The Justice Department addressed news reports that some members of special counsel Robert Mueller's team of investigators believe Attorney General William Barr failed to adequately summarize the findings of Mueller's 22-month investigation in the four-page letter Barr sent to Congress in March. Spokeswoman Kerri Kupec released a statement Thursday morning, saying the Justice Department was concerned about illegally releasing grand jury information, which is confidential. "Every page of the 'confidential report' provided to Attorney General Barr on March 22, 2019 was marked 'May Contain Material Protected Under Fed. R. Crim. P.6(e)' — a law that protects confidential grand jury information — and therefore could not be publicly released," she wrote. She went on to explain the reasoning of the department in releasing what it has so far: the March letter. "Given the extraordinary public interest in the matter, the Attorney General decided to release the report's bottom-line findings and his conclusions immediately — without attempting to summarize the report — with the understanding that the report itself would be released after the redaction process. As the Attorney General stated in his March 29th letter to Chairman Graham and Chairman Nadler, he does not believe the report should be released in 'serial or piecemeal fashion.' The Department continues to work with the special counsel on appropriate redactions to the report so that it can be released to Congress and the public." In his letter, Barr said Mueller had concluded that there was no collusion between President Trump and the Russian government during the 2016 election. He also said while Mueller did not arrive at a determination about whether the president obstructed justice, Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein determined that available evidence was insufficient to establish Mr. Trump had obstructed justice. Reports by The New York Times and The Washington Post released Wednesday evening said some of Mueller's investigators believed the results of the special counsel's investigation were more damaging to Mr. Trump than Barr's letter revealed. Some on Mueller's team fear public opinion about the report is being solidified because of Barr's letter, and the information the public has received is incomplete, according to the Times. Mr. Trump responded to reporting by the Times Thursday morning, shortly after Kupec released the statement. "The New York Times had no legitimate sources, which would be totally illegal, concerning the Mueller Report. In fact, they probably had no sources at all! They are a Fake News paper who have already been forced to apologize for their incorrect and very bad reporting on me!" Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter. The Times has not been forced to apologize for their reporting about Mr. Trump, contrary to this tweet. Barr has said he will release a redacted version of Mueller's report to Congress sometime in April, although Democrats have asked for the full report to be released. Barr is set to testify before the House and the Senate Intelligence Committees next week. "Just release the Mueller report...In the public domain there are comments that people on the Mueller team think there's a mischaracterization by the attorney general, I don't know, there is an easy answer to this: Release the Mueller report as soon as possible," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in her weekly press conference Thursday. In response to the Post and Times reports, Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, who is the ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that he plans to call on the Senate to pass a resolution on making the Mueller report available to the public and to Congress. FBI Director Christopher Wray told the House Appropriations Committee Thursday he has not read Mueller's report. The White House has also not received a preview copy of the report. Reporting by Paula Reid.<doc-sep>Ms. Kupec also said that the report and its release were subject to the regulations, which stipulate that Mr. Mueller prepare a confidential document of his findings intended only for the attorney general. She also said that sensitive information had to be blacked out first, noting that “every page of the ‘confidential report’” was marked with a warning that it may contain secret grand jury testimony. Mr. Barr and other law enforcement officials are also reviewing the document for classified material, information about continuing investigations and derogatory details about third parties not directly related to the inquiry. The attorney general has said he is aiming to send to lawmakers a redacted version of the report by mid-April. Under the regulations, he is free to release parts or all of it if he decides it is in the public interest. The special counsel’s report included summaries of the major findings, and some team members believed Mr. Barr should have included more of their material in his March 24 letter, according to the government officials. But the attorney general “does not believe the report should be released in a ‘serial or piecemeal fashion,’” Ms. Kupec said, citing a letter that Mr. Barr wrote to lawmakers on Friday. Justice Department officials have also said they determined that the summaries contained sensitive information that needed to be reviewed before they were released. Democrats have demanded full access to the report. The House Judiciary Committee voted on Wednesday to let its chairman, Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, use a subpoena to compel Mr. Barr to turn over a complete copy of the Mueller report and its underlying evidence.<doc-sep>Attorney General William Barr sought to reassure Congress and the public that the Mueller report will be released, promising in a new letter that “everyone will soon be able to read it on their own.” The letter also answers crucial questions about the process but highlights new battle lines in the escalating fight over who gets to see Mueller’s work. Barr’s letter comes as Democrats have become increasingly concerned that the attorney general wouldn’t make the full text of Mueller’s report available, after he released a brief, four-page summary of the findings less than one week ago. Barr’s March 29 missive expressly tries to alleviate some of those fears, but there is still wide latitude for large portions of the report to be hidden from Congress or the public. “I share your desire to ensure that Congress and the public have the opportunity to read the Special Counsel’s report,” Barr wrote in a letter addressed to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler. “Everyone will soon be able to read it on their own.” Read More: Robert Mueller’s Work Is Done. What Happens Next Is Up to William Barr Barr’s letter revealed new details about the process of releasing the report (including revealing its length: nearly 400 pages, not including tables and appendices), but while some of Democrats’ concerns may have been allayed, they’re already gearing up for a new phase of the fight. The attorney general listed the four types of information he is working on redacting from the report: grand jury material, information that could compromise sensitive intelligence sources or methods, details related to ongoing investigations and “information that would unduly infringe on the personal privacy and reputational interests of peripheral third parties.” Questions have lingered over what material to do with President Donald Trump that Barr might redact. The prevailing opinion in the Justice Department is that a sitting president can’t be indicted, and it’s typical department practice not to reveal information gathered about people who aren’t going to be charged. That could mean that Barr would scrub any information about Trump from the report. By citing “peripheral third parties,” Barr seems to imply that Trump won’t fall into that category. Still, depending on what Mueller’s report contains, it’s not clear how lengthy or significant the redacted sections will be. Congress is already pushing to see the full report with no redactions. “Congress requires the full and complete Mueller report, without redactions, as well as access to the underlying evidence, by April 2,” Nadler said in a statement released shortly after the letter, establishing the push for access to redacted materials as the new front in the war. “If the Department fails to make the Mueller report public in its entirety and turn over the underlying evidence to Congress, it may be actively facilitating a cover-up,” said a Democratic House staffer. Another key question about transparency has been whether the White House would get access to the report before Congress to make executive privilege claims. This, Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, a Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, tells TIME, is “where the ideological views of the Attorney General may have the greatest potential to threaten the transparency” of the report. Many Democrats worried that Barr’s strong views of executive power would make him deferential to broad assertions of privilege by the White House. But in this new letter, Barr says explicitly that he doesn’t plan to go down that road at all. “Although the President would have the right to assert privilege over certain parts of the report,” Barr wrote, “he has stated publicly that he intends to defer to me and, accordingly, there are no plans to submit the report to the White House for a privilege review.” Responding to that news, Trump said Friday, “I have great confidence in the Attorney General, if that’s what he’d like to do. I have nothing to hide.” That may be reassuring to Democrats, along with the fact that Barr could have sent another summary to Congress instead of the report itself. There was a change in regulations after independent counsel Ken Starr’s investigation into President Bill Clinton: When Starr submitted his final report in 1998, he had to send it to Congress as well as to the attorney general. But when the special counsel regulations were written the following year, the notification to Congress requirement was removed. That means that Barr has almost sole authority over what information to share with Congress and the public, and he does not have to provide the report to lawmakers. Democrats had begun to ramp up pressure on Barr to send them the report itself rather than another summary. “We don’t need you interpreting for us,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, referencing his March 24 letter. “It was condescending, it was arrogant, and it wasn’t the right thing to do.” In his new letter, Barr chastises those “mischaracterizing” his previous letter. “My March 24 letter was not, and did not purport to be, an exhaustive recounting of the Special Counsel’s investigation or report… I do not believe it would be in the public’s interest for me to attempt to summarize the full report or to release it in serial or piecemeal fashion,” he wrote. Barr says he anticipates being able to release a redacted version of Mueller’s full report by mid-April. Barr’s latest letter removes some of the crucial questions about points in the process where large chunks of Mueller’s report could have been scrubbed. If Barr plans to release the report itself—not a summary of it— and doesn’t plan to show it in the White House in advance, Congress and the American public should learn many new details about Mueller’s two-year-long investigation in a matter of weeks. And that won’t be the end of Barr’s input: he also said he would testify himself before both the House and Senate about the investigation. (Graham accepted his invitation to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 1.)<doc-sep>Mr. Barr shed some additional light on Mr. Mueller’s decision not to reach a prosecutorial decision about whether Mr. Trump criminally obstructed the investigation and his own decision to conclude in his letter to Congress delivering the investigation’s conclusions last month that the evidence did not meet that bar. Mr. Barr said he had spoken with Mr. Mueller about why he did not reach a decision on obstruction of justice, but declined to offer details of their conversations. The attorney general said that Mr. Mueller did not explicitly ask that Congress be allowed to judge the evidence and decide for itself, nor did he say that the attorney general should. “But that is generally how the Department of Justice works,” Mr. Barr said, saying that the department’s job is to make prosecutorial decisions — and he had. “I am looking forward to explaining my decision that I briefly outlined in the March 24 letter, but I don’t think I can do it until the report is out,” he said. The redacted Mueller report may be released “next week,” Barr says. On the timing of the redacted report’s release, Mr. Barr said Wednesday that he “hoped” to make it public “next week.” The answer differed slightly from what he told House lawmakers on Tuesday, that he intended to put out the report “within a week.” He said Justice Department lawyers and members of Mr. Mueller’s team, who are reviewing the report for sensitive information to black out before release, would not remove information that would harm the “reputational interests” of Mr. Trump. Mr. Barr also said that he had not overruled Mr. Mueller’s team on any proposed redactions from the Mueller report, and had not discussed with the White House what he was blacking out. Barr is willing to work with Congress on redacted information. Democrats in the House have slammed Mr. Barr for what they view as his refusal to share the investigation’s underlying evidence and material he may redact from the report. But Mr. Barr told senators on Wednesday he would be willing to re-evaluate that decision to try to accommodate lawmakers’ concerns.<doc-sep>
(CNN) — The Department of Justice on Thursday defended Attorney General William Barr’s summary of special counsel Robert Mueller’s confidential report after two newspapers said Mueller’s investigators felt Barr didn’t properly convey how damaging their findings were for President Donald Trump. A Justice Department spokeswoman said “every page” of Mueller’s nearly 400-page report provided to Barr on March 22 was flagged as potentially containing material covered under a law that protects confidential grand jury information and “therefore could not be publicly released.” “Given the extraordinary public interest in the matter, the Attorney General decided to release the report’s bottom-line findings and his conclusions immediately — without attempting to summarize the report — with the understanding that the report itself would be released after the redaction process,” Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said in a statement. Kupec said the department is continuing to work with the special counsel on “appropriate redactions to the report so that it can be released to Congress and the public.” The New York Times and Washington Post reported that some of Mueller’s investigators were frustrated about the limited information Barr included in his four-page summary submitted to Congress on March 24. Members of the special counsel’s team complained to associates that the evidence they compiled on whether Trump obstructed justice was “alarming and significant,” the Post reported. Both news outlets noted that Mueller’s team had prepared its own summaries of the report, expecting that they would be publicly released and were disappointed when they weren’t. In his letter to Congress, Barr said Mueller did not establish Trump’s campaign or associates conspired with Russia. Barr wrote Mueller did not have sufficient evidence to establish obstruction of justice, but Barr quoted Mueller as saying that the special counsel also did not exonerate the President. The letter notes Mueller found evidence on both sides of the obstruction issue, a strong signal that there is information that was not positive for the President. The Justice Department said late last week that it will release Mueller’s report to Congress and the public by “mid-April, if not sooner.” Barr said his department is “well along” making redactions, with the assistance of the special counsel, and “there are no plans to submit the report to the White House for a privilege review.” Congressional Democrats, however, have been pushing for the full Mueller report to be released without redactions, saying anything else is unacceptable. The House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday approved on party lines a subpoena to obtain the full, unredacted report. An administration official expressed some frustration with Democratic demands to see as much of the Mueller report as possible. The official complained that the report should not reveal information that is embarrassing about the President if he’s not being accused by the special counsel of committing any crimes. That official called that possibility “sh***y.” This story has been updated. CNN’s Kate Sullivan and Jim Acosta contributed to this report.