Nothing is more consistent about partisan warfare in the Beltway than inconsistency. Today’s case in point comes from 1998 (and from Jeff Dunetz), when House Judiciary Committee member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) objected to the idea that everything found by an independent prosecutor should get published for all to see. Nadler told Charlie Rose that Ken Starr’s report might contain “all kinds of material that it would be unfair to release,” including “statements which may or may not be true by various witnesses.” Besides, Nadler argued at the time, releasing grand-jury material violated federal law.
Yes, I know you were talking about the House receiving it. But still.
Did the Starr report get released unredacted?Sounds like a majority favored transparency in 1998 despite nadler’s opposition. Was there strong support from republicans for full release? Must have been rather easy. Say 420-0?
Nothing is more consistent about partisan warfare in the Beltway than inconsistency. Today’s case in point comes from 1998 (and from Jeff Dunetz), when House Judiciary Committee member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) objected to the idea that everything found by an independent prosecutor should get published for all to see. Nadler told Charlie Rose that Ken Starr’s report might contain “all kinds of material that it would be unfair to release,” including “statements which may or may not be true by various witnesses.” Besides, Nadler argued at the time, releasing grand-jury material violated federal law.
Yes, I know you were talking about the House receiving it. But still.
Did the Starr report get released unredacted?Sounds like a majority favored transparency in 1998 despite nadler’s opposition. Was there strong support from republicans for full release? Must have been rather easy. Say 420-0?
Either way. Sounds like you don’t care.
I do care about the report being released. I also care about prudent redactions being made in accordance with grand jury laws.
Nothing is more consistent about partisan warfare in the Beltway than inconsistency. Today’s case in point comes from 1998 (and from Jeff Dunetz), when House Judiciary Committee member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) objected to the idea that everything found by an independent prosecutor should get published for all to see. Nadler told Charlie Rose that Ken Starr’s report might contain “all kinds of material that it would be unfair to release,” including “statements which may or may not be true by various witnesses.” Besides, Nadler argued at the time, releasing grand-jury material violated federal law.
Yes, I know you were talking about the House receiving it. But still.
Still what? Releasing something publicly vs to the House who can sign confidentiality documents is at bottom simply not the same thing!
Democrats led by our own Janet Reno were so disgusted about the Starr report that they said never again will it just be released by the SP
What Janet Reno “said” sure makes trumptards fall in line 20 years later.
Trump should just ignore all of this and sweep it under the rug for the next 20 months.
He’s busy closing the border, eventually, with all of the mexicos anway.
Trump is feeling it!
The law was changed
Like Bob said, you have to be pretty stupid and you are
The law was changed?
J F C
This must be really embarrassing for you and bob. Special counsel provisions are covered under DOJ regulatory authority (28 CFR 600) the mechanics of which were put in place in 1999 by reno’s DOJ when the independent counsel law expired. Nadler and Congress can do whatever the fuck they want.
Democrats led by our own Janet Reno were so disgusted about the Starr report that they said never again will it just be released by the SP
What Janet Reno “said” sure makes trumptards fall in line 20 years later.
Trump should just ignore all of this and sweep it under the rug for the next 20 months.
He’s busy closing the border, eventually, with all of the mexicos anway.
Trump is feeling it!
The law was changed
Like Bob said, you have to be pretty stupid and you are
The law was changed?
J F C
This must be really embarrassing for you and bob. Special counsel provisions are covered under DOJ regulatory authority (28 CFR 600) the mechanics of which were put in place in 1999 by reno’s DOJ when the independent counsel law expired. Nadler and Congress can do whatever the fuck they want.
Retards.
So why aren't Nadler and Congress doing whatever they want?
Democrats led by our own Janet Reno were so disgusted about the Starr report that they said never again will it just be released by the SP
What Janet Reno “said” sure makes trumptards fall in line 20 years later.
Trump should just ignore all of this and sweep it under the rug for the next 20 months.
He’s busy closing the border, eventually, with all of the mexicos anway.
Trump is feeling it!
The law was changed
Like Bob said, you have to be pretty stupid and you are
The law was changed?
J F C
This must be really embarrassing for you and bob. Special counsel provisions are covered under DOJ regulatory authority (28 CFR 600) the mechanics of which were put in place in 1999 by reno’s DOJ when the independent counsel law expired. Nadler and Congress can do whatever the fuck they want.
Retards.
If they can do what they want why are they bitching about not being able to see the full report? Just march over to the DOJ and take it. They can do whatever the fuck they want.
Nothing is more consistent about partisan warfare in the Beltway than inconsistency. Today’s case in point comes from 1998 (and from Jeff Dunetz), when House Judiciary Committee member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) objected to the idea that everything found by an independent prosecutor should get published for all to see. Nadler told Charlie Rose that Ken Starr’s report might contain “all kinds of material that it would be unfair to release,” including “statements which may or may not be true by various witnesses.” Besides, Nadler argued at the time, releasing grand-jury material violated federal law.
Yes, I know you were talking about the House receiving it. But still.
Did the Starr report get released unredacted?Sounds like a majority favored transparency in 1998 despite nadler’s opposition. Was there strong support from republicans for full release? Must have been rather easy. Say 420-0?
Either way. Sounds like you don’t care.
You don't redact Penthouse Forum stories...you just don't do that. BJ's and cigars HAVE to be disclosed.
We're fucking AMERICANS! We want our porn.
NGAF about email servers, meetings and that other bullshit.
Monday afternoon on FOX News, legal scholar Alan Dershowitz said there is "no legal basis" for Democrats to demand the release of the full Mueller report. "This is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue," he said.
"I think, even if Barr were hypothetically to refuse to issue anything, there would be no legal basis for a court to compel him to do that," Dershowitz said.
"The special counsel, under the rules, has an obligation to file a report with the attorney general. There’s nothing in the rules that require the attorney general to make the report public, particularly if it contains information critical of people who were not indicted. So, this is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue."
Dershowitz added: "This rush to release is understandable. The American public wants to see this report. They’re curious. But the law has to be complied with, and the law generally protects subjects of investigations who haven’t been indicted."
Monday afternoon on FOX News, legal scholar Alan Dershowitz said there is "no legal basis" for Democrats to demand the release of the full Mueller report. "This is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue," he said.
"I think, even if Barr were hypothetically to refuse to issue anything, there would be no legal basis for a court to compel him to do that," Dershowitz said.
"The special counsel, under the rules, has an obligation to file a report with the attorney general. There’s nothing in the rules that require the attorney general to make the report public, particularly if it contains information critical of people who were not indicted. So, this is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue."
Dershowitz added: "This rush to release is understandable. The American public wants to see this report. They’re curious. But the law has to be complied with, and the law generally protects subjects of investigations who haven’t been indicted."
None of that fucking matters, they can do whatever they want.
US statutes authorize DOJ to create SP regulations.
The current regulatory framework in place dates back to 1999 and Janet reno’s DOJ.
Regulations do not carry the same authority as laws. Congress maintains oversight, management, and control over the regulatory process (thanks to strong republican inroads during the Clinton and Obama administrations).
Trumptards are claiming that since mueller submitted his report to the AG per the SP regulations (as authorized under law) then they have complied with the law, and end of story.
Nadler and House Dems are saying that they maintain control over DOJ and its regulatory authority. The House Judiciary Committee tomorrow is approving nadler’s authority to issue subpoenas compelling full release of the full unredacted report. (In other words “Doing whatever the fuck they want,” tomorrow.)
We’ll see which argument wins the legal battle as the process ensues.
Regardless, the mueller report must be extremely damaging to trump for him to go to these extremes. He would rather have this play out until November 2020? Whatever happened to 420-0?
Comments
Either way. Sounds like you don’t care.
Democrats led by our own Janet Reno were so disgusted about the Starr report that they said never again will it just be released by the SP
Trump should just ignore all of this and sweep it under the rug for the next 20 months.
He’s busy closing the border, eventually, with all of the mexicos anway.
Trump is feeling it!
Like Bob said, you have to be pretty stupid and you are
J F C
This must be really embarrassing for you and bob. Special counsel provisions are covered under DOJ regulatory authority (28 CFR 600) the mechanics of which were put in place in 1999 by reno’s DOJ when the independent counsel law expired. Nadler and Congress can do whatever the fuck they want.
Retards.
Pussies?
Like you?
We're fucking AMERICANS! We want our porn.
NGAF about email servers, meetings and that other bullshit.
Stain on blue dresses? Hell yeah!
"I think, even if Barr were hypothetically to refuse to issue anything, there would be no legal basis for a court to compel him to do that," Dershowitz said.
"The special counsel, under the rules, has an obligation to file a report with the attorney general. There’s nothing in the rules that require the attorney general to make the report public, particularly if it contains information critical of people who were not indicted. So, this is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue."
Dershowitz added: "This rush to release is understandable. The American public wants to see this report. They’re curious. But the law has to be complied with, and the law generally protects subjects of investigations who haven’t been indicted."
The current regulatory framework in place dates back to 1999 and Janet reno’s DOJ.
Regulations do not carry the same authority as laws. Congress maintains oversight, management, and control over the regulatory process (thanks to strong republican inroads during the Clinton and Obama administrations).
Trumptards are claiming that since mueller submitted his report to the AG per the SP regulations (as authorized under law) then they have complied with the law, and end of story.
Nadler and House Dems are saying that they maintain control over DOJ and its regulatory authority. The House Judiciary Committee tomorrow is approving nadler’s authority to issue subpoenas compelling full release of the full unredacted report. (In other words “Doing whatever the fuck they want,” tomorrow.)
We’ll see which argument wins the legal battle as the process ensues.
Regardless, the mueller report must be extremely damaging to trump for him to go to these extremes. He would rather have this play out until November 2020? Whatever happened to 420-0?
Nadler and House Dems are saying that they maintain control over DOJ and its regulatory authority
DOJ is not under the House
Its executive branch
Fucking morons