Article 1 says the House “shall have sole power of impeachment.” Yet, Bill Barr is refusing to release the full, entire, Mueller report to the House which seems to obstruct and impede the House’s Article 1 obligation: checks and balances.
In order to uphold their Article 1 checks and balance obligation, the House “shall have sole power” to examine: the entire evidence inside the Mueller report, all the evidence in other investigations, and conduct hearings.
But it appears that Bill Barr is, unilaterally, and with no authority, taking the “sole power” away from the House and given that “sole power” to himself.
We know there is evidence that Trump did engage in crimes because even Bill Barr’s letter says Trump did:
- Trump engaged in crimes that only Bill Barr claims do not reach “reasonable doubt”
- Mueller did “not exonerate” Trump
- Trump refused to testify, so Trump’s “intent … was not determinative”
- Barr writes that Mueller examined a possible conspiracy/coordination between Trump and the “Russian Government”
- But, Barr (strategically?) did not mention Mueller’s evidence between: Trump and a “foreign actor,” or Trump and American(s) working with a “foreign actor,” etc.,
- However, we do know from Roger Stone’s indictment that a “Senior Trump Campaign official" conspired and coordinated with Stone regarding foreign actor, WikiLeaks.
So the bottom line is: Trump did engage in crimes, Trump’s campaign engaged in crimes, Americans on Trump’s behalf engaged in crimes.
Mueller’s report categorizes evidence of crimes Trump, his campaign, and people on Trump’s behalf engaged in. So, Bill Barr must release the full Mueller report to the House so that the House can uphold their Article 1 obligation.
Bill Barr’s job is to make sure he does not deviate from Constitution. Period.
It seems to me that if Bill Barr is going to uphold his own oath to uphold the Constitution; then he “shall” give the House the entire Mueller report so they (the House) can decide what evidence, if any, they will use in exercising their “sole power” to be a check and balance on the president.
Yesterday Peter Baker at the New York Times reported that Bill Barr is not even planning to give any of the actual Mueller report to the House. Instead, Bill Barr will have his “own summary ready to send to lawmakers within weeks.” Baker writes,
Mr. Mueller’s full report has yet to be released, and it remained unclear if it ever would be. House Democrats have demanded that it be sent to them by next Tuesday, but the Justice Department outlined a longer schedule, saying that it will have its own summary ready to send to lawmakers within weeks, though not months.
As well written as Peter Baker’s article is, at no point does Baker alert his readers that Bill Barr has no authority to write his own summary and then give his “Barr Summary” to the House. It’s almost as if Baker has the impression that Barr has authority to give Congress and the public the same evidence, but Barr does not any such authority.
In fact, Bill Barr may be obstructing and impeding the House’s Constitutional Article 1 obligation if he refuses to release the entire Mueller report to the House.
To Withhold: Barr Gives Appearance Congress And The Public Are One In The Same:
I feel that Bill Barr has successfully gaslighted the media and is intentionally, through parsing of words, blending together: Congress and the public. I feel Barr is doing that in order to give the media the impression that the Congress and the public are one in the same. But they are not. So why does that matter?
Well it matters because Congress has an Art 1 obligation to examine all the evidence; whereas the public does not.
If the media views ‘the two as one,’ then the media will not alert the public to demand that Barr release the entire Mueller report to the House in order for the House to uphold their Article 1 obligation.
And, if that happens, then Bill Barr, and Donald Trump, will get away with withholding the actual Mueller report from the House which prevents the House from exercising their “sole power.”
I’ve heard talking-heads say things like, “well Barr’s letter says he’ll use 28 CFR 600.9(c) to decide what to release.” And others say, “Barr will use 6e to decide what the public can see.” And others say “Democrats in the House want the full report released but Barr will decide what they get based on 6e and 28 CFR 600.” All with the same incorrect assumption that Bill Barr has authority to dictate, decide, and cherry-pick what evidence the House sees, Barr has no such authority.
The Constitution does not give Barr that power and neither do any federal regulations or statutes.
In Barr’s watered-down letter he gives the impression that he will unilaterally decide what to release to Congress and to the public (blending the two) based on: 64 Fed Reg 37038-37044, and 6e, and 28 CFR 600.9(c)
Three things about those regs which can be found here in pdf form
- Those regs give Barr no authority: to withhold any part of the Mueller report from the House, and give Barr no authority to rewrite the Mueller report, in Barr’s words, and then submit to the House.
- Those regs only describe how the public (not the House) will see a Special Counsel’s report.
- The “Summary” and “Background” sections seems to prohibit, or at least discourage, the Attorney General from “deciding” if a POTUS committed crimes: Special Council appointed to “remove a large degree of responsibility” of a matter but does allow the AG to “review specific decisions reached by the Special Council.”
64 Fed Reg 37038-37044:
SUMMARY: This order amends the Code of Federal Regulations to provide regulations concerning Attorney General appointment of Special Counsel to investigate and, when appropriate, to prosecute matters when the Attorney General concludes that extraordinary circumstances exist such that the public interest would be served by removing a large degree of responsibility for a matter from the Department of Justice.These regulations replace the procedures for appointment of independent counsel pursuant to the Independent Counsel Reauthorization Act of 1994.
Background: The Special Counsel would be free to structure the investigation as he or she wishes and to exercise independent prosecutorial discretion to decide whether charges should be brought within the context of the established procedures of the Department. Nevertheless, it is intended that ultimate responsibility for the matter and how it is handled will continue to rest with the Attorney General ... thus, the regulations explicitly acknowledge the possibility of review of specific decisions reached by the Special Counsel.
600.7 [T]he Attorney General may request that the Special Counsel provide an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step, and may after review conclude that the action is so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued. In conducting that review, the Attorney General will give great weight to the views of the Special Counsel. If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a Special Counsel should not be pursued,the Attorney General shall notify Congress as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).
Closing documentation: At the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.
600.9(c)
The Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest,to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions. All other releases of information by any Department of Justice employee, including the Special Counsel and staff, concerning matters handled by Special Counsels shall be governed by the generally applicable Departmental guidelines concerning public comment with respect to any criminal investigation, and relevant law.
Regarding releasing the entire Mueller report: the regs seem to only allow the AG to determine what the public will see but no authority to determine what evidence the House will see to uphold their Article 1 obligation.
Bill Barr Has No Article 1 Power:
Bill Barr has no Article 1 power. So it seems to me that Barr has no power to rewrite Mueller’s report (in Barr’s own words) to give the House; Barr has no power to give Mueller’s report to Trump so Trump can rewrite Mueller’s report (in Trump’s own words) to give to Congress; Barr has no power to pick and choose which of Mueller’s “evidence” within Mueller’s report to give to the House. Only the House “shall have sole power” to examine evidence to carryout their checks and balance obligation, not Barr.
Bill Barr Has History of Covering-Up Crimes & Possible Quid Pro Quo
2019: Donald Trump hired Barr’s son-in-law as WH legal counsel the same day (hours before) Barr was sworn in at Justice. (quid pro quo?)
2018: For an entire year Barr begged to be AG by demonizing the Mueller Probe.
1992 then-Attorney General Bill Barr (at the time “Cover-up General”) helped cover-up the Iraqgate crimes for the GOP.
1992: Speculation that Bill Barr’s cover-up of Iraqgate almost landed Barr in prison.
1992 then AG Barr helped cover-up Iran Contra crimes HW Bush was implicated in.
I bring up because, I do not trust Bill Barr and there is no reason I should.
To summarize:
- Barr is refusing to give the full Mueller report to the House so that the House can exercise their Article 1 “sole power.”
- Barr is planning to re-write Mueller’s report, in Barr’s words, and then give “Barr’s report” to the House.
- Barr is also picking and choosing which evidence within Mueller’s report he will rewrite to submit to the House.
All that added together, sounds like Bill Barr is willfully obstructing and impeding the House’s Article 1 “sole power” to examine evidence and decide for themselves what evidence to use in exercising their Article 1 obligation.
And if that’s true, if Bill Barr is willfully obstructing and impeding Article 1: Is Bill Barr now committing an “impeachable” offence by refusing to uphold his own oath to the Constitution?
During the June 1788 debates and deliberation of the US Constitution, the framers were clear in that the House was to be a “considerable check on the senate and the president” and Article 1 “checks and balances of this Constitution are to be an impenetrable wall...”
The House of Representatives will be a considerable check on the senate and the President. (page 174)
The checks and balances of this Constitution are to be an impenetrable wall to some purposes and mere cobwebs for others. (page 252)
*In Nixon investigation we learned the House has Constitutional authority to examine Grand Jury Testimony.
*In Clinton investigation we learned the same thing, the House has Constitutional authority to examine Grand Jury Testimony.
Seems to me that under the U.S. Constitution, Bill Barr only has one choice: release the entire Mueller report to the House. Now.