sent this week, top Democrats said they expected the attorney general to significantly limit his redactions to the report — and they said those redactions should not be used to protect the reputation of the Trump family brand.

“The Department also should not be able to keep from Congress information related to the ‘reputational interests of peripheral third parties’ as referenced in the Attorney General’s March 29 letter,” they wrote. “To the extent the Special Counsel has developed information relative to President Trump’s family members (including those employed by the White House) or his associates, campaign employees, consultants, advisers, and others within the scope of the investigation, that should not be withheld.”

The Democrats go on to argue that this is “precisely the type of information” that Congress needs to properly perform its oversight functions.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) has given Barr a deadline of today to give the Mueller report to Congress. If Barr misses this deadline, Nadler has said he may seek to subpoena the report.

Read the Democrats’ entire letter here.

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/04/dems-warn-barr-no-reason-redact-embarrassing-dirt-trumps-family-mueller-report/

[DontBooVote]

1. So now it's gone from "we want the full report" to "limited redactions"?? God damn it!

[marylandblue]

2. The report has classified info, so there will definitely be redactions

They just don't want people like Individual 1 Jr. redacted out.

[NewJeffCT]

4. It's not getting released to the general public

at least not yet.

Any classified info redacted should be reviewed by the Gang of 8 at the least.

[marylandblue]

9. Nadler is Judiciary Committee, not gang of 8, so his version would eventually be public.

Gang of 8 can request the full report.

[htuttle]

6. Congress has the right and the security clearance to see it without redactions

Schiff (and the other 3 heads of the Intelligence committees) has a security clearance that's effectively equal to the president.

They get briefed on intelligence matters just as the President does. Of course, they probably pay more attention to the briefings...

[marylandblue]

11. They can, but this is from the Judiciary Committee, which doesn't get certain things.

[notdarkyet]

23. Exactly.

[DontBooVote]

8. Nadler said in his letter "we want the full report". This is bullshit! Nothing less than the

legitimacy of our Constitution and the power of our Congress (The People!) is at stake here!

Get off of Uncle Joe and get on the god damned phones and get out on the streets and demand that our committees get that fucking report before the whole fucking thing becomes a footnote in the history of the end of America!

My kids are BEGGING YOU!

[marylandblue]

13. Don't yell at me.

Call Adam Schiff. He can get the full unredacted version. He probably already requested it privately.

I don't care what Uncle Joe does with his hands.

[DontBooVote]

14. I'm not yelling at you. It was directed generally. And, I'm right to boot!

[marylandblue]

15. Ok, thanks. I do agree it needs to come out.

But it may take a subpoena and a court battle.

[notdarkyet]

12. I heard maybe Rachel that previous reports like watergate were not redacted. She said

The intelligence committee is allowed unredacted and unclassified materials. The info has to stay in committee.

[KPN]

18. And if we don't get it, we MAY subpoena it?!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

20. There always had to be redactions, duh. Even Democrats would release a redacted report.

Starr's report on Bill Clinton did not involve national security, foreign adversaries, intelligence gathering techniques and agents, etc.

[DontBooVote]

22. No shit, duh! But our majority committee's with security clearance have a right to see it and

a duty to act as a check on the executive branch.

Duh! While you're duh-ing!

[NewJeffCT]

3. *may* subpoena the report?

How about sending the subpoena at 12:01am if they don't get it today.

[marylandblue]

5. In politics, it's unwise to say "will do."

It locks you into a course of action that could be worse than some alternative that pops up before you can actually do it.

But his intention is clear.

[triron]

7. +1000

[DontBooVote]

10. See?? Exactly what I said was going to happen is happening! Now Nadler's backing down on the

tough talk and is weakening!

Fuck! Fuck! Fuck!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

21. No. It's not like that. Never was. . . . nt

[yaesu]

16. Barr is the fixer with a long history of fixing repug problems

I think his plan will be zero cooperation & to tie up any subpoenas in courts until after the election. The repugs have been padding the Federal courts with rightwing judges & that strategy is about to pay off for them.

[BadgerMom]

17. Excuse me?

MAY seek to subpoena the report?

[TryLogic]

19. Don't forget "reputational interests" of third parties like Nunes, McConnell, Graham,

and various other Republican politicians involved in covering up and stone walling.

[Marcuse]

24. Putin has a reputational interest at stake here as well.