Mueller Might Be Barred From Publishing Trump-Russia Report Thanks To Obscure Court Case

A six-decade old murder case working its way through a Washington D.C. Court of Appeals may set a precedent that would prevent special counsel Robert Mueller from publishing any information from stemming from the Trump-Russia investigation, reports Politico.

Columbia University professor Jesus Galindez disappeared in 1956, and was believed to be possibly kidnapped to the Dominican Republic and murdered. His body was never found. The case inspired a 2003 film starring Harvey Keitel, “The Galindez File.”

Attorney and author Stuart McKeever has been pursuing the case, and has asked the D.C. court to release secret testimony given to a DC-based grand jury, however the Department of Justice (DOJ) has argued that judges don’t have “inherent authority” to release said information unless Congress approves.

As Politico‘s Josh Gerstein notes, McKeever’s success or failure to obtain the documents may have far reaching implications for other investigations – including Mueller’s probe of President Trump and those in his orbit.

[I]f a Washington appeals court set to hear the murder-related case next month sides with the Justice Department and rules that judges don’t have the freedom to release grand jury information that is usually kept secret, it could throw a monkey wrench into any plans Mueller has to issue a public report on his probe’s findings, lawyers following the issue said.

And it might even keep the special counsel from sending a report to Congress, shaking Democrats’ hopes that such a document could provide the impetus for impeachment proceedings against the president. –Politico

This means of course that if Mueller can’t nail Trump for anything outside of porn-star payoffs and parking tickets, he will conveniently avoid an embarrassing public disclosure after more than two years of DOJ investigation. On the other hand, if Trump is found guilty of being a Putin-puppet, it would similarly hinder public disclosure.

“It is a sleeper case,” says Harvard Law professor Alex Whiting. “If the D.C. Circuit were to accept the Department of Justice’s arguments…that would have potentially enormous implications for the future of the information from the Mueller investigation. That could close out a path by which that information becomes public.“

That said, Congress could subpoena the report as part of impeachment proceedings. If the Democrats flip the House in November’s midterms, the House Judiciary Committee could subpoena the report as part of an impeachment inquiry – which a judge would likely approve due to a 1974 D.C. court ruling that approved the delivery of a similar report related to President Richard Nixon’s Watergate case.

Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani has said Mueller’s office is preparing a report on his findings, but the exact mechanism by which it would be disclosed is unclear. Experts on grand jury secrecy say the public assumption that Mueller can simply publish his conclusions could be wrong, especially if the appeals court sides with the Justice Department in the McKeever case next month. –Politico

“The question of how information obtained by Mueller in his investigation will ultimately become public is a pressing one, and it’s a complicated question,” Whiting said.

The three DC Circuit Court judges deciding the McKeever case lean Republican, and will include the court’s only Trump appointee; Judge Greg Katsas. Reagan appointed Judge Douglas Ginsburg and Obama appointee Judge Sri Srinivasan are the other two.

And as Politico also notes – the McKeever case could affect another politically sensitive disclosure; CNN’s attempt to access records of various grand jury court battles during the Clinton years.

Last week, the Justice Department agreed to release a special master’s report from one of those cases. The report, detailing an investigation into alleged grand jury leaks, did not mention Brett Kavanaugh, the Trump Supreme Court nominee who served as a member of independent counsel Ken Starr’s staff.

A Justice Department spokesman declined to explain why the agency approved release of that report but is fighting to keep information in other grand jury-related cases under wraps. However, the spokesman pointed to a legal brief where Justice attorneys argued that the special master’s report did not contain any grand jury secrets that had not previously been released. –Politico

The appeals court could also handle the McKeever case in a way which would avoid impacting mueller – such as sending the matter back to district court for consideration of a narrowed request from the author, or to simply say that it will not opine on potential disclosures to Congress or those regarding impeachment inquiries.

“It depends on how narrowly or broadly they want to write the opinion,” says Boston College law professor and expert on grand juries, Mike Cassidy, who added that there are precedents for grand juries releasing reports.

McKeever, meanwhile, isn’t primarily concerned about the impact his case might have on the Mueller probe – though he’s worried that the appeals court decision may shut down historians, authors and journalists from obtaining information related to cases that grand juries dropped or didn’t finish.

“My whole goal here is to tell the story on every single level, all the ramifications,” McKeever said. “Who’s in charge of the truth here?”

via RSS https://ift.tt/2ofN9MR Tyler Durden

Leave a Reply Cancel reply