Skip to main content

Judge orders DOJ to publish info redacted as privileged from Mueller report


A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the Department of Justice (DOJ) to publish information redacted from the Mueller report that had been designated as privileged.

District Judge Reggie Walton said the Trump administration had failed to justify certain redactions from the report on the special counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The specific redactions he took issue with cover the decisionmaking process within former special counsel Robert Mueller Robert (Bob) MuellerCNN's Toobin warns McCabe is in 'perilous condition' with emboldened Trump CNN anchor rips Trump over Stone while evoking Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting The Hill's 12:30 Report: New Hampshire fallout MORE's team over whether to charge certain people with crimes during the probe.

ADVERTISEMENT

"Based on the Court’s review of the unredacted version of the Mueller Report, the Court concludes that the Department has failed to satisfy its burden to demonstrate that the withheld material is protected by the deliberative process privilege," Walton, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, wrote in his 40-page opinion.

The decision comes as a result of a pair of lawsuits under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) brought by a journalist with BuzzFeed News and the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to have the full, unredacted report released to the public.

Walton on Wednesday ruled that the DOJ could continue to withhold material it had redacted under FOIA exemptions allowing agencies to conceal information that would compromise law enforcement investigations or compromise the privacy of witnesses.

Matt Topic, who was lead attorney for plaintiffs, told The Hill: "After a very thorough review, the Court found that the Justice Department violated federal law with regard to a number of the redactions to the Mueller Report. We look forward to the release of this additional information by November 2."

A spokeswoman for the DOJ did not immediately respond when asked for comment.

ADVERTISEMENT

In March, Walton ordered the DOJ to give him access to an unredacted copy of the report so that he could review their withholdings. He excoriated the department and Attorney General William Barr Bill BarrMueller in rare statement pushes back on top aide's criticism of investigation Flynn's attorney says she recently discussed case with Trump Juan Williams: Trump's Supreme Court power grab MORE at the time for misrepresenting the report's conclusions before it was actually released.

"The inconsistencies between Attorney General Barr’s statements, made at a time when the public did not have access to the redacted version of the Mueller Report to assess the veracity of his statements, and portions of the redacted version of the Mueller Report that conflict with those statements cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump Donald John TrumpFive takeaways from Trump-Biden debate clash The Memo: Debate or debacle? Democrats rip Trump for not condemning white supremacists, Proud Boys at debate MORE despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary," Walton wrote in March.

"These circumstances generally, and Attorney General Barr’s lack of candor specifically, call into question Attorney General Barr’s credibility" and the DOJ's arguments in the FOIA lawsuit, the judge added.

Updated at 3:11 p.m.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Allies of Rep. Adam Kinzinger launch super PAC to support Republicans who have bucked Trump

Founders of the group, which include Kinzinger advisers, are also launching a sister nonprofit to “build a grass roots army,” according to documents reviewed by The Washington Post. Unlike traditional PACs, both organizations can accept unlimited contributions. Nonprofit groups are not required to disclose the identity of their contributors. AD Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) posted a video on Jan. 7, 2020, the day after pro-Trump riots at the Capitol, saying, “It is time to invoke the 25th Amendment.” (@RepKinzinger/Twitter) The effort will be up against significant head winds, as Trump still holds vast sway over the Republican Party — even after his supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol in an effort to stop the certification of President Biden’s victory. AD The new groups, which aim to mobilize the kinds of anti-Trump donors who backed the now-embattled Lincoln Project, are being launched as the former president is planning to expand his political operation with his own super PAC. Kinzin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Matt Gaetz tried to loop Tucker Carlson into the underage sex allegations against him

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) is trying to tell us that he’s not going down alone. Last night, the much-maligned congressman lowkey tried to implicate Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson (and his wife) into his sex abuse allegations during an unusual interview on live television. Featured Video Hide According to a New York Times report, Gaetz, an ally of former President Donald Trump, is at the part of a Justice Department investigation into a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old. He potentially faces charges related to federal sex trafficking laws. Advertisement Hide The Times also reports that “the investigation was opened in the final months of the Trump administration under Attorney General William Barr” with senior Justice Department officials aware of the inquiry. Gaetz has not been charged “and the extent of his criminal exposure is unclear,” according to the Times. This is WILD.@MattGaetz to #Tucker: "It is a horrible allegation and it is a lie. The New York Times is running a sto...
Post a Comment
Read more

Federal ‘jack-booted thugs’ are roaming Portland. Where is the NRA now? (Your letters)

To the Editor: Back in 1995, the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre complained, “The government is full of jack-booted thugs in bucket helmets” trampling on our constitutional rights. Now we see presumably federal government agents, this time in military camouflage, wearing no badges, forcing peaceable protesters into unmarked vehicles in Portland, Oregon. Where is the NRA and all those who complained then? Our President Donald Trump has threatened to do the same in other cities, in spite of the objections by the mayor and governor of the place it has already happened. Our president, his agency heads and the agents themselves swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. I took an oath to defend the Constitution, too. I’ve been retired from the Army almost a half century but two things upset me about this use of anonymous federal agents: First, it is wrong. Second, camouflage is intended for fighting in the field; so, who dispatched agents into a city clad in that costume? Stanley H. Roe Hamilton
Post a Comment
Read more