Mar 22, 2019 · By Sarah N. Lynch and Jan Wolfe WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Now that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has submitted the report on his investigation of Russia's role in the 2016 U.S. election, Attorney...
Mar 23, 2019 · By Sarah N. Lynch and Jan Wolfe WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Now that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has submitted the report on his investigation of Russia's role in the 2016 U.S. election, Attorney...
Mar 22, 2019 · WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Now that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has submitted the report on his investigation of Russia’s role in the 2016 U.S. election, Attorney General William Barr must decide...
Mar 22, 2019 · By Sarah N. Lynch and Jan Wolfe WASHINGTON, March 22 (Reuters) - Now that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has submitted the report on his investigation of Russia's role in the 2016 U.S. election,...
The Special Counsel obtained a number of indictments and convictions of individuals and entities in connection with his investigation, all of which have been publicly disclosed. During the course of his investigation, the Special Counsel also referred several matters to other offices for further action.
Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. The Special Counsel’s report is divided into two parts. The first described the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed ...
On possible obstruction of justice, Mueller wrote, “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”. Barr said that he is still reviewing the full report, including sections that he could release publicly. Read the full text of the letter below:
In a March 24 letter to Congress summarizing Mueller’s findings, Barr wrote that the evidence collected is “not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”
That’s among the many things House Democrats hope to learn from reading Mueller’s report.
In demanding Mueller’s full report, Democrats have asserted that Barr cannot be trusted to interpret its findings objectively because he was appointed by the president. They say that makes his exoneration of Trump a political, rather than legal, determination.
Trump expects personal loyalty from his staff – including from his attorney general – reports Yu Ouyang, professor of political science at Purdue University Northwest.
In March 2020, federal judge Reggie Walton, appointed to his position by President George W. Bush, declared that he would personally review the redactions made in the Mueller report to ensure that the redactions were legitimate. This came during a lawsuit filed by the pro-transparency Electronic Privacy Information Center and media outlet BuzzFeed News to release the full, unredacted report under the Freedom of Information Act. Walton cited that he had concerns on whether the redactions were legitimate, due to Attorney General William Barr having displayed a "lack of candor" regarding the report.
House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerry Nadler announced he would issue a subpoena for the full report after the Justice Department released a redacted version. Democrats also criticized what they say were "orchestrated attempts" by the Trump administration to control the narrative surrounding the report's April 18 release. Nadler issued the subpoena on April 19. A DOJ spokesperson called Nadler's subpoena "premature and unnecessary", citing that the publicly released version of the report had "minimal redactions" and that Barr had already made arrangements for Nadler and other lawmakers to review a version with fewer redactions.
Democrat Ted Lieu asked Mueller whether the reason he did not indict Trump was that Department of Justice policy prohibits the indictment of sitting presidents. Mueller originally confirmed that this was the reason. However, later that day, Mueller corrected his comments, stating that his team did not determine whether Trump committed a crime. Additionally, Mueller answered Republican Ken Buck that a president could be charged with obstruction of justice (or other crimes) after the president left office.
In July 2019, Mueller testified to Congress that a president could be charged with crimes including obstruction of justice after the president left office. In 2020, a Republican-appointed federal judge decided to personally review the report's redactions to see if they were legitimate.
The report was submitted to Attorney General William Barr on March 22, 2019, and a redacted version of the 448-page report was publicly released by the Department of Justice (DOJ) on April 18, 2019. It is divided into two volumes.
The redacted version of the Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election was released to the public by the Department of Justice on April 18, 2019. The Mueller report, officially titled Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election, ...
According to its authorizing document, which was signed by then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on May 17, 2017, the investigation's scope included allegations that there were links or coordination between President Donald Trump 's presidential campaign and the Russian government as well as "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation". The authorizing document also included "any other matters within the scope of 28 CFR § 600.4 (a) "; enabling the special counsel "to investigate and prosecute" any attempts to interfere with its investigation, "such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses ".
The Mueller Report is here! Well, sort of. On March 22, Attorney General William Barr notified the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had completed his investigation and filed his final report. Two days later, Barr sent a follow-up letter informing them ...
Instead, Barr states that after consulting with department officials and “applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide” charging decisions, he and Rosenstein concluded that the evidence was “not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”.
Fourth, there was no collusion. Barr informed the judiciary committees that a “primary consideration” of Mueller’s investigation was to determine “whether any Americans—including individuals associated with the Trump campaign—joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime.”.