They were also troubled by the fact that Barr did not use summaries they had prepared for public release but instead used a highly subjective summation that came close to being a whitewash.
Per the Post: "'There was immediate displeasure from the team when they saw how the attorney general had characterized their work instead,' according one U.S. official briefed on the matter.... Summaries were prepared for different sections of the report, with a view that they could made public, the official said. The report was prepared 'so that the front matter from each section could have been released immediately — or very quickly,' the official said. 'It was done in a way that minimum redactions, if any, would have been necessary, and the work would have spoken for itself.'"
They also took issue with the fact that Barr hastily dismissed the obstruction of justice issue. Again per the Post: "members of Mueller’s team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant. 'It was much more acute than Barr suggested,' said one."
Some version of the Mueller Report will allegedly be released to the public mid-month. While grand jury testimony therein must be redacted per federal law and references to pending investigations must be shielded, too, will anything else be hidden from public view? If the released version of the report is heavily redacted, the public has the right to know if those redactions include material that was not legally required to be removed.
Redactions must be as minimal as legally required. If the Justice Department does not adhere to that policy, will it admit to doing so? The American public has a right to know if material embarrassing to Donald Trump is being withheld.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Speak up!