Why Mueller's report might be a letdown
for Trump critics
Send a link to a friend
[March 06, 2019]
By Jan Wolfe
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A lavishly detailed
445-page report by Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr released by the
U.S. House of Representatives in 1998 concluded that President Bill
Clinton "committed acts that may constitute grounds for an impeachment"
and paved the way for an unsuccessful attempt in Congress to remove him
from office.
But Special Counsel Robert Mueller's impending report on the findings of
his investigation into Russia's role in the 2016 U.S. election may far
fall short of the searing and voluminous Starr report, legal experts
said, in part due to constraints on Mueller that did not exist when
Starr produced his report.
The Starr report presented explicit details about Clinton's sexual
encounters with a White House intern named Monica Lewinsky and accused
Clinton of specific crimes including perjury, attempted obstruction of
justice, witness tampering and "a pattern of conduct that was
inconsistent with his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the
laws."
Starr operated under an independent counsel law that has since lapsed.
Mueller's powers differ from those of Starr, and Justice Department
regulations place limits on him that Starr did not face. Mueller since
May 2017 has looked into whether Trump's 2016 campaign conspired with
Russia and whether the president unlawfully sought to obstruct the
probe.
Trump has denied collusion and obstruction. Russia has denied election
interference.
Here is an explanation of some of the factors that may limit what ends
up in Mueller's report to U.S. Attorney General William Barr and what
ultimately may be released to the public.
WHAT DO JUSTICE DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS CALL FOR?
Congress let the independent counsel law expire in part because of
concern among some lawmakers that Starr had exceeded his mandate. The
Justice Department then crafted regulations to create the job of special
counsel in 1999, with certain limits on powers.
The department's No. 2 official, Rod Rosenstein, appointed Mueller to
take over the Russia investigation after Trump fired FBI Director James
Comey, whose agency had led the probe, and directed Mueller to abide by
the special counsel regulations.
But the regulations provide only limited guidance on the parameters of
Mueller's final report, stating that at the conclusion of his work he
should provide the U.S. attorney general, the nation's top law
enforcement official, with a "confidential report" explaining his
"prosecution or declination decisions." The term "declination decisions"
refers to judgments that Mueller made not to bring criminal charges
against a given individual. Mueller already has brought charges against
34 people - including the former chairman of Trump's campaign Paul
Manafort and other campaign figures, Trump's former personal lawyer
Michael Cohen and former national security adviser Michael Flynn - and
three Russian companies.
The regulations require Barr to notify the top Republicans and Democrats
on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees that Mueller's
investigation has concluded. The Justice Department's policy calls for
Barr to summarize the confidential report for Congress with "an outline
of the actions and the reasons for them." According to the regulations,
Barr "may determine that public release of these reports would be in the
public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable
legal restrictions."
[to top of second column]
|
Special Counsel Robert Mueller departs after briefing the U.S. House
Intelligence Committee on his investigation of potential collusion
between Russia and the Trump campaign on Capitol Hill in Washington,
U.S., June 20, 2017. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein/File Photo
WHAT HAS BARR SAID ABOUT WHAT HE WILL RELEASE?
In his January Senate confirmation hearing, Barr provided some
insight into his thinking. He said that "it is very important that
the public and Congress be informed of the results of the special
counsel's work." Barr added, "For that reason, my goal will be to
provide as much transparency as I can consistent with the law. I can
assure you that, where judgments are to be made by me, I will make
those judgments based solely on the law and will let no personal,
political or other improper interests influence my decision."
House Democrats have vowed to subpoena the report and go to court if
necessary to win its full release.
WHAT WILL MUELLER'S REPORT LOOK LIKE?
Some legal experts said the text of the 1999 regulations and the
context under which they were written in the aftermath of the Starr
report signal that Mueller should not write a lengthy narrative like
Starr did, but rather deliver straightforward and concise findings.
The regulations were intended to give a special counsel some
independence while ensuring a degree of accountability and oversight
by the Justice Department.
But some experts said Mueller would be well within his power to
provide Congress with information it can use to conduct further
investigations. Leon Jaworski, who served as a special prosecutor
during President Richard Nixon's Watergate scandal, adopted this
approach when he finished his investigation. Jaworski's "road map"
document, which helped prompt Nixon's resignation, remained secret
until 2018.
Comey, in a Washington Post opinion piece on Tuesday, urged Barr to
make an expansive release, saying "a straightforward report of what
facts have been learned and how judgment has been exercised may be
the only way to advance the public interest."
PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT
There is a tension between a decades-old Justice Department policy
against public comment on decisions not to bring criminal charges
and the requirement in the special counsel regulations that Mueller
explain which criminal cases he brought and which ones he declined
to bring. Rosenstein in February said, "If we aren't prepared to
prove our case beyond a reasonable doubt in court, then we have no
business making allegations against American citizens."
This policy might lead Mueller to keep his explanations of his
declination decisions brief, legal experts said, and Barr
subsequently could opt not to disclose those parts of the
confidential report. Department policy, presented in a 1973
Nixon-era memo and reaffirmed in a 2000 Clinton-era memo, is that a
sitting president cannot face a criminal indictment.
Some lawyers have said this policy, combined with the practice of
generally not explaining decisions not to prosecute someone, limits
what Mueller can put in the report about Trump's conduct. Other
lawyers have said Jaworski, who had an analogous role, set a
precedent that Mueller would be within his power to lay out a case
for removing Trump from office through impeachment, as Starr did
with Clinton in 1998.
(Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |