It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Redaction Question - Mueller Report?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Okay, now we're seeing the Mueller report, the result of two years of "investigation" into president Trump and alleged wrongdoing. In this report we see several hundred pages of redactions. A redaction is intended to not allow someone to see some data in a report or document.

So, I have a question, well, okay more than one. I ask these questions because I am unclear on the answers...

1. Who is it exactly who places these redactions in the report? Is it Mueller and his team, or someone else?

2. Who gets to decide whether something needs to be redacted from the report? And, who approves this?

3. How do we citizens know that redacted elements aren't statements or evidence about crimes committed during the investigation itself?

4. Who all (and this is important), outside of Mueller's team, gets to read and review the UN-redacted report? The President? Congress? The Senate? Who?

5. If the answer to #4 above is..."selected members" (of group x), then who decides who these 'selected' members are?

I think you get the theme here.

We are a nation of 50 States. We have elected representatives from all 50 of those states in the House of Representatives and the Senate. This country is made up of 250m taxpaying citizens. This entire nation has been derailed by the Mueller investigation, Congress and the Senate both have done NOTHING BUT argue over this investigation, at the expense of just about everything else. Us citizens have been left to wait, swinging in the breeze, while one part of government poured hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into this infamous investigation and the summarizing report. Yet the net result of all this monumental distraction is only available to a handful of people. Who are these people, and who put them in charge? I know no one ever asked me about who I thought should review the report. How about you?

Okay, I get it, there may be some covert operations which would be exposed by not redacting certain things. Fine, some redactions are understandable, but why hundreds of pages? Is the whole government one big covert operation such that the average taxpayer who pays all these guys paychecks is not allowed to see???

I don't care if it's democrats or republicans whose hides are on the line, I think we are entitled as law abiding taxpaying citizens to see what this report found. There should be absolutely zero tolerance for politicians covering their sacred asses here!

Show us the damn report!


edit on 4/19/2019 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:24 AM
link   
They can't release info that could jeopardize ongoing matters. That is simple enough.
It is illegal to release grand jury information. That is the law.
There is a lot of both of those items... makes up the bulk of redactions.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Okay, now we're seeing the Mueller report, the result of two years of "investigation" into president Trump and alleged wrongdoing. In this report we see several hundred pages of redactions. A redaction is intended to not allow someone to see some data in a report or document.

So, I have a question, well, okay more than one. I ask these questions because I am unclear on the answers...

1. Who is it exactly who places these redactions in the report? Is it Mueller and his team, or someone else?


Barr mentioned requesting that Mueller do the redactions and then submit the report to himself for review.


2. Who gets to decide whether something needs to be redacted from the report? And, who approves this?

See above


3. How do we citizens know that redacted elements aren't statements or evidence about crimes committed during the investigation itself?


We don't.


4. Who all (and this is important), outside of Mueller's team, gets to read and review the UN-redacted report? The President? Congress? The Senate? Who?


Barr & later, probably a Congress committee. Very much later, it will probably be released under FOIA.


5. If the answer to #4 above is..."selected members" (of group x), then who decides who these 'selected' members are?

I think you get the theme here.

We are a nation of 50 States. We have elected representatives from all 50 of those states in the House of Representatives and the Senate. This country is made up of 250m taxpaying citizens. This entire nation has been derailed by the Mueller investigation, Congress and the Senate both have done NOTHING BUT argue over this investigation, at the expense of just about everything else. Us citizens have been left to wait, swinging in the breeze, while one part of government poured hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into this infamous investigation and the summarizing report. Yet the net result of all this monumental distraction is only available to a handful of people. Who are these people, and who put them in charge? I know no one ever asked me about who I thought should review the report. How about you?

Okay, I get it, there may be some covert operations which would be exposed by not redacting certain things. Fine, some redactions are understandable, but why hundreds of pages? Is the whole government one big covert operation such that the average taxpayer who pays all these guys paychecks is not allowed to see???

I don't care if it's democrats or republicans whose hides are on the line, I think we are entitled as law abiding taxpaying citizens to see what this report found. There should be absolutely zero tolerance for politicians covering their sacred asses here!

Show us the damn report!


Most of the redactions are due to ongoing matters and are marked as such. Some are personal privacy issues (marked as such) and there are others such as 'investigative technique' which may be something that the court would like to keep secret to prevent criminals from defending against it.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

tge Muller team didnt make tge redactions.

the report has nothing to do with Muller.

only people who need information redacted request redactios based on evidence of on going cases, investigation, fouo, classified, or national security related.

no one will take to the streets and protest redactions nor pritest against the investigator himself...

the tax payers are under mind control. we just take what the politicians say at face value, just as long as we think "they" are on "our political side"



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy



... makes up the bulk of redactions.


Okay, and you know this how? Grand Jury information I understand, but the whole investigation wasn't a Grand Jury. In fact, very little of it was.

Don't get me wrong, it's probably a good assumption, but then one has to ask...

6. Okay, what other "ongoing matters" are there related to this investigation?

7. Who gets to decide what these 'ongoing matters' are? Who gets to decide if more 'ongoing matters' get added?

The investigation is over. Or, is it? (that's a rhetorical question)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I believe Barr gave a very descriptive run-down detailing the redaction process near the end of his Presser. Here is the link to thePress Conference Transcript

By scrolling down towards the end, you will find most of your questions answered by Barr himself.

Edit add: Barr stated that the other examples of ongoing cases or criminal investigations were like the IRA or roger stone cases during his Presser too.

edit on 4 19 2019 by CynConcepts because: (no reason given)


(post by CADpro removed for political trolling and baiting)

posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: butcherguy



... makes up the bulk of redactions.


Okay, and you know this how? Grand Jury information I understand, but the whole investigation wasn't a Grand Jury. In fact, very little of it was.

Don't get me wrong, it's probably a good assumption, but then one has to ask...

6. Okay, what other "ongoing matters" are there related to this investigation?

7. Who gets to decide what these 'ongoing matters' are? Who gets to decide if more 'ongoing matters' get added?

The investigation is over. Or, is it? (that's a rhetorical question)




If you go through the report as it was released for public consumption, the redactions are labeled as to why they were removed.
The investigation as laid out by Rosenstein when he appointed Mueller is over. Ongoing matters are matters that arose from the investigation, like the indictment of the guy that used to work for the Obama administration. A case in point would be Manafort and tax evasion, since he wasn't colluding with Russians, the matter isn't part of what Mueller was focusing on, but came up during the investigation.
The people that made the decisions for redacting material were Mueller and his team, Rod Rosenstein, the Attorney General, and the intelligence community (for matters that are classified).
edit on b000000302019-04-19T09:41:57-05:0009America/ChicagoFri, 19 Apr 2019 09:41:57 -0500900000019 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Technically, the E.O. states that information CAN NOT be classified to cover crimes.


Good luck with that one though.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Good response. Thanks.




Most of the redactions are due to ongoing matters and are marked as such. Some are personal privacy issues (marked as such) and there are others such as 'investigative technique' which may be something that the court would like to keep secret to prevent criminals from defending against it.


Okay, let's dissect this last part a little bit...

Ongoing matters - What ongoing matters? The investigation is over. Collateral investigations, okay.

Personal Privacy - Names, addresses, SSN's = fine. Someone got a wild hunch to go on a witch hunt and got a warrant without cause = not fine. Define personal privacy? To me, personal privacy in the public service world stops at PII.

Investigative Technique - Man, we could go all over the map with this one! Shouldn't a criminal be able to defend against it if said technique was illegal? Means and methods are all subject to public scrutiny. These are, after all, public servants. If I want to bug my neighbor's phone for no reason other than to see what I can dig up on him, that's an investigative technique, right? That dog doesn't hunt.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Several congressional members will be receiving a copy of this report where only the grand jury stuff will be redacted. They will get a bigger picture on what Mueller reported.

As time goes on and the other investigations become concluded, the redactions on the public report will be removed accordingly.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 10:08 AM
link   
There will be a lot of flaming, opinions, though not as bad as the mud pit might receive, and one could speculate a host of outcomes. Do you think President Trump can toss this behind him and continue presidential duties ? Is there still jeopardy? I know AOC, Watters and Pelosi will continue cackling un-endingly, but do you think he can finally tell them all to pound sand ?



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Barr said that certain members of Congress may see the unredacted report, except for issues related to the Gran Jury---which by law cannot be divulged.
These Members of Congress can view it only in a controlled setting, and I believe in the presence of Barr or someone like him.
No copying, etc. is allowed, IIRC.

Also, the redacted stuff is labeled as to why it was redacted.
edit on Fri Apr 19 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 10:36 AM
link   



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

Right, as I noted earlier, I understand the Grand Jury stuff being redacted.

And yes, I have looked at the report and its annotations, so I understand how they are marked.

However, in the same breath, just look at some of the stuff which is redacted. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out the word/words in some cases which was redacted and it's words like "investigation", etc. In other places whole sections have been redacted, so obviously we can't know what those are.

I've made it about 280 pages or so into the report and it reads the same way...allegation, allegation, allegation, then redaction. Rinse and repeat. When you step back away from it and look at it as a whole you see a trend.

That's all I'm saying.




top topics



 
4

log in

join