,
14 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
THREAD: There's only one direct comparison to Mueller, who is (1) a special counsel appointed from outside the DOJ and (2) bound by the 1999 regulations. Here's what that case (the Waco investigation) tells us about Mueller's report. Stick with me here! cnn.com/2019/03/04/pol…
First -- Existing DOJ rules require Mueller to submit a "confidential report" at the end of his investigation to Attorney General Bill Barr. After that, Barr must send his own notification to Congress, letting them know that the investigation is over. cnn.com/2019/03/04/pol…
Barr has pledged to "provide as much transparency as I can," but hasn't committed to publicly releasing the entirety of Mueller's confidential report. That's where a lot of the debate is right now about the Russia investigation. cnn.com/2019/03/04/pol…
Looking back at Waco... those investigators didn't wait around for DOJ higher-ups to examine their final product. They posted their full report directly onto the burgeoning Internet, along with hundreds of pages of detailed exhibits and timelines. cnn.com/2019/03/04/pol…
That special counsel was Jack Danforth. He posted his full, final report about the Waco saga on his website, osc-waco.org, which is now defunct. (2000, early days of the Internet!) BTW: He already publicly revealed his preliminary findings in a 153-page interim report. 
What does Danforth think Mueller should do? He told CNN: "Mueller was given a specific charge (to investigation Russian meddling), not to just investigate whatever he wants. Let's leave no doubt in the public's mind what his findings are on that charge." cnn.com/2019/03/04/pol…
But, Danforth goes on: "...if it's getting into stuff unrelated to that charge and matters where he doesn't have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, my impression is that shouldn't go public," he said. cnn.com/2019/03/04/pol…
I also spoke to Danforth's deputy Ed Dowd. He said: "We're talking about whether a candidate for president was co-opted by a foreign government. Obviously, the people of this country are entitled to this information." cnn.com/2019/03/04/pol…
Fmr. deputy special counsel Ed Dowd continued... "I'm sure Robert Mueller will try to give us as much information as he can, and hopefully the new attorney general will too. I just really hope he gives the American people what they're entitled to." cnn.com/2019/03/04/pol…
I found it interesting when Dowd explained their process in 2000 this way: "the goal was to be as transparent as we could possibly be." (Remember: AG Barr promised to lawmakers that he would "provide as much transparency as I can," under the laws/rules.)
There are many key differences between the Waco investigation and the Russia investigation. Look no further than the Sept. 1999 order appointing Danforth. Then-AG Janet Reno told him to prepare his reports "in a form that will permit public dissemination." See section (e) below.
That's a key difference from Mueller. When Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller in 2017, Mueller got wide latitude to investigate Russian meddling but told to stick to DOJ rules... which say *nothing* about the special counsel releasing his own public report.
On this note... CNN reported last week that some Trump administration officials believe the rules don't authorize releasing Mueller's report. They think the rules, as originally written, protect Trump from any negative information being released if he is not charged with a crime.
One more wrinkle: Trump's allies have found solace in recent comments from Barr and Rosenstein extolling the virtue of protecting uncharged individuals by keeping "derogatory information" out of public view. That is the DOJ policy after all.... BUT, Waco tells a different story.
