If you left a bait bucket -wrapped in a plastic bag- sitting in the sun for three days, the results would be be appropriate for Mitt Romney’s latest brand of cologne.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said on Friday he was “sickened” by the dishonesty of U.S. President Donald Trump and people around him as portrayed in a report on Russia’s attempts to influence the 2016 election. (more)
Apparently Mitt Romney wants the world to know his opinion of the Mueller report:
There has been a widespread media claim for two years that Robert Mueller’s special counsel team never leaked. However, today, while entirely obfuscating the lede aspect to their admission/story, Buzzfeed News outlines how FBI agents assigned to Robert Mueller’s team actually leaked documents from their investigation to the media.
This admission is stunning…. I don’t even think Buzzfeed realizes what they are admitting to here. It’s in these paragraphs (emphasis mine):
(Buzzfeed) […] I’d also like to share an accounting of how we came to our characterization, to give our audience and people who reasonably raised questions about our reporting as much information as possible about how the story came to be.
Our story was based on detailed information from senior law enforcement sources. That reporting included documents — specifically, pages of notes that were taken during an interview of [Michael] Cohen by the FBI.
In those notes, one law enforcement source wrote that “DJT personally asked Cohen to say negotiations ended in January and White House counsel office knew Cohen would give false testimony to Congress. Sanctioned by DJT. Joint lawyer team reviewed letter Cohen sent to SSCI about his testimony about Trump Tower moscow, et al, knowing it contained lies.”
The law enforcement source also wrote: “Cohen told OSC” — the Office of Special Counsel — “he was asked to lie by DJT/DJT Jr., lawyers.”
At the time, the sources asked reporters to keep the information confidential, but with the publication of Mueller’s report they have permitted its release. (read more)
Do you realize what Buzzfeed is saying right there?
The FBI gave copies of their FD-302 reports (investigative notes) to Buzfeed news !!
Notice the use of the plural “reporters“; specifically the way “reporters” is used in the paragraph, infers that multiple media outlets were given the same FBI leaked documents.
Tell me again about the honorable “rank and file”… I digress.
The lead investigative member of the FBI for Robert Mueller was FBI Special Agent David Archey. Presumably, according to the narrative, Special Agent Archey took over after it was determined the text-message evidence of Pete Strzok’s political bias was a taint upon the investigative unit.
It would appear Buzzfeed has inadvertently opened up a solid reason for yet another FBI internal investigation. Obviously, it would be a simple process for the FBI to look at who conducted the FBI interviews of Michael Cohen. This is not a complex puzzle.
Right there, staring everyone in the face, is direct and demonstrable evidence of two, yes plural, leakers in the FBI… Apparently the 2018 “bias training” espoused by FBI Director Christopher Wray did not include these two agents.
Do you think anyone else will catch this?… or do anything about this?
Here’s a reference point to help answer that question [From 2018]
Mark Levin goes on a tear this morning noting the second part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Trump-Russia collusion is “crap” and simply an “op-ed” on the former FBI director’s thoughts about obstruction of justice.
Levin is right… Volume I was complete nonsense, there never was any Russia collusion-conspiracy. Volume II, “Obstruction”, was always the purpose of Mueller, Weissmann and Rosenstein.
.
Don’t get lulled into thinking this thing is over; it is not. The Democrats don’t want people to notice the long-planned and coordinated Pelosi launch platform. The collective “left” want to run the impeachment hearing through the media, not the actual House of Representatives. Then they want the “impeachment vote” to take place at the polls in 2020.
President Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani appears on Fox News to discuss how the Mueller report is written with misleading information to create a narrative.
Now that people are starting to absorb the intent and motivations of the Special Counsel investigation, it’s worth remembering Robert Mueller interviewed President Donald Trump six days after the FBI launched a criminal “obstruction of justice” investigation, and ten months after the FBI launched the counterintelligence investigation….
..The May 16, 2017, Mueller meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office.
The Mueller Report shows there never was a Trump Russia-Collusion-Conspiracy case to begin with; and with the report showing how most of Mueller’s investigative time was spent gathering evidence for an ‘obstruction case’; and with new revelations from Andrew McCabe, John Dowd and Mueller officials overlayed on the previous Strzok/Page texts; we can now clearly reconcile the May 16th, 2017, meeting between President Trump, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller. Here’s how…
FBI Director James Comey was fired on Tuesday May 9th, 2017. According to his own admissions (NBC and CBS), Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe immediately began a criminal ‘obstruction’ investigation the next day, Wednesday May 10th; and he immediately enlisted Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
These McCabe statements line up with with text message conversations between FBI lawyer Lisa Page and FBI agent Peter Strzok – (same dates 5/9 and 5/10):
It now appears that important redaction is “POTUS” or “TRUMP”. [Yes, this is evidence that some unknown DOJ officials redacted information from these texts that would have pointed directly to the intents of the DOJ and FBI. [WARNING: Don’t get hung on it.]
The next day, Thursday May 11th, 2017, Andrew McCabe testifies to congress. With the Comey firing fresh in the headlines, Senator Marco Rubio asked McCabe: “has the dismissal of Mr. Comey in any way impeded, interrupted, stopped, or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigation, or any ongoing projects at the Federal Bureau of Investigation?”
McCabe responded: “So there has been no effort to impede our investigation to date. Quite simply put, sir, you cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.”
However, again referencing his own admissions, on Friday May 12th McCabe met with DAG Rod Rosenstein to discuss the issues, referencing the criminal ‘obstruction’ case McCabe had opened just two days before. According to McCabe:
… “[Rosenstein] asked for my thoughts about whether we needed a special counsel to oversee the Russia case. I said I thought it would help the investigation’s credibility. Later that day, I went to see Rosenstein again. This is the gist of what I said: I feel strongly that the investigation would be best served by having a special counsel.” (link)
Recap: Tuesday-Comey Fired; Wednesday-McCabe starts criminal ‘obstruction’ case; Thursday-McCabe testifies to congress “no effort to impede”; Friday-McCabe and Rosenstein discuss Special Counsel.
After the weekend, Monday May 15th, McCabe states he and Rosenstein conferred again about the Special Counsel approach. McCabe: “I brought the matter up with him again after the weekend.”
Now, overlaying what we know now that we did not know in 2018, to include the John Dowd interview and McCabe admissions, a very clear picture emerges.
On Tuesday May 16th, Rod Rosenstein takes Robert Mueller to the White House to talk with the target of the ‘obstruction’ criminal investigation, Donald Trump, under the ruse of bringing Mueller in for a meeting about becoming FBI Director.
Knowing McCabe launched a criminal obstruction investigation six days earlier (May 10th); and knowing Mueller was ineligible for the position of FBI Director; this “meeting” looks entirely different. This meeting looks like an opportunity to gather evidence for the obstruction case.
Heck, perhaps this meeting was even recorded as part of the FBI investigation.
Remember the Rosenstein ‘wear a wire‘ debates? Well, did Rosenstein need to actually wear a wire, or did soon-to-be appointed Special Counsel Robert Mueller just carry the recording device into an undercover deposition?… Consider:
WASHINGTON – Andrew McCabe, the disgraced former acting FBI director, reveals in his new book that Robert Mueller temporarily left his cell phone behind after a meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office and that the phone “later had to be retrieved.”
McCabe did not explain why he included the detail in his book.
McCabe says that Mueller left the phone behind after Trump had interviewed Mueller as a potential candidate to replace James Comey as FBI director. The interview reportedly took place in the Oval Office just one day before Mueller had been appointed special counsel in the so-called Russia collusion case. (more)
Oh, I think I know why McCabe included the detail in his book… leverage.
In combination with the ‘wear a wire’ comments, McCabe’s stealth book note is a shot across the bow to Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller. Only the insider ‘small group’ would understand what McCabe is threatening. It’s a get out of jail free card that McCabe played to escape the clutches of the 2018 DC criminal referral. And it looks like it worked.
This would explain why DC U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu dropped the case against McCabe?
I digress… but can you see how obvious this is?
The next day, Wednesday May 17th, 2017, Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe go to brief the congressional “Gang-of-Eight”: Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, ¹Devin Nunes, Adam Schiff, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Richard Burr and Mark Warner.
… […] “On the afternoon of May 17, Rosenstein and I sat at the end of a long conference table in a secure room in the basement of the Capitol. We were there to brief the so-called Gang of Eight—the majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate and the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. Rosenstein had, I knew, made a decision to appoint a special counsel in the Russia case.”
[…] “After reminding the committee of how the investigation began, I told them of additional steps we had taken. Then Rod took over and announced that he had appointed a special counsel to pursue the Russia investigation, and that the special counsel was Robert Mueller.” (link)
Immediately following this May 17, 2017, Go8 briefing, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein notified the public of the special counsel appointment.
According to President Trump’s Attorney John Dowd, the White House was stunned by the decision. [Link] Coincidentally, AG Jeff Sessions was in the oval office for unrelated business when White House counsel Don McGahn came in and informed the group. Jeff Sessions immediately offered his resignation, and Sessions’ chief-of-staff Jody Hunt went back to the Main Justice office to ask Rosenstein what the hell was going on.
Now, with hindsight and full understanding of exactly what the purposes and intents were for Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein to bring Robert Mueller to the White House, revisit this video from June 2017:
.
The DOJ (Rosenstein) and FBI (McCabe) activity in coordination with the Robert Mueller team was always about the obstruction case from day one; heck, from even before Robert Mueller was appointed.
The totality of all primary effort has always been to protect the ruse of the Russia investigation by throwing out nonsense Russian indictments and keeping Manafort, Flynn and Papadopoulos (the original spygate targets) under control…. while the focus was on building the obstruction case against President Trump. Remember what FBI Agent Peter Strzok said:
…”you and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely, I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.”
Mueller’s investigative ‘small group’ were the people inside Main Justice (DOJ) and FBI headquarters who redacted the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages, and removed messages and communication antithetical to their goals.
As Devin Nunes outlined recently the Mueller team also kept key documents and information away from congress; stalled any effort to expose the unlawful aspects of “SpyGate’ and the fraudulent foundation behind the Carter Page FISA application; and undermined any adverse discoveries in the leak investigations (James Wolfe) writ large.
This investigative small group didn’t change when Mueller arrived, they just retooled the focus of their effort based on new leadership and new objectives. Those who created the Trump-Russia collusion/conspiracy case of 2016, evolved into creating the Trump obstructing justice case of 2017, 2018 and 2019.
Everything Mueller and Rosenstein were doing in late 2017 and throughout 2018 was intended to drag-out the Russia conspiracy narrative as long as possible, even though there was no actual Trump-Russia investigation taking place.
It was always the “obstruction” investigation that could lead to the desired result by Mueller’s team of taking down President Trump through evidence that would help Pelosi and Nadler achieve impeachment . The “obstruction case” was the entirety of the case they were trying to make from May 2017 through to March 2019.
[¹] Now we know why House Speaker Paul Ryan moved to sideline Devin Nunes under the cloud of an ethics investigation.
In response to media inquiry and FOIA demands, the government of Australia formally admitted today to the role of High Commissioner Alexander Downer and his engagements with George Papadopoulos in 2016. The timing coincides with the Mueller Report (released today), which states it was information about this engagement from Alexander Downer that opened the FBI counterintelligence investigation in July 2016.
The Australian government cited the conclusion of the Robert Mueller special counsel investigation as the background for their willingness to comply with an 15-month-old FOIA request from Buzzfeed News.
Alexander Downer is the Australian diplomat who engaged George Papadopoulos in London just days after U.S. intelligence asset Joseph Mifsud told Papadopoulos that Russians had emails from Hillary Clinton.
We can take the FOIA information and overlay it into some really fantastic research on Alexander Downer, previously done by TWE:
In 1956, Australia — alongside New Zealand — were both added to the newly expanded UKUSA Agreement, which extended intelligence co-operation to those two countries with the current members of the agreement — United Kingdom, United States and Canada — which formed the alliance known as “Five Eyes”.
Many years later, on February 22, 2006, Alexander Downer and Bill Clinton signed a memorandum of understanding to spread grant money over the course of four years to a project to provide screening and drug treatment to AIDS patients in Asia as part of the Clinton Foundation.
On February 18, 2014, Downer was announced as Australia’s next High Commissioner to London, where he would replace Mike Rann.
There’s a little bit of a conflict in the dates (likely due to the significantly different time zones between London and Australia). According to Downer’s calendar schedule the meeting was May 11th, 2016 (as released today)
Here’s the heavily redacted cable communique from Downer to Canberra, AU office, on May 11th, 2016, the day he meting Papadopoulos (as released today):
Here’s the excerpt from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report that describes the events. However, worth noting Mueller assigns this meeting to May 6th, 2016. (?):
On July 23, 2016, the Australian Government contacted Elizabeth Dibble at the United States Embassy to inform her about Downer and Papadopoulos’s conversation.
Somehow the information was transmitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Crossfire Hurricane was then opened on July 31, 2016 by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Two days later, on August 2, 2016, Special Agent Peter Strzok and another agent at the Federal Bureau of Investigation met with Downer directly in London to discuss his conversation with Papadopoulos further. Strzok then received reading materials, which he texted about to Lisa Page.
REPORT THIS AD
However, it’s worth noting information provided by Devin Nunes (April 2018) as it pertains to an unofficial channel of information that surrounded these events:
REPRESENTATIVE DEVIN NUNES: “That’s correct. So it took us a long time to actually get this, what’s called the “electronic communication”, as we know it now for your viewers, what it is it’s the original intelligence, original reasons that the counterintelligence was started.
Now this is really important to us because the counterintelligence investigation uses the tools of our intelligence services that are not supposed to be used on American citizens. And we’ve long wanted to know: what intelligence did you have that actually led to this investigation? So what we’ve found now, after the investigators have reviewed it, is that in fact there was no intelligence.
So we have a traditional partnership with what’s called the Five Eyes Agreement. Five Eyes Agreement involves our friends in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canada, and of course, us. So long time processes and procedures in place where we move intelligence across.
We are not supposed to spy on each others’ citizens. And it’s worked well. And it continues to work well. And we know it’s working well because there was no intelligence that passed through the Five Eyes channels to our government.
And that’s why we had to see that original communication. So now we’re trying to figure out, as you know, we are investigating the State Department, we think there’s some major irregularities in the State Department, and we’re trying to figure out how this information about Mr. Papadopoulos of all people who was supposedly meeting with some folks in London, how that made it over across into the FBI’s hands.” (Video Interview Link)
Also, during a MAGA Rally in Las Vegas, NV on September 20, 2018, when President Donald Trump was interviewed by Sean Hannity, the President mentioned that two foreign governments were attempting to block the declassification of the FISA on Carter Page.
“We’re also dealing with foreign countries that do have a problem, I must tell you. I got called from two very good allies saying ‘please, can we talk?’ So it’s not as simple as all that. And we do have to respect their wishes. But it’ll all come out.”
— President Donald Trump
.
The following day, Sept. 21, 2018, President Trump posted these tweets:
We already know Cambridge Professor Stefan Halper is a U.S. intelligence asset used to run an operation against Carter Page. If Joseph Mifsud is shown to be a U.S. (or Western) intelligence asset; not Russian; and he planted the Clinton email story on Papadopoulos, then the make-up of the operation to frame Papadopoulos is solidified.
Downer would be used to extract the information planted by Mifsud; giving the appearance of Russian influence.
The Robert Mueller report on the 2016 election and Russian interference is available for download HERE (DOJ Site). Additionally, it is available on pdf HERE. [Embed Below]
The scale of internet bandwidth being used to view this 448-page report is incredible. Allow time for visibility or any download/upload. Feel free to drop your comments on review below. CTH will have full analysis after a thorough review.
A much anticipated press conference today with Attorney General Bill Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as they release the report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller. When the actual report is released we can FIND IT HERE.
On March 22, 2019, Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded his investigation of matters related to Russian attempts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and submitted his confidential report to me pursuant to Department of Justice regulations.
As I said during my Senate confirmation hearing and since, I am committed to ensuring the greatest possible degree of transparency concerning the Special Counsel’s investigation, consistent with the law.
At 11:00 this morning, I will transmit copies of a public version of the Special Counsel’s report to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. The Department of Justice will also make the report available to the American public by posting it on the Department’s website after it has been delivered to Congress.
I would like to offer a few comments today on the report.
But before I do that, I want to thank Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for joining me here today and for his assistance and counsel throughout this process. Rod has served the Department of Justice for many years with dedication and distinction, and it has been a great privilege and pleasure to work with him since my confirmation. He had well-deserved plans to step back from public service that I interrupted by asking him to help in my transition. Rod has been an invaluable partner, and I am grateful that he was willing to help me and has been able to see the Special Counsel’s investigation to its conclusion. Thank you, Rod.
I would also like to thank Special Counsel Mueller for his service and the thoroughness of his investigation, particularly his work exposing the nature of Russia’s attempts to interfere in our electoral process.
As you know, one of the primary purposes of the Special Counsel’s investigation was to determine whether members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, or any individuals associated with that campaign, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.
Volume I of the Special Counsel’s report describes the results of that investigation. As you will see, the Special Counsel’s report states that his “investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
I am sure that all Americans share my concerns about the efforts of the Russian government to interfere in our presidential election. As the Special Counsel’s report makes clear, the Russian government sought to interfere in our election. But thanks to the Special Counsel’s thorough investigation, we now know that the Russian operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of President Trump or the Trump campaign – or the knowing assistance of any other Americans for that matter. That is something that all Americans can and should be grateful to have confirmed.
The Special Counsel’s report outlines two main efforts by the Russian government to influence the 2016 election:
First, the report details efforts by the Internet Research Agency, a Russian company with close ties to the Russian government, to sow social discord among American voters through disinformation and social media operations.
Following a thorough investigation of this disinformation campaign, the Special Counsel brought charges in federal court against several Russian nationals and entities for their respective roles in this scheme. Those charges remain pending, and the individual defendants remain at large.
But the Special Counsel found no evidence that any Americans – including anyone associated with the Trump campaign – conspired or coordinated with the Russian government or the IRA in carrying out this illegal scheme.
Indeed, as the report states, “[t]he investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation.” Put another way, the Special Counsel found no “collusion” by any Americans in the IRA’s illegal activity.
Second, the report details efforts by Russian military officials associated with the GRU to hack into computers and steal documents and emails from individuals affiliated with the Democratic Party and the presidential campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton for the purpose of eventually publicizing those emails. Obtaining such unauthorized access into computers is a federal crime.
Following a thorough investigation of these hacking operations, the Special Counsel brought charges in federal court against several Russian military officers for their respective roles in these illegal hacking activities. Those charges are still pending and the defendants remain at large.
But again, the Special Counsel’s report did not find any evidence that members of the Trump campaign or anyone associated with the campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its hacking operations. In other words, there was no evidence of Trump campaign “collusion” with the Russian government’s hacking.
The Special Counsel’s investigation also examined Russian efforts to publish stolen emails and documents on the internet. The Special Counsel found that, after the GRU disseminated some of the stolen materials through its own controlled entities, DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0, the GRU transferred some of the stolen materials to Wikileaks for publication. Wikileaks then made a series of document dumps.
The Special Counsel also investigated whether any member or affiliate of the Trump campaign encouraged or otherwise played a role in these dissemination efforts. Under applicable law, publication of these types of materials would not be criminal unless the publisher also participated in the underlying hacking conspiracy. Here too, the Special Counsel’s report did not find that any person associated with the Trump campaign illegally participated in the dissemination of the materials.
Finally, the Special Counsel investigated a number of “links” or “contacts” between Trump Campaign officials and individuals connected with the Russian government during the 2016 presidential campaign. After reviewing those contacts, the Special Counsel did not find any conspiracy to violate U.S. law involving Russia-linked persons and any persons associated with the Trump campaign.
So that is the bottom line. After nearly two years of investigation, thousands of subpoenas, and hundreds of warrants and witness interviews, the Special Counsel confirmed that the Russian government sponsored efforts to illegally interfere with the 2016 presidential election but did not find that the Trump campaign or other Americans colluded in those schemes.
After finding no underlying collusion with Russia, the Special Counsel’s report goes on to consider whether certain actions of the President could amount to obstruction of the Special Counsel’s investigation. As I addressed in my March 24th letter, the Special Counsel did not make a traditional prosecutorial judgment regarding this allegation. Instead, the report recounts ten episodes involving the President and discusses potential legal theories for connecting these actions to elements of an obstruction offense.
After carefully reviewing the facts and legal theories outlined in the report, and in consultation with the Office of Legal Counsel and other Department lawyers, the Deputy Attorney General and I concluded that the evidence developed by the Special Counsel is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.
Although the Deputy Attorney General and I disagreed with some of the Special Counsel’s legal theories and felt that some of the episodes examined did not amount to obstruction as a matter of law, we did not rely solely on that in making our decision. Instead, we accepted the Special Counsel’s legal framework for purposes of our analysis and evaluated the evidence as presented by the Special Counsel in reaching our conclusion.
In assessing the President’s actions discussed in the report, it is important to bear in mind the context. President Trump faced an unprecedented situation. As he entered into office, and sought to perform his responsibilities as President, federal agents and prosecutors were scrutinizing his conduct before and after taking office, and the conduct of some of his associates. At the same time, there was relentless speculation in the news media about the President’s personal culpability.
Yet, as he said from the beginning, there was in fact no collusion. And as the Special Counsel’s report acknowledges, there is substantial evidence to show that the President was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.
Nonetheless, the White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the President took no act that in fact deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation. Apart from whether the acts were obstructive, this evidence of non-corrupt motives weighs heavily against any allegation that the President had a corrupt intent to obstruct the investigation.
Now, before I take questions, I want to address a few aspects of the process for producing the public report that I am releasing today. As I said several times, the report contains limited redactions relating to four categories of information. To ensure as much transparency as possible, these redactions have been clearly labelled and color-coded so that readers can tell which redactions correspond to which categories.
As you will see, most of the redactions were compelled by the need to prevent harm to ongoing matters and to comply with court orders prohibiting the public disclosure of information bearing upon ongoing investigations and criminal cases, such as the IRA case and the Roger Stone case.
These redactions were applied by Department of Justice attorneys working closely together with attorneys from the Special Counsel’s Office, as well as with the intelligence community, and prosecutors who are handling ongoing cases. The redactions are their work product.
Consistent with long-standing Executive Branch practice, the decision whether to assert Executive privilege over any portion of the report rested with the President of the United States. Because the White House voluntarily cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation, significant portions of the report contain material over which the President could have asserted privilege. And he would have been well within his rights to do so.
Following my March 29th letter, the Office of the White House Counsel requested the opportunity to review the redacted version of the report in order to advise the President on the potential invocation of privilege, which is consistent with long-standing practice. Following that review, the President confirmed that, in the interests of transparency and full disclosure to the American people, he would not assert privilege over the Special Counsel’s report. Accordingly, the public report I am releasing today contains redactions only for the four categories that I previously outlined, and no material has been redacted based on executive privilege.
In addition, earlier this week, the President’s personal counsel requested and were given the opportunity to read a final version of the redacted report before it was publicly released. That request was consistent with the practice followed under the Ethics in Government Act, which permitted individuals named in a report prepared by an Independent Counsel the opportunity to read the report before publication. The President’s personal lawyers were not permitted to make, and did not request, any redactions.
In addition to making the redacted report public, we are also committed to working with Congress to accommodate their legitimate oversight interests with respect to the Special Counsel’s investigation. We have been consulting with Chairman Graham and Chairman Nadler throughout this process, and we will continue to do so.
Given the limited nature of the redactions, I believe that the publicly released report will allow every American to understand the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation. Nevertheless, in an effort to accommodate congressional requests, we will make available to a bipartisan group of leaders from several Congressional committees a version of the report with all redactions removed except those relating to grand-jury information. Thus, these members of Congress will be able to see all of the redacted material for themselves – with the limited exception of that which, by law, cannot be shared.
I believe that this accommodation, together with my upcoming testimony before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, will satisfy any need Congress has for information regarding the Special Counsel’s investigation.
Once again, I would like to thank you all for being here today. I now have a few minutes for questions.
The anticipated start time for the press conference is 9:30am EST; with the release of the Mueller report around 11:00am to Noon at the Special Counsel website HERE.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
If you left a bait bucket -wrapped in a plastic bag- sitting in the sun for three days, the results would be be appropriate for Mitt Romney’s latest brand of cologne.
Centinel2012 