Justice Department To Release Internal Memo It Tasked Barr With Analyzing Whether To Indict Trump In Russia Probe

But the federal appeals court didn’t buy that argument, finding that Barr never seriously considered charging Trump with obstructing Mueller’s investigation — saying in the ruling that the memo Barr ordered was an “academic exercise” and a “thought experiment ». Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation found several instances where Trump’s actions while president could qualify for an obstruction of justice charge, but Mueller left the decision up to Barr. Barr then told Congress that he was “consulting” with top Justice Department officials about whether there was enough evidence to show Trump committed obstruction. But that was misleading, the courts found, and the Justice Department has since acknowledged. Barr had already decided that the sitting President would not be charged with a crime, DC Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinavasan wrote in the new opinion. The D.C. Circuit likened the Trump charging analysis that Barr sought from DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel and others to him seeking a department position on whether the late President Richard Nixon broke the law during Watergate — a fictional request that could be made “because [the attorney general] he was just curious,” the appeals court wrote. The court ultimately sided with the Washington group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics after the DOJ tried to argue that its redactions still stood because they protected legal discourse. Those legal consultations did not exist in this circumstance, the court ruled, agreeing with lower court Judge Amy Berman Jackson.

title: “Justice Department To Release Internal Memo It Tasked Barr With Analyzing Whether To Indict Trump In Russia Probe Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-04” author: “Carmen Krausz”

But the federal appeals court didn’t buy that argument, finding that Barr never seriously considered charging Trump with obstructing Mueller’s investigation — saying in the ruling that the memo Barr ordered was an “academic exercise” and a “thought experiment ». Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation found several instances where Trump’s actions while president could qualify for an obstruction of justice charge, but Mueller left the decision up to Barr. Barr then told Congress that he was “consulting” with top Justice Department officials about whether there was enough evidence to show Trump committed obstruction. But that was misleading, the courts found, and the Justice Department has since acknowledged. Barr had already decided that the sitting President would not be charged with a crime, DC Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinavasan wrote in the new opinion. The D.C. Circuit likened the Trump charging analysis that Barr sought from DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel and others to him seeking a department position on whether the late President Richard Nixon broke the law during Watergate — a fictional request that could be made “because [the attorney general] he was just curious,” the appeals court wrote. The court ultimately sided with the Washington group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics after the DOJ tried to argue that its redactions still stood because they protected legal discourse. Those legal consultations did not exist in this circumstance, the court ruled, agreeing with lower court Judge Amy Berman Jackson.

title: “Justice Department To Release Internal Memo It Tasked Barr With Analyzing Whether To Indict Trump In Russia Probe Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-12” author: “Christine Basile”

But the federal appeals court didn’t buy that argument, finding that Barr never seriously considered charging Trump with obstructing Mueller’s investigation — saying in the ruling that the memo Barr ordered was an “academic exercise” and a “thought experiment ». Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation found several instances where Trump’s actions while president could qualify for an obstruction of justice charge, but Mueller left the decision up to Barr. Barr then told Congress that he was “consulting” with top Justice Department officials about whether there was enough evidence to show Trump committed obstruction. But that was misleading, the courts found, and the Justice Department has since acknowledged. Barr had already decided that the sitting President would not be charged with a crime, DC Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinavasan wrote in the new opinion. The D.C. Circuit likened the Trump charging analysis that Barr sought from DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel and others to him seeking a department position on whether the late President Richard Nixon broke the law during Watergate — a fictional request that could be made “because [the attorney general] he was just curious,” the appeals court wrote. The court ultimately sided with the Washington group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics after the DOJ tried to argue that its redactions still stood because they protected legal discourse. Those legal consultations did not exist in this circumstance, the court ruled, agreeing with lower court Judge Amy Berman Jackson.

title: “Justice Department To Release Internal Memo It Tasked Barr With Analyzing Whether To Indict Trump In Russia Probe Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-19” author: “Maria Phillips”

But the federal appeals court didn’t buy that argument, finding that Barr never seriously considered charging Trump with obstructing Mueller’s investigation — saying in the ruling that the memo Barr ordered was an “academic exercise” and a “thought experiment ». Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation found several instances where Trump’s actions while president could qualify for an obstruction of justice charge, but Mueller left the decision up to Barr. Barr then told Congress that he was “consulting” with top Justice Department officials about whether there was enough evidence to show Trump committed obstruction. But that was misleading, the courts found, and the Justice Department has since acknowledged. Barr had already decided that the sitting President would not be charged with a crime, DC Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinavasan wrote in the new opinion. The D.C. Circuit likened the Trump charging analysis that Barr sought from DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel and others to him seeking a department position on whether the late President Richard Nixon broke the law during Watergate — a fictional request that could be made “because [the attorney general] he was just curious,” the appeals court wrote. The court ultimately sided with the Washington group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics after the DOJ tried to argue that its redactions still stood because they protected legal discourse. Those legal consultations did not exist in this circumstance, the court ruled, agreeing with lower court Judge Amy Berman Jackson.