Both are in response to Dow Jones and Associated Press request to hold more of Fitzmas proceedings in public.
And here is one good reason why no charges on the underlying crime were brought:
Because the indictment in this case charges obstruction offenses rather than substantive national security crimes, it is hoped that the case can be tried with a minimum of issues concerning classified information needing to be resolved, and thus that the trial may be conducted in as public a manner as possible.
The reasons for limited disclosure of investigastion details are obvious Grand Jury rules, personal privacy, and protecting the rights of "innocent accused".
Here's the paragraph about the newly empaneled grand jury the MSM reported a few days ago:
Moreover, because the investigation is continuing, and because the investigation will involve proceedings before adifferent grandjurythan the grandjury whichreturned the indictment, traditional concerns that underlie Fed. R. Crim. 6(e) very much apply.
Fed. R. Crim 6(e) refers to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)
(B) Unless these rules provide otherwise, the following persons must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury:
(i) a grand juror;
(ii) an interpreter;
(iii) a court reporter;
(iv) an operator of a recording device;
(v) a person who transcribes recorded testimony;
(vi) an attorney for the government; or
(vii) a person to whom disclosure is made under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) or (iii).
except (6(e)3(c))
(C) An attorney for the government may disclose any grand-jury matter to another federal grand jury.
Fitzgerald concludes his request with this:
I note that the Government is mindful that as much ofthe conduct of pre-trial litigation and the trial itself should be conducted in open court with publicly-filed documents, and this is an additional reason why the classification and declassification review process is being undertaken, It is anticipated that reference may be made to some discovery materials in pretrial motions and that such materials will likely be offered as exhibits at trial. Thus, the government's request for a protective order is not intended to inhibit the public conduct of the proceedings. Indeed, allowing the transmission of relevant documents to the defense pursuant to a protective order is the most efficient way to complete discovery in an expeditious manner and to proceed to a public trial with the least delay.
The documents are
here