ApexCat, it seems we’re pretty much in the same place we were when Barr published his “summary” of Mueller’s report.
Barr testified today that he will not give Congress an unredacted report
The constitutional issue is this:
Congress, or the Attorney General appointed by the president?
Article I, § 2, cl. 5 gives the House of Representatives “the sole power of impeachment.” archives.gov/founding-docs/…
So under the Constitution, Congress decides.
Nadler promises that if Barr doesn’t give an unredacted report to Congress, he'll issue a subpoena & fight it out in court.
Rep Schiff, too, requested the unredacted report, so the Dems are "fighting a two-front war.”
SCOTUS orders Barr to turn over an unredacted report.
SCOTUS says that Barr does not have to hand it over.
But weirder things have happened.
The Supreme Court has, in the past, issued some pretty terrible opinions.
Tier two Terrible: Lochner v. New York, Bush v. Gore, Citizens United
So it wouldn’t be the first time the Supreme Court screws up.
Even in the case of a terrible SCOTUS decision, the House has options.
Or Congress can try to get the unredacted report through a provision in the Patriot Act combined with the notification provisions . . .
Barr says his redacted report will be public within the week.
He also said his redactions will fall into 4 categories.
First category: Grand Jury material, which he says is secret by law.
2. Material that may reveal foreign intelligence sources or
3. Material that implicates on-going investigations or
4. Material that violates the privacy of “peripheral” players.
CSHecht, there are strategic reasons to wait to see what Barr does. Once the House lawyers see the redactions, they'll have a better idea how to frame their arguments.
Someone asked . . .
Those redactions were there because of on-going investigations. In due time, the unreacted docs can be made public.
Just another way to get to the truth.
I don’t believe the Supreme Court would rule for Trump, even though the Court leans so far to the right. Roberts is concerned with Court's prestige, and has pushed back against Trump.
Moreover, right now the Court . . .
If they rule that the AG can cover up for a president—including covering up serious crimes—what would stop Trump from entering a conspiracy to kill a SCOTUS justice he doesn't like?