,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
1) The latest example of how irresponsible @RepAdamSchiff and his tweets are. The case here is Haldeman v. Sirica (1974) decided by DC Circuit. The left is jumping all over this, claiming it is basis for why Barr should have to disclose to Congress secret grand jury proceedings.
2)What Schiff & Co. don't mention is this case is to do with a grand jury "report." Under the law, grand juries "may" choose to produce a report for the court. These reports are highly procedurally regulated.
3) They are designed to allow jury to provide findings of "noncriminal" misconduct by an "appointed public officer." Any person named had to have had an opportunity to testify in front of grand jury, as well as witnesses on his/her behalf.
4) Each person named is also given 30 days to respond to any allegation in the report, before it can be filed as public record, or subject to a subpoena. These reports are often written to become public, as they bear on some investigation into gov employee misconduct.
5) the case in 1974 dealt with some grand jury findings about Nixon officials. The complex rules were followed. the report, after some legal wrangling, was then turned over to a specific House impeachment inquiry.
6) None of this bears remotest relation to what Dems are demanding from Barr. They want raw grand jury testimony/evidence, including that related to criminal inquiries into elected officials.
7) this grand jury testimony/evidence meanwhile undoubtedly relates to folks who never testified themselves, or presented witnesses, or have seen findings/results and had opportunity to respond.
It is universes apart. And our public officials ought to be expected to be a little bit more honest about history, and their unprecedented demand to see secret grand jury proceedings
