Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

I don't believe that many people actually read the letter, 4 pages, submitted by Barr.... and if you did, then perhaps one comment was read too quickly and not given much thought... as it was not the verdict you expected. https://www.scribd.com/document/402973432/AG-March-24-2019-Letter-to-House-and-Senate-Judiciary-Committees#from_embed

"Barr stated that "There are no plans to submit the report to the White House for a privilege review." And that would constitute a total waiver of executive privilege - an act that is both commendable and unprecedented in its degree of t***sparency.

The waiver of executive privilege has gone with nary a mention in coverage, as has the impressive speed and scope of Barr's disclosure in handling the report. Yet, for critics of executive privilege, this is a decision that is not only historic but good for our democracy.

Many of us have criticized Trump for inappropriate comments that undermine the integrity and dignity of his office. That will be a lasting and troubling part of his legacy. However, this will also be part of the record, too. While praise is only begrudgingly given to this president by a media he constantly (and offensively) labels as "the enemy of the people," the decision to waive privilege is not just worthy of praise but could well eclipse his predecessors in yielding inherent powers to the public interest.

In his letter to Congress, Barr noted that "although the President would have the right to assert privilege over certain parts of the report," he decided not to do so. It was an extraordinary moment not only for Trump but for Barr."

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436564-trumps-noble-moment-being-t***sparent-on-mueller-report

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Unfortunately, the confirmation bias on the part of l*****ts, thoroughly indoctrinated by MSM propaganda, and reinforced by peer pressure, won’t allow them to even consider the positive moral implications in Trump’s waiver. My prediction is, rather than applaud him, which is far from their abilities, they will find a way to spin it into a negative. It’s called the “heads I win, tails you lose” tactic (or phenomena) of the immoral left.

I hope they will prove me wrong!

In looking over the article you quoted from The Hill, https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436564-trumps-noble-moment-being-t***sparent-on-mueller-report, there is a lot more to be said. I really liked the paragraph comparing President Trump’s t***sparency to the notable lack of t***sparency on President Obama’s part. Which will be another aspect that l*****ts will figure out a way to flip to attempt to save the reputation of their chosen one.

Thanks for the post, Pennylynn! Yet another example of MSM bias against our President to every extent possible and l*****t hypocrisy, especially of those who are claiming Republicans want to conceal the full Mueller report. Accusing your victims of what you are doing is another l*****t tactic they are very effective at, but actually just proves how morally bankrupt they are.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Barr denied Trump the opportunity to claim executive privilege, by stating that he was NOT submitting the report to the WH for review. This speaks to Barr's integrity alone.

moldyoldy

Airforceone

Release the full report. Trump has been quoting he has been 100% exonerated by the Muellar report so why not release it. Most of what’s in the Muellar investigation happened prior to Trump being elected so what’s he claiming Executive privilege over.

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

I could have been wrong in accepting that Trump himself waived executive privilege. However...

As if on cue, the l*****t Democrats have once again played their "heads I win, tails you lose" card! They seemingly cannot bring themselves to acknowledge ANYTHING good coming from this administration!

"Executive Privilege
"The right of the president of the United States to withhold information from Congress or the courts.
"Historically, presidents *have claimed the right* of executive privilege when they have information they want to keep confidential, either because it would jeopardize national security or because disclosure would be contrary to the interests of the Executive Branch...
"...Furthermore, the Court maintained that *the judiciary, not the president*, has the power to determine the applicability of executive privilege. While the Court affirmed the use of executive privilege, therefore, it determined that in this case, the right of the U.S. people to full disclosure outweighed the president's right to secrecy. This momentous decision soon led to Nixon's resignation from the office of president.
"Executive branch officials under presidents William Jefferson Clinton and george w. bush havesought to limit dissemination of information through executive privilege, though these efforts were often unsuccessful. When Clinton was investigated by Independent Counsel kenneth w. starr about whetherClinton lied in a deposition regarding an affair with a former White House intern, Starr subpoenaedSecret Service agents to testify before a Grand Jury about Clinton's actions. Several agents refusedto testify. This forced Starr to file a motion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia tocompel their testimony. The agents asserted they were protected by a "protective function" privilegethat allowed them to conceal what they observe in the protection of the president.
"U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson declined to recognize the privilege, holding that there wasno support for it in the U.S. Constitution, federal statute, or the Common Law. Johnson cited federalstatutes that require the president to accept Secret Service protection and require executive branchpersonnel, which includes Secret Service agents, to report criminal activity that they observe. The absence of a protective function privilege in those statutes suggested that Congress did not intend to create one. She rejected the argument that without the privilege, presidents would push away their protectors." -https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/executive+privilege

See also: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/six-decades-of-executive-privilege/2012/06/20/gJQA7eZKrV_graphic.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a91fe1992531

What this tells me is that neither President Trump nor Attorney General William Barr, (both of the Executive Branch), are outside of their rights or power or historic practices for their offices, to request Executive Privilege, AND that it is NOT within Congress' authority (i.e. House Rep Jerrold Nadler) to *determine* the applicability of the Executive Branch's right and authority to executive privilege, RATHER, it is for the Judiciary Branch (i.e. The Supreme Court and lower federal courts) to determine.

So, House Rep Nadler, it appears to me, is the one who is overstepping his bounds by attempting to appropriate for himself authority that belongs to another branch of government. Is that not so?

Disclosure: my comments are offered merely as opinions and are subject to correction or revision as more info is identified.

For the record, I believe the full report should be released unredacted to the American public

JoyV

The Mueller team and Barr are in the process of jointly redacting classified portions and those which put FBI agents and sources at risk. The time frame of getting this done in 2 weeks is very fast.

1) The investigation was carried out almost exclusively by anti-Trump people.
2) The findings have NOT been revealed to the White House ahead of Congress.
3) The findings will be released to the public as soon as classified info is redacted, and will be done within half a month.

What more do you want?

Airforceone

Executive privilege not a chase 90% of that Muellar report is before he became president. There’s not Excutive privilege there.

Beside where in the constitution does it say anything about executive privilege. There is no such thing when it comes to Obstruction of Justice.

Nixon tried it with watergate and lost and his tapes had to be released.

There is nothing in the Muellar report that remotely means Trump can claim executive privilege.

But what difference does it make Trump has been standing at the Bully pulpit now for over 2 years claiming his innocence, when Barr wrote that phony letter it opened the door for Trump not being able to claim executive privilege.

You can’t be running around and saying you have been 100% exonerated and then deny the release of the full report and then claim executive privilege.

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

There is no obstruction of justice, there are only l*****t lies and wishful thinking, trying to bring down a l********e p*******t. You folks are just exposing your h**e ever time you open your mouths.

moldyoldy

Trumps own words convict him.

JoyV

Just when has Trump attempted to claim executive privilege? And who is denying the release of the full report? The FBI has asked for certain redactions. The redactions are not being done by Barr alone, but in conjunction with Mueller and the Mueller team. I'm not sure if the FBI is also involved in the redactions, but it wouldn't surprise me.

JoyV

Which words? Please quote his words which you say convict him.

moldyoldy

He said to Lester Holt, I fired Comey because of the Russia thing.
He said the same thing to two Russian spies in the oval office.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Here is a reminder... when Comey was fired, he (Comey) had assured our President that he was not under investigation. In thhe interview with Holt, "I actually asked him" if I were under investigation, Trump said, noting that he spoke with Comey once over dinner and twice by phone.

"I said, if it's possible would you let me know, am I under investigation? He said, 'You are not under investigation."

So....he probably did fire Comey because Comey's boss recommended his removal due to substandard duty performance. If the President was not under investigation, then he was not fired for personal reasons. Going on the President said: ""He's a showboat, he's grandstander, the FBI has been in turmoil," Trump said of Comey in his wide-ranging interview with Holt. "You know that, I know that. Everybody knows that. You take a look at the FBI a year ago, it was in virtual turmoil, less than a year ago. It hasn't recovered from that."

Holt asked Trump if he was "angry with Mr. Comey because of his Russia investigation."

"I just want somebody that's competent," Trump responded. "I am a big fan of the FBI, I love the FBI."

Now..... Russian spies? I don't think so. "Russian spy in the oval office? Nope, that was f**e news" https://www.rt.com/usa/433541-oval-office-russia-spy-f**e/

moldyoldy

You can try to defend him but I am going by his actual words that you can find on you tube from his interviews