Barr's new letter

The special counsel’s report on the investigation into Russia’s election interference will be made public by mid-April, Attorney General William P. Barr told lawmakers on Friday, adding that the White House would not see the document before he sent it to Congress. [Barr's] declaration on Sunday, two days after the report was delivered to him, that Mr. Trump had not illegally obstructed justice drew swift condemnation from Democrats. They accused him of stepping in where Mr. Mueller had declined to make a prosecutorial decision.

[...]

[In his second letter, written today, Barr] said the report — which covers Moscow’s campaign to sabotage the 2016 presidential race, whether any Trump associates conspired and whether the president obstructed the inquiry — was nearly 400 pages, plus supplements. He said he planned to testify on Capitol Hill in early May, shortly after the report’s release, to discuss it with lawmakers.

[...]

Mr. Barr reiterated that Mr. Trump had publicly stated that he would defer to the Justice Department, “although the president would have the right to assert privilege over certain parts of the report,” the attorney general wrote.

“Accordingly, there are no plans to submit the report to the White House for a privilege review,” Mr. Barr added.However, it remains an open question whether Justice Department lawyers themselves will excise material they believe could be privileged before sending the report to Congress.

  NYT

Because, why? Barr is the head lawyer at the DOJ. The March 29 letter.



Yes, I especially like this part of the letter:




Barr knows full well that summarizing the "principal conclusions" would be interpreted by most people as tantamount to summarizing the whole thing. He intended people to think that.  And that summary was no more in the public interest than would be summarizing the full report or releasing it piecemeal.  Nobody said it was purported to be "exhaustive", and it was not "mischaracterizing" his letter to say it was a summary of the Mueller report.  That's what he intended everyone to see it as.  He's being just as disingenuous in this letter as he was in that one.


Full March 29 letter:

UPDATE:

Absolutely Jerry Nadler should have the full, unredacted report.  Nadler is the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, where any impeachment proceedings would begin.  By the Constitution, the House has the power to impeach, and they cannot be expected to wield that power without full disclosure of the evidence.  He WILL end up getting it.

UPDATE:

I think that's a pretty safe bet.