U.S. House Democrats to get more Mueller evidence, Trump calls witness 'sleazebag'

[webfact]

U.S. House Democrats to get more Mueller evidence, Trump calls witness 'sleazebag'

By Andy Sullivan and Jan Wolfe

 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler looks through papers as he chairs a House Judiciary Committee hearing entitled "Lessons from the Mueller Report" on Capitol Hill in Washington U.S., June 10, 2019. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Congressional Democrats on Monday struck a rare deal in their wide-ranging probes of President Donald Trump, with the U.S. Justice Department agreeing to hand over more evidence from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia inquiry.

 

The compromise, an unusual retreat by Trump in his months-long stonewalling campaign against House Democrats, came just before a House panel heard testimony for more than four hours from John Dean, a historic figure from the Watergate era.

 

Before Dean spoke to the House Judiciary Committee, Trump took the opportunity on Twitter to slam the former White House counsel under President Richard Nixon as a "sleazebag attorney." Nixon resigned the presidency in disgrace in 1974.

 

Dean told the panel there were parallels between Mueller's investigative report, released in redacted form in mid-April, and a 1974 document, known as the Watergate Road Map, in which a special prosecutor laid out the case against Nixon.

 

"Mueller has provided this committee with a road map," said Dean, who was part of a panel of witnesses.

 

Mueller's report found Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and that Trump's election campaign had multiple contacts with Russian officials. But the report found insufficient evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy between the campaign and Moscow.

 

The report also outlined 10 instances in which Trump tried to interfere with Mueller's investigation but declined to make a judgement on whether that amounted to obstruction of justice.

 

As part of his effort to uncover more of Mueller's findings, Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler announced that his panel will get some of the evidence related to Trump's attempts to interfere with Mueller's probe from the Justice Department.

 

The committee will not see a full, unredacted copy of Mueller's report under the agreement, said Nadler, a Democrat. But lawmakers will get access to interview notes and other evidence, including "first-hand accounts of misconduct," Nadler said at the outset of the hearing.

 

The hearing, one in a series still to come on the Mueller report, occurred amid continuing discussion among House of Representatives Democrats about whether to begin impeachment proceedings against Trump.

 

Nadler said that under the deal with Justice he will hold off on a threat to bring criminal contempt charges against U.S. Attorney General William Barr.

 

For weeks Barr has resisted a subpoena from Nadler's committee for a full, unredacted version of Mueller's 448-page final report and underlying evidence.

 

The Justice Department will continue to cooperate with the committee, under their agreement, as long as Democrats hold off on the contempt vote, Justice spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said.

 

The Democratic-controlled House will vote as previously planned on Tuesday on a measure that would increase pressure on Trump by authorizing the committee to sue the administration in federal court if needed over access to the report.

 

Nadler said a lawsuit may yet be necessary and added that Tuesday's vote may force former White House counsel Don McGahn, a central figure in Mueller's report, to testify. McGahn resigned his White House post in August 2018.

 

Mueller's investigation is part of a broad fight between Trump and congressional Democrats, who are investigating his policies, conduct in office and private businesses. Trump has vowed to fight congressional subpoenas.

 

Barr has said he is required by law not to release evidence obtained from grand jury proceedings, and grand jury materials were redacted from the section of the report dealing with Russian interference in the election. But this was less of a concern for the section of Mueller's report dealing with obstruction, which was based on testimony from voluntary interviews Trump advisers and other witnesses gave to Mueller, rather than grand jury testimony.

 

Representative Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said the agreement indicated the Trump administration was not stonewalling Congress, adding that Democrats should focus on the threat from Russia.

 

"Democrats are abandoning their duty to confront foreign interference in our elections in favour of drawing out their slanderous campaign against the president," he said.

 

In related news, the House Oversight Committee said on Monday it plans to vote on Wednesday on whether to hold Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt of Congress for stonewalling a probe into an alleged scheme to politicize the 2020 U.S. Census.

 

(Additional reporting by Makini Brice; editing by Kevin Drawbaugh, Tom Brown and James Dalgleish)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-06-11

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Tug]

Good looks like Barr is starting to act like the AG and look who is calling who a sleaze bag lol the man of 10,000 lies that’s funney

[TopDeadSenter]

I see the "no collusion, no obstruction" verdict didn't slow them down much.

[Thailand]

Kettle ,pot, black!

[simple1]

9 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

I see the "no collusion, no obstruction" verdict didn't slow them down much.

Incorrect. The Mueller Report does not claim 'no obstruction'

[Lacessit]

I don't suppose Trump would perceive the irony of calling someone a sleazebag.

This is a guy who boasted of grabbing women by the pussy.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Lacessit

[legend49]

48 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I don't suppose Trump would perceive the irony of calling someone a sleazebag.

This is a guy who boasted of grabbing women by the pussy.

Slander not a crime in trump country?

[soalbundy]

13 minutes ago, legend49 said:

Slander not a crime in trump country?

I would say 'sleazebag' is name calling not slander and we are all used to Trump's childish school playground antics, who takes anything he says seriously? Getting attacked by him is a badge of honour, it shows one has integrity. 

[welovesundaysatspace]

2 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

I see the "no collusion, no obstruction" verdict didn't slow them down much.

There was no such verdict. Another lie of serial liar Trump and his lying fans.  

[Chomper Higgot]

Barr didn’t back down for no reason.

 

Barr was facing a vote on Contempt of Congress to be held tomorrow.

 

Let’s see if he delivers the all tge documents Congress demanded or if this is just another stalling tactic.

[Tug]

Chomper you may have a point I hope the house comes down on him like a ton of bricks if this is some delay call Donald the victim plan!

[Kasane]

The wheels of justice grind slowly. The noose maybe slowly tightening with this news.

[mtls2005]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The compromise, an unusual retreat by Trump in his months-long stonewalling campaign against House Democrats

The first brick in the wall to drop. FInally.

 

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump took the opportunity on Twitter to slam the former White House counsel under President Richard Nixon as a "sleazebag attorney." 

Wonder what he'll call McGahn.

 

He sees the end now, so he'll turn up the Krazy to 11.

 

 

[Paul Henry]

Looks like POTUS will now fire that SOB AG Barr for rolling over.

Poor BABY Donald less and less people love him. 

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, Paul Henry said:

Looks like POTUS will now fire that SOB AG Barr for rolling over.

Poor BABY Donald less and less people love him. 

Trump firing Barr would be wonderful news, but it ain’t going to happen.

 

Barr is Trump’s most valuable asset in his continuing attempts to evade Congressional oversight.

[Jingthing]

Looks like POTUS will now fire that SOB AG Barr for rolling over.
Poor BABY Donald less and less people love him. 

He won't fire him. He couldn't possibly do better than Barr.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, Tug said:

Good looks like Barr is starting to act like the AG and look who is calling who a sleaze bag lol the man of 10,000 lies that’s funney

 

Do you think the AG who had a airport runway meeting with Bill Clinton just before the FBI said Hilary shouldn't be prosecuted was acting as a AG should? 

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

I see the "no collusion, no obstruction" verdict didn't slow them down much.

 

That was not the aim or agenda. They need to keep digging and churning hoping to find anything, no matter what. Clutching at straws and desperation.

 

Pity they waste so much time, energy and public money. Must be hard being driven by so much hate and political motivation.

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Do you think the AG who had a airport runway meeting with Bill Clinton just before the FBI said Hilary shouldn't be prosecuted was acting as a AG should? 

Which is related to this thread how?

[bristolboy]

13 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

That was not the aim or agenda. They need to keep digging and churning hoping to find anything, no matter what. Clutching at straws and desperation.

 

Pity they waste so much time, energy and public money. Must be hard being driven by so much hate and political motivation.

I guess if you haven't got the facts in your favor, go after motivation. 

[Boon Mee]

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

I see the "no collusion, no obstruction" verdict didn't slow them down much.

Desperation time when they have to trot out convicted felon and major sleeze bag John Dean who has testified against every Republican since Nixon. 

What a circus! 555 

[AgMech Cowboy]

3 hours ago, simple1 said:

Incorrect. The Mueller Report does not claim 'no obstruction'

No recommendation, no indication.

 

Barr is not giving them the unredacted report, only notes. It is illegal to give grand jury info to congress. Besides they have a mostly unredacted report available that the authorized Democrats have not even gotten off their butts to go read. All they are fighting about is that they cannot leak a copy to the slanderous MSNBC & CNN to twist into another half truth.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, AgMech Cowboy said:

No recommendation, no indication.

 

Barr is not giving them the unredacted report, only notes. It is illegal to give grand jury info to congress. Besides they have a mostly unredacted report available that the authorized Democrats have not even gotten off their butts to go read. All they are fighting about is that they cannot leak a copy to the slanderous MSNBC & CNN to twist into another half truth.

It is not 'illegal' to give Grand Jury information to Congress. 

 

Your claim that the Democrats have not read the redacted report is contrary to the evidence of Democrats having read the redacted report. 

 

But you are correct, there is a fight here, a fight to place the executive back under the scrutiny of Congress. 

[Chomper Higgot]

49 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

That was not the aim or agenda. They need to keep digging and churning hoping to find anything, no matter what. Clutching at straws and desperation.

 

Pity they waste so much time, energy and public money. Must be hard being driven by so much hate and political motivation.

I'm not sure on what basis you characterise investigating foreign interference in a US election as a 'waste of time, energy and public money'?

 

 

[Mansell]

52 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Desperation time when they have to trot out convicted felon and major sleeze bag John Dean who has testified against every Republican since Nixon. 

What a circus! 555 

And what was John Dean convicted of pray tell?

[Becker]

57 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Desperation time when they have to trot out convicted felon and major sleeze bag John Dean who has testified against every Republican since Nixon. 

What a circus! 555 

A base man-child supporter accusing his opponents of being sleaze bags! Well done Boon Me, you just caused today's first LOL - thank you!

[Skeptic7]

1 minute ago, Becker said:

A base man-child supporter accusing his opponents of being sleaze bags! Well done Boon Me, you just caused today's first LOL - thank you!

Ol' Boon excels at that. Makes me LOL & PMP (piss my pants) almost every time he posts! ????

[jany123]

5 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

I see the "no collusion, no obstruction" verdict didn't slow them down much.

Isn’t that trumps own verdict on himself?

 

That would be the trump of 10,000 lies (and counting). Ergo statistics indicate that there is a high percentage of probability that he’s lying in claiming no collusion, no obstruction.

[wayned]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Barr didn’t back down for no reason.

 

Barr was facing a vote on Contempt of Congress to be held tomorrow.

 

Let’s see if he delivers the all tge documents Congress demanded or if this is just another stalling tactic.

Barr is facing another contempt of Congress vote on Wednesday by the House Oversight Committee led by Trump's good friend Maxine Waters.  Wilbur Ross is also on the ticket and it has nothing to do with the Mueller report, it's about the citizenship question on the 2020 census.

[jany123]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Pity they waste so much time, energy and public money. Must be hard being driven by so much hate and political motivation.

The mueller investigation turned a profit for the country, didn’t it? (with the potential for garnering still more profit in the months ahead.)

 

anyway... surely one would expect politicians to be politically motivated, much as one would expect a cook to be motivated to feed his customers.