04-11-2019, 01:06 PM
(04-11-2019, 12:01 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: What lie would that be?
https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/04/05/judges-have-no-inherent-power-to-disclose-grand-jury-records-dc-circuit/?cmp=share_twitter
(04-11-2019, 12:15 PM)jj22 Wrote: That it had to be redacted because of Grand Jury testimony.
The justice department can make a request. Barr testified a couple days ago he wasn't going to do that.
https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/04/09/ag-barr-no-plans-to-ask-court-to-release-grand-jury-info-in-mueller-report/?slreturn=20190311111643
FYI. Not accusing you of lying. Just the overall talking appoint being spread by Republicans etc.
Okay, hold up. The idea that Barr could/should seek that exception is not a good one, and whether the exception would be carved out by the courts is a big question as well. However, the report with the GJ information unredacted could be given to certain committee chairs in Congress without any sort of judicial order by law. So it is a lie that the information can't be seen in full by some in Congress, but Barr honestly shouldn't seek that exception because the information should remain redacted for a number of reasons.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
