New Orleans

Justice Dept. releases part of memo on Russia probe, but appeals judge’s order to release in full – New Orleans, Louisiana

New Orleans, Louisiana 2021-05-25 04:10:00 –

The Biden administration said Monday that it would appeal to a judge’s order ordering that former President Donald Trump fully publish a legal memo about whether he interfered with the judiciary during a Russian investigation. However, they also agreed to publish part of the document. Earlier this month, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the US District Court ordered the Department of Justice to publish the entire March 2019 memo as part of a public record proceeding from a Washington-based advocacy group. She said that under Attorney General William Barr, the ministry misunderstood the purpose of the document, claiming that it had the right to withdraw the document from a civil group for Washington’s responsibility and ethics. The Justice Department said it had decided whether to follow the judge’s decision or appeal, and even continued to believe that the entire document should be exempt from disclosure. The ministry agreed to publish part of the document, but the lawyer requested Jackson to put her order on hold to give the Federal Court of Appeals an opportunity to consider the decision. At issue is a memo from the Ministry of Justice of the Ministry of Justice on March 24, 2019. A legal adviser prepared for Bar to assess whether the evidence collected in the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller can support the obstruction of the president’s judicial charge. Barr said he turned to his opinion when he determined that Trump did not illegally interfere with Russia’s investigation. The Justice Department submitted other documents to the crew as part of the group’s proceedings, but refused to give them OLC notes. Government lawyers said they had the right to withhold notes under public records law because they reflected internal deliberations between lawyers before a formal decision was made, but Jackson said the notes were barred. The judiciary informs Congress and the general public that these arguments are dishonest because they were simultaneously prepared for the sake of Bar and senior sector leaders who concluded that Trump did not interfere with the judiciary. Ministry letter. Therefore, she said, the OLC memo was not “conclusive” in nature if the Justice Department had already determined that there were no sabotage cases. A Justice Department lawyer said in a motion on Monday that the government did not intend to mislead the court, but some of the languages ​​may have been clearer. The ministry said the Attorney General’s previous decision was not whether to prosecute Trump because the incumbent president’s prosecution was excluded by long-standing Judiciary ministry policy. Rather, the question Memo set to address was whether the facts collected by Mueller could justify the criminal case. According to the government, the question was a true decision that had to be made. “The Attorney General’s decision on that point, and the decision on what to say to the general public, if any, couldn’t actually prosecute the incumbent president,” said a Justice Ministry lawyer. Is writing. “There was no legal obstacle to deciding whether the evidence established the crime. It’s a decision made and announced by the Attorney General,” they added. Justice ministry leaders advised Barr that, in their view, Mueller’s evidence cannot support the conclusion of the obstruction beyond reasonable doubt.

The Biden administration said Monday that it would appeal to a judge’s order ordering that former President Donald Trump fully publish a legal memo about whether he interfered with the judiciary during a Russian investigation. However, I also agreed to publish a short part of the document.

Earlier this month, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the US District Court ordered the Department of Justice to publish the entire March 2019 memo as part of a public record proceeding from a Washington-based advocacy group. She said that under Attorney General William Barr, the ministry misunderstood the purpose of the document, claiming that it had the right to withdraw the document from a civil group for Washington’s responsibility and ethics.

The Justice Department said it continued to believe that the entire document should be exempt from disclosure in a motion filed late Monday, which is the deadline for deciding whether to follow the judge’s decision or appeal. ..

The department agreed to publish one section of the document, but the lawyer asked Jackson to put her order on hold to give the Federal Court of Appeals an opportunity to consider the decision.

At issue is the Justice Department’s legal affairs prepared for the bar to assess whether the evidence collected in the investigation of special counsel Robert Swan Mueller can support the obstruction of the president’s judicial charge. This is a memo from the Advisory Bureau on March 24, 2019. Barr said he turned to his opinion when he determined that Trump did not illegally interfere with Russia’s investigation.

The Justice Department submitted other documents to CREW as part of the group’s proceedings, but refused to submit the OLC memo. Government lawyers said they have the right to withhold notes under the Public Records Act, as they reflect internal deliberations between lawyers before a formal decision was made.

However, Jackson is another Justice Department letter informing Congress and the general public that the memo was prepared for Bar and at the same time Bar and senior sector leaders concluded that Trump did not interfere with the judiciary. Therefore, he said these arguments were dishonest.

Therefore, she said, the OLC memo could not be “decisive” in nature if the Justice Department had already determined that there were no sabotage cases.

In a motion on Monday, a Justice Department lawyer said the government did not intend to mislead the court, but admitted that some of the wording could have been clearer.

The ministry said the Attorney General’s previous decision was not whether to prosecute Trump because the incumbent president’s prosecution was excluded by long-standing Judiciary ministry policy. Rather, the question Memo set to address was whether the facts collected by Mueller could justify the criminal case. According to the government, the question was a real decision.

“The Attorney General’s decision on that point, and, if any, what to say to the general public about the question, is wrong, even if it could not lead to the actual prosecution of the incumbent president. It qualifies as a decision without any, “the Attorney General wrote.

“There was no legal obstacle to deciding whether the evidence established the crime. It’s a decision made and announced by the Attorney General,” they added.

A short part of the memo that the Justice Department agreed to disclose is that two senior Justice Department leaders, in their view, cannot support Mueller’s evidence beyond reasonable doubt to conclude the obstruction. Indicates that he advised.

Justice Dept. releases part of memo on Russia probe, but appeals judge’s order to release in full Source link Justice Dept. releases part of memo on Russia probe, but appeals judge’s order to release in full

Back to top button