What to watch for as Barr releases more on the Mueller report



By Ellen Nakashima ,
Carol D. Leonnig and
Rosalind S. Helderman
Members of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s team have told associates they are frustrated with the limited information Attorney General William P. Barr has provided about their nearly two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether President Trump sought to obstruct justice, according to people familiar with the matter.
The displeasure among some who worked on the closely held inquiry has quietly begun to surface in the days since Barr released a four-page letter to Congress on March 24 describing what he said were the principal conclusions of Mueller’s still-confidential, 400-page report.
In his letter, Barr said that the special counsel did not establish a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. And he said that Mueller did not reach a conclusion “one way or the other” as to whether Trump’s conduct in office constituted obstruction of justice.
Absent that, Barr told lawmakers that he concluded the evidence was not sufficient to prove that the president obstructed justice.
But members of Mueller’s team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant.
“It was much more acute than Barr suggested,” said one person, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity.
Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III led a team of 19 prosecutors and roughly 40 FBI agents and analysts. (Cliff Owen/AP)
The New York Times first reported that some special counsel investigators feel that Barr did not adequately portray their findings.
[Attorney General Barr’s letter on the Mueller report’s principal conclusions]
Some members of the office were particularly disappointed that Barr did not release summary information the special counsel team had prepared, according to two people familiar with their reactions.
“There was immediate displeasure from the team when they saw how the attorney general had characterized their work instead,” according to one U.S. official briefed on the matter.
Summaries were prepared for different sections of the report, with a view that they could made public, the official said. . . .

Some on Mueller’s Team Say Report Was More Damaging Than Barr Revealed


Image
Attorney General William P. Barr has shown hints of frustration with how the rollout of the special counsel’s chief findings has unfolded.CreditCreditSarah Silbiger/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos, Michael S. Schmidt and Mark Mazzetti
WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations. At stake in the dispute — the first evidence of tension between Mr. Barr and the special counsel’s office — is who shapes the public’s initial understanding of one of the most consequential government investigations in American history. Some members of Mr. Mueller’s team are concerned that, because Mr. Barr created the first narrative of the special counsel’s findings, Americans’ views will have hardened before the investigation’s conclusions become public. Mr. Barr has said he will move quickly to release the nearly 400-page report but needs time to scrub out confidential information. The special counsel’s investigators had already written multiple summaries of the report, and some team members believe that Mr. Barr should have included more of their material in the four-page letter he wrote on March 24 laying out their main conclusions, according to government officials familiar with the investigation. Mr. Barr only briefly cited the special counsel’s work in his letter. . . .  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/william-barr-mueller-report.html 
Copyright 2019 Martin P. All World Rights Expressly Reserved (no claim to The Washington Post or The New York Times content)