Senate blocks resolution calling for public release of Robert Mueller's report

[GMDino]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/03/14/house-calls-public-release-mueller-report-vote/3161577002/

Quote:WASHINGTON – The Senate blocked a measure that demanded special counsel Robert Mueller's final report on Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election be made public — hours after the House unanimously voted in support of the measure. 



Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called for a vote on the measure but was blocked by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who asked that the resolution also include calling for the appointment of a new special counsel to investigate how the Justice Department conducted its investigation. 


Earlier, the House passed a nonbinding resolution, with a vote of 420-0, urging for the public release of "any report" Mueller provides to Attorney General William Barr, except the portions "expressly prohibited by law." And they insisted that Congress should receive the whole thing. 


Graham pointed to controversies surrounding a surveillance warrant on Trump aide Carter Page and text messages by two FBI employees that were critical of President Donald Trump. 


"We let Mueller look at all things Trump, related to collusion and otherwise," Graham argued on the Senate floor. "Somebody needs to look at what happened on the other side and find out if the FBI and the DOJ had two systems." 

Schumer declined to include Graham's proposed amendment and said he was "deeply disappointed" in Graham for "blocking this very simple, non-controversial resolution." 


He said he would bring the measure back before the Senate at a later time. 
The votes came amid signs that Mueller's inquiry could be drawing closer to its conclusion. Mueller's office confirmed on Thursday that one of its top prosecutors, Andrew Weissmann, plans to leave for another job soon, the latest in a series of departures from the office. 

Justice Department rules require Mueller to submit a final, confidential report to Barr outlining why he charged some people and not others. Barr has said he wants to release as much detail as possible about the results of the special counsel investigation, but has not committed to releasing all of the findings of an investigation that has been based in part on classified intelligence and secret grand jury information. 

The nearly two-year investigation dug deeply into President Donald Trump's presidential campaign, his administration and their Russian ties.


The president has repeatedly derided the probe as a "witch hunt" and often claims there was no collusion between his campaign and Russia.
Mueller has indicted 34 people, including Russian intelligence operatives and some of Trump's closest aides and advisers. In doing so, he revealed a wealth of details about a sophisticated Russian effort to influence the 2016 election and about a campaign eager to reap the benefits of that activity. What he might add in a final report remains uncertain.

Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Louisiana, said the end of Mueller's investigation is "long overdue" and that he must be transparent with the public.

"After taking nearly two years, costing tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, and providing limited public information about its scope, I am especially concerned about what would happen if the report was not made available to Congress," Scalise said in a statement.

The party of NO strikes again.  

I wish I knew what DJT had on Graham....

[Benton]

The public doesn't need access to a report generated by tax dollars about possible abuses by public employees and concerning a president the majority didn't vote for.

[GMDino]

(03-15-2019, 12:19 PM)Benton Wrote: The public doesn't need access to a report generated by tax dollars about possible abuses by public employees and concerning a president the majority didn't vote for.

Well, not unless we can open a NEW investigation about how an OLD investigation was conducted.  But surely not for just political purposes. 

[ballsofsteel]

Trump said the Mueller report should be released to the public. Why are the Repubs in the senate saying no? What are they covering up?

[Au165]

(03-18-2019, 06:06 PM)ballsofsteel Wrote: Trump said the Mueller report should be released to the public. Why are the Repubs in the senate saying no? What are they covering up?

To be fair he also wants to see it first before it reaches congress so he can exert executive price page and attempt remove pieces he doesn’t like.

[Belsnickel]

(03-15-2019, 12:19 PM)Benton Wrote: The public doesn't need access to a report generated by Paul Manafort's seized assets tax dollars about possible abuses by public employees and concerning a president the majority didn't vote for.

[NATI BENGALS]

Look no further for proof of a crooked as hell Republican party.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(03-19-2019, 08:32 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Look no further for proof of a crooked as hell Republican party.

Who said they weren't?
Both parties crooked as hell.

[*bfine32*]

(03-15-2019, 12:19 PM)Benton Wrote: The public doesn't need access to a report generated by tax dollars about possible abuses by public employees and concerning a president the majority didn't vote for.

I agree the public does not need access to such reports. The majority didn't vote for any candidate; not sure of the relevance. 

[Vas Deferens]

(03-21-2019, 06:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree the public does not need access to such reports. The majority didn't vote for any candidate; not sure of the relevance. 

everyone is paying the price of an administration putting personal gains ahead of the country.  any revelations would either prove guilt/innocence or help encourage more to vote.

tax paying citizens of this fine country deserve the full unadulterated truth.  

[*bfine32*]

(03-21-2019, 09:30 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: everyone is paying the price of an administration putting personal gains ahead of the country.  any revelations would either prove guilt/innocence or help encourage more to vote.

tax paying citizens of this fine country deserve the full unadulterated truth.  

Well the "I don't see the relevance" was directed toward the he didn't get the majority of the vote assertion. Would folks "need to know" be different if he had won the majority or do you agree it was irrelevant? 

I've always been of the notion that the general public doesn't "need to know" everything; especially when the classification of the information has yet to be determined. 

[hollodero]

(03-21-2019, 09:30 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: tax paying citizens of this fine country deserve the full unadulterated truth. 

Unadulterated. Didn't know that one, but that is a cool word. Just the hint of adultery to make it a bit salacious even.

I am not paying taxes in the US (Jeez, most certainly not) but I also very much deserve the full unadulterated truth. XXX-unadulterated.

[Benton]

(03-21-2019, 06:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree the public does not need access to such reports. The majority didn't vote for any candidate; not sure of the relevance. 

Democracy dies behind closed doors. 

If you think Trump is the victim of a witch hunt, you should want the report to be open. If you think Trump is corrupt, you should want the report open. 

As far as the joke, sorry you didn't get it. I'll include a flow chart the next time. Ha. Ha.