‼️ “In his ruling, Walton said he needed to review the [Mueller Report] itself because he could not trust that the Justice Department’s redactions of the report were made properly and in good faith.” apnews.com/fe8eee387b5388…
“Walton said it would be ‘disingenuous” to presume the redactions were ‘not tainted by Attorney General Barr’s actions and representations’ throughout the process.”
"The Court has grave concerns about the objectivity of the process that preceded the public release of the redacted version of the Mueller Report and its impacts on the Department’s subsequent justifications that its redactions of the Mueller Report are authorized by the FOIA.”
"...a review of the redacted version of the Mueller Report by the Court results in the Court’s concurrence with Special Counsel Mueller’s assessment that Attorney General Barr distorted the findings in the Mueller Report.”
“[The] circumstances generally, and Barr’s lack of candor specifically, call into question Barr’s credibility and in turn, the Department’s representation that ‘all of the information redacted from the version of the [Mueller] Report released by [Barr]’ is protected..."
"...the Court must conclude that the actions of Attorney General Barr and his representations about the Mueller Report preclude the Court’s acceptance of the validity of the Department’s redactions without its independent verification.”
