FOIA Judge May View Full Mueller Report And Release It To The Media

[riversedge]

Source: hillreporter



BY Chris Walker April 17, 2019




....................................

On Tuesday, federal district Judge Reggie Walton, an appointee of former Republican President George W. Bush, expressed doubts over whether redactions in the Mueller report were necessary, according to a report from Politico. Walton also made clear that he didn’t feel that Attorney General William Barr, who has final say over what parts are redacted or not, would be honest in doing so.

“Obviously there is a real concern as to whether there is full transparency,” Walton said, per reporting from CNN. “The attorney general has created an environment that has caused a significant part of the American public to be concerned” about redactions to the Mueller report.

Walton made those comments during a court hearing that stemmed from a request by BuzzFeed News requesting that the Department of Justice make the full, unredacted Mueller report public through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

The judge said that there could be a possibility that the full report might be made public, under an order he’d make based on a certain set of conditions. First, he said, the redacted report itself has to be seen, and if the redactions aren’t too controversial, making the full report available won’t necessarily be needed.

..........................

Read more: https://hillreporter.com/foia-judge-may-view-full-mueller-report-and-release-it-to-the-media-31543

[Iliyah]

1. Let's see shall we . . .

[watoos]

2. Rachel had a video of him last night,

he looks like a no nonsense, down to earth dude. The suggestion is that he may read the entire Mueller report to verify if Barr made the proper redactions or if in fact Barr went too far. This judge may very well be a check on Barr.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

3. Let's hope so.

[calimary]

4. Indeed. I find all of this VERY hard to believe!

[BigmanPigman]

13. Yep, she gave us some pretty good info

last night.

[lagomorph777]

5. Let's keep the FOIA requests coming. Need this to pop up in multiple courtrooms.

[FBaggins]

8. Not how it works

The FOIA request doesn't go to the court, it goes to DOJ. When the DOJ says "No... you can't have that" is when the requestor takes the matter to a court. Every request after this would get a reply that references the existing court case and any court that gets an appeal from that reply would say that it's already being adjudicated.

[lagomorph777]

9. So then could there be multiple amicus briefs from all the concerned parties?

[FBaggins]

10. To the court currently considering the matter? There could be multiple requests

The court may or may not feel that any of the requests add value and might not accept any.

[lagomorph777]

11. Ok that makes sense. But that boosts visibility of the case either way.

So more ought to be better, IMHO.

[FBaggins]

12. They generally aren't public

They aren't uncommon at the appellate court level, but the district court is likely to accept those that present a new theory that isn't part of the existing record. "More" would only be "better" if they're different enough to cause the court to receive them. If this Bush appointee feels that they're just piling on, they won't become public.

Of course, any organization that wants to submit one could publicize that fact themselves, but that's not any different from just writing an opinion piece and getting a friendly paper or site to publish it.

[Kitchari]

6. This is what we need n/t

[Mr. Evil]

7. If they're doing what they're doing right now,

does anyone really think they're going to honor a FOIA request? Nothing about this is normal in any sense. The republicans are taking over for Putin and the Evangelicals, super-rich, giant corporations and daring anyone to say otherwise. As of this moment, the rule of law is dead.

[TexasBushwhacker]

14. At the very least, Congress should be able to see the unredacted report in its entirety n/t