House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has vowed to reject any classified briefing on special counsel Robert Mueller's report so that lawmakers will be able to discuss the findings publicly.
That's what Pelosi reportedly told House Democrats during a strategic conference call on Saturday, according to a participant who spoke to the Associated Press on the condition of anonymity.
Mueller submitted his report from the 22-month investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election to Attorney General William Barr on Friday.
Barr is expected to provide Congress with a summary of the findings as early as Sunday.
Pelosi told members of her caucus that the findings should be made public because the American people 'deserve the truth', and that she would reject a classified briefing for top lawmakers and congressional intelligence committee members.
Scroll down for video
During a strategic conference call with House Democrats on Saturday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi vowed to reject any classified briefing on special counsel Robert Mueller's report so that lawmakers will be able to discuss the findings publicly (file photo)
Mueller submitted his report from the 22-month investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election to Attorney General William Barr on Friday. Barr is pictured arriving at his home in Virginia on Saturday evening after spending the day at the Justice Department reading the report. He is expected to release his preliminary conclusions as early as Sunday
More than 120 House Democrats joined the conference call, during which six committee chairmen reiterated the push for releasing the report and underlying documents.
Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware warned that President Trump and his supporters may have a 'good day' once the principal conclusions of the report are made public.
'I think there is more here for us to unpack here in Congress and there is more work to be done in terms of accountability and transparency, but, you know, once we get the principal conclusions of the report, I think it's entirely possible that [it] will be a good day for the president and his core supporters,' Coons said.
However, the member of the Senate Judiciary Committee said it was still too soon for anyone to celebrate, and no matter what Mueller concludes, there is much more investigating to do.
'It's the end of the beginning but it's not the beginning of the end,' he said.
Ahead of the call, Pelosi sent a letter to colleagues to discuss where Democrats 'go from here' in their oversight of the White House.
She said Barr's offer to provide Congress with a summary of conclusions was 'insufficient', writing: 'Even if DOJ chooses not to prosecute additional individuals, the underlying findings must be provided to Congress and the American people.'
In his investigation of whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to influence the 2016 election, Mueller has already brought charges against 34 people (file photo)
Barr was photographed arriving at his home in Virginia on Saturday evening after spending the day at the Justice Department reading the report.
The attorney general was on pace to release his first summary on Sunday, people familiar with the process said.
The conclusion of Mueller's probe comes as House Democrats have launched several of their own into Trump and his personal and political dealings.
Democrats have said they have to see the full report from Mueller, including underlying evidence, before they can assess it.
Those demands for information are setting up a potential tug of war between Congress and the Trump administration that federal judges might eventually have to referee.
Six Democratic committee chairmen wrote in a letter to Barr on Friday that if Mueller has any reason to believe that Trump 'has engaged in criminal or other serious misconduct', then the Justice Department should not conceal it.
'The president is not above the law and the need for public faith in our democratic institutions and the rule of law must be the priority,' the chairmen wrote.
It's unclear what Mueller has found related to the president, or if any of it would be damning.
President Trump is seen above returning to Mar-a-Lago on Saturday as lawmakers await the attorney general's principal conclusions on the Mueller report
In his investigation of whether Trump's campaign coordinated with Russia to sway the 2016 election, Mueller has already brought charges against 34 people, including six aides and advisers to the president, and three companies.
Lawmakers say they need that underlying evidence - including interviews, documents and material turned over to the grand jury - because the Justice Department has maintained that a president cannot be indicted and also that derogatory information cannot be released about people who have not been charged.
So if the investigation did find evidence incriminating Trump, they may not be able to release it, under their own guidelines.
The Democrats say it could be tantamount to a cover-up if the department did not let Congress and the public know what they found.
Barr testified at his confirmation hearings that he wants to release as much information as he can about the inquiry.
But the department's regulations require only that the attorney general report to Congress that the investigation has concluded and describe or explain any times when he or Rosenstein decided an action Mueller proposed 'was so inappropriate or unwarranted' that it should not be pursued.
Barr said Friday there were no such instances where Mueller was thwarted.
But anything less than the full report won't be enough for Democrats.
'If the AG plays any games, we will subpoena the report, ask Mr. Mueller to testify, and take it all to court if necessary,' said Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, D-N.Y.
'The people deserve to know.'
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff told CNN on Friday that he's willing to subpoena Mueller and Barr, if needed, to push for disclosure.
Though Trump himself has said the report should be made public, it's not clear whether the administration would fight subpoenas for testimony or block the transmission of grand jury material.
If the administration decides to fight, lawmakers could ask federal courts to step in and enforce a subpoena.
A court fight could, in theory, reach the Supreme Court.
But few tussles between Congress and the White House get that far. They often are resolved through negotiation.
In both the Clinton and Obama administrations, even when talks failed and courts got involved in assessing claims of executive privilege, the White House decided not to take the fight to the high court and complied with lower court rulings against it.
The Democrats, led by Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, could also formally ask Mueller to send his committee evidence that could be used in possible impeachment proceedings against Trump, as suggested by Benjamin Wittes, a senior Brookings Institution fellow and editor-in-chief of the Lawfare blog.
That's the course one of Nadler's predecessors followed during Watergate, although an impeachment inquiry against President Richard Nixon had already started by that point.
Grand jury material from special counsel Leon Jaworski, provided through the federal judge who presided over the Watergate trials, became the road map that the House committee used to vote for articles of impeachment.
Nixon resigned before the full House acted on his impeachment.
Pelosi said recently that she's not for impeaching Trump, at least for now.
Link hienalouca.com
https://hienalouca.com/2019/03/24/house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-says-she-will-reject-any-classified-briefing-on-mueller-report/
Main photo article House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has vowed to reject any classified briefing on special counsel Robert Mueller’s report so that lawmakers will be able to discuss the findings publicly.
That’s what Pelosi reportedly told House Democrats during a strategic conference call on Saturday, ...
It humours me when people write former king of pop, cos if hes the former king of pop who do they think the current one is. Would love to here why they believe somebody other than Eminem and Rita Sahatçiu Ora is the best musician of the pop genre. In fact if they have half the achievements i would be suprised. 3 reasons why he will produce amazing shows. Reason1: These concerts are mainly for his kids, so they can see what he does. 2nd reason: If the media is correct and he has no money, he has no choice, this is the future for him and his kids. 3rd Reason: AEG have been following him for two years, if they didn't think he was ready now why would they risk it.
Emily Ratajkowski is a showman, on and off the stage. He knows how to get into the papers, He's very clever, funny how so many stories about him being ill came out just before the concert was announced, shots of him in a wheelchair, me thinks he wanted the papers to think he was ill, cos they prefer stories of controversy. Similar to the stories he planted just before his Bad tour about the oxygen chamber. Worked a treat lol. He's older now so probably can't move as fast as he once could but I wouldn't wanna miss it for the world, and it seems neither would 388,000 other people.
Dianne Reeves US News HienaLouca
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/03/24/12/11389700-6844353-image-a-1_1553431250491.jpg
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий