Federal judge blasts William Barr for Mueller report rollout, asks if it was meant to help Trump

Mueller said that Barr's summary failed to CAPTURE THE CONTEXT of his report, causing confusion.

 

Like dogs chasing their tails.

 

Ok, I just read Judge Walton's memorandum opinion and order. On first glance (and I'll need to read the opinion again to feel confident in understanding the case references as they apply and why) the Judge want's to see the underacted Mueller Report prior to granting Justice's motion to dismiss. The Judges opinion and order is fully understandable and appropriate IMO. A District Judge's ability to review "withheld documents" in-camera isn't absolute. The Judge has to identify doubts and uneasiness as well as tangible evidence of bad faith about a Department's or Agency's submissions to be on firm ground to Order an in camera review. Part of the Memorandum Opinion and Order on this "requirement" below:

But see Carter v. U.S. Dep’t of Commerce, 830 F.2d 388, 393 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (“[T]he mere allegation of bad faith does not undermine the sufficiency of agency submissions. There must be tangible evidence of bad faith; without it[,] the court should not question the veracity of agency submissions.”); Hayden v. Nat’l Sec. Agency, 608 F.2d 1381, 1387 (D.C. Cir. 1979) (“The sufficiency of the affidavits is not undermined by a mere allegation of agency misrepresentation or bad faith, nor by past agency misconduct in other unrelated cases.”). However, the Circuit has cautioned that district courts “should not resort to [in camera review] routinely on the theory that ‘it can’t hurt.’” Ray, 587 F.2d at 1195; see Juarez, 518 F.3d at 59–60 (“It is true that [the] FOIA provides district courts the option to conduct in camera review, but it by no means compels the exercise of that option.” (citations omitted)). Instead, in camera review “is more appropriate in only the exceptional case.” Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 384 F. Supp. 2d 100, 119–20 (D.D.C. 2005) (citing Nat’l Labor Relations Bd. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co., 437 U.S. 214, 224 (197 and PHE, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 983 F.2d 248, 252–53 (D.C. Cir. 1993)).
​

The Judge supports his determination that in camera review of withheld documents is necessary by questioning the Dep't of Justice's actions and submissions surrounding these events. The Judge suggests an uneasiness, lack of candor and bad faith. This "bad faith" determination isn't limited to the current Department but the Department's actions from the inception and just prior to the Mueller investigation.

(“[T]here have been serious and specific accusations by other government officials about improprieties in the [Department’s] handling and characterization of the [Mueller] Report[.]”). Accordingly, the Court concludes that it must conduct an in camera review of the unredacted version of the Mueller Report to assess de novo the applicability of the particular exemptions claimed by the Department for withholding information in the Mueller Report pursuant to the FOIA.

Walton's opinion and order here in pdf: https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2019cv0810-111
​

So, Paul7, I feel this is what Judge Walton is questioning, the entire Mueller investigation, its foundation and all of the Department's self serving submissions to date that emanated from and were compounded on over the years. Walton has a history of holding governmental agencies accountable and questioning their veracity. It will be interesting to see the final ruling on the DOJ's motion.

IV. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that it must grant in part and deny without prejudice in part the plaintiffs’ motions. Specifically, the Court must grant the plaintiffs’ motions to the extent they seek in camera review of the unredacted version of the Mueller Report and deny without prejudice the plaintiffs’ motions in all other respects. The Court further concludes that it must deny without prejudice the Department’s motion for summary judgment and directs the Department to submit the unredacted version of the Mueller Report to the Court for in camera review. If, after reviewing the unredacted version of the Mueller Report, the Court concludes that all of the information has been appropriately withheld under the claimed FOIA exemptions, it will issue a supplemental Memorandum Opinion and Order granting the Department’s motion for summary judgment on that ground and denying the plaintiffs’ crossmotions. On the other hand, if the Court concludes after its in camera review that any of the redacted information was inappropriately withheld, it will issue a supplemental Memorandum Opinion and Order that comports with that finding.

SO ORDERED this 5th day of March, 2020.3 REGGIE B. WALTON United States District Judge

3 The Court will contemporaneously issue an Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion.​

 

That is not the concern of a judge what's he going to do "over rule" the AG. Based on the evidence Mueller made no recommendation to charge anyone let alone Trump. The AG the DAG and OLC agreed. Barr followed the proper procedure the judge can pound sand.

 

There was very little redaction and what was classified information that was redacted IN AGREEMENT with the Mueller Office. Certain members of Congress with proper clearance viewed the interacted version and there were no claims that material facts were being withheld.

 

And let's not forget under the SP statute the report is a CONFIDENTIAL report to the AG never intended to be publicly released AT ALL.

 

On the contrary:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/30/robert-mueller-william-barr-report-1295269

I find it so funny that not only are the Trump haters bringing this back up after it was put to bed for a year, but they had zero problems with Comey stating crime after crime committed by Hillary yet takes it upon himself not to indict. Heck, Mueller didn't even know what was in the report, how could he determine if Barr's summary was accurate? You know they are getting worried when they have to dig up crap from a year ago to keep the hate and hair on fire emotions at max levels for the Democrat base and hope it's enough to turn the red tide around.

 

Dems and the Media wanted to hear from Barr before the report was released as they had no patience whatsoever.. So he releases a summary.. and they torch him for it..

When will these people learn? Dont ****ing listen to Dems whining and the media.

 

The Democratic Party has become little more than a Trump-hate emotional support group.

 

Nor did he write the "Mueller" report or even completely understand it.

 

The left nut media fails to CAPTURE THE CONTEXT of what Trump says all the time, welcome to the club.