WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.
At stake in the dispute — the first evidence of tension between Mr. Barr and the special counsel’s office — is who shapes the public’s initial understanding of one of the most consequential government investigations in American history. Some members of Mr. Mueller’s team are concerned that, because Mr. Barr created the first narrative of the special counsel’s findings, Americans’ views will have hardened before the investigation’s conclusions become public.
Mr. Barr has said he would move quickly to release the nearly 400-page report but needed time to scrub out confidential information. The special counsel’s investigators had already written multiple summaries of the report, and some team members believe that Mr. Barr should have included more of their material in the four-page letter he wrote on March 24 laying out their main conclusions, according to government officials familiar with the investigation. Mr. Barr only briefly cited the special counsel’s work in his letter.
However, the special counsel’s office never asked Mr. Barr to release the summaries soon after he received the report, a person familiar with the investigation said. And the Justice Department quickly determined that the summaries contain sensitive information, like classified material, secret grand-jury testimony and information related to current federal investigations that must remain confidential, according to two government officials.
Mr. Barr was also wary of departing from Justice Department practice not to disclose derogatory details in closing an investigation, according to two government officials familiar with Mr. Barr’s thinking. They pointed to the decision by James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, to harshly criticize Hillary Clinton in 2016 while announcing that he was recommending no charges in the inquiry into her email practices.
The officials and others interviewed declined to flesh out why some of the special counsel’s investigators viewed their findings as potentially more damaging for the president than Mr. Barr explained, although the report is believed to examine Mr. Trump’s efforts to thwart the investigation. It was unclear how much discussion Mr. Mueller and his investigators had with senior Justice Department officials about how their findings would be made public. It was also unclear how widespread the vexation is among the special counsel team, which included 19 lawyers, about 40 F.B.I. agents and other personnel.
At the same time, Mr. Barr and his advisers have expressed their own frustrations about Mr. Mueller and his team. Mr. Barr and other Justice Department officials believe the special counsel’s investigators fell short of their task by declining to decide whether Mr. Trump illegally obstructed the inquiry, according to the two government officials. After Mr. Mueller made no judgment on the obstruction matter, Mr. Barr stepped in to declare that he had cleared Mr. Trump of wrongdoing.
……..
- Discussion
-
BREAKING: Mueller’s team goes after Barr, says the report is much more damaging than the AG said in his 4 page memo https://t.co/Z5N7aOF0dq
— Scott Stedman (@ScottMStedman) April 3, 2019
NYT bombshell tonight about investigators saying Mueller Report was misrepresented by Barr and bad for Trump is not just important in its own right…its a warning shot. Its investigators saying they won't sit silently by and be misrepresented. A very big deal.
— David Rothkopf (@djrothkopf) April 3, 2019
No kiddinghttps://t.co/6DDMPl25Cz
— John Schindler (@20committee) April 4, 2019
Anybody foolish enough to push AG Barr's 4-pager as the Last Word on the SCO investigation into Trump and the Russians is going to be sorely disappointed….rather soon.
— John Schindler (@20committee) April 4, 2019
Fmr. Assistant FBI Director Frank Figliuzzi: "If this is indeed the first leakage we're seeing from the special counsel's team, we need to stand up and pay attention to that … That tells us they are not happy with what the attorney general is doing." @allinwithchris
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) April 4, 2019
Yep.
The disclosure that Mueller’s team wrote unclassified summaries along the way is big.
Exactly zero reason to keep those from the public. https://t.co/gOf8NcSOcv
— Angry Staffer (@AngrierWHStaff) April 4, 2019
2) @washingtonpost sources say Team Mueller wrote these summaries specifically for immediate use. Obviously Mueller wouldn't put sensitive/privileged material in short executive summaries.
Team Barr seems willing to claim privilege for anything and everything.
No credibility. pic.twitter.com/JYNFboQyf0— Jed Shugerman (@jedshug) April 4, 2019
This is interesting. Would like to hear Barr's answer to this. And the good news is: We will. https://t.co/dkYpiwU5cl
— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahNRO) April 4, 2019
Just in: Mueller’s evidence on obstruction was alarming and significant — “much more acute than Barr suggested,” per one source. There was “immediate displeasure” among special counsel team members. WaPo matches NYT scoop tonight —> https://t.co/4HMI4wPdGq
— Philip Rucker (@PhilipRucker) April 4, 2019
NBC: Mueller report includes “detailed accounts of Trump campaign contacts with Russia” and depicts a “campaign whose members were manipulated by a sophisticated Russian intelligence operation.” https://t.co/0QHBAiijVh
— Jon Swaine (@jonswaine) April 4, 2019
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.