Utah Rep. Chris Stewart to see more of Mueller report than public, most members of Congress

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • direct_consent Logan, UT
    April 18, 2019 1:57 p.m.

    It's over with, get the massage. Congress need to address: the border Wall, new immigration laws, a reciprocal trade policy, healthcare policy, etc.. Do some real work for the American people!!!! Or (Trump in 2020 - vote out congress!!!)

    April 18, 2019 12:51 p.m.

    If Devin Nunes is such a great and patriotic American, why did Devin Nunes' Mom say so many devastating things about him on twitter?

  • Herbert Gravy Salinas, CA
    April 18, 2019 12:13 p.m.

    @Mad Hatter

    Devan Nunes did NOT try to "intervene" in the Mueller probe to protect President Trump.

    Representative Nunes is a great and patriotic American whose good name and reputation should not be impugned.

    Too bad we don't have more like him in Congress.

  • Herbert Gravy Salinas, CA
    April 18, 2019 12:07 p.m.

    Some Democrats now claiming that AG Barr should resign.

    If anyone should resign, it should start with Adam Schiff and Eric Swallwell (sp).

    Those two keep claiming that they have such damaging information re President Trump but they won't tell us what it is.

    What a joke.

    Don't think they could possibly have anything that rises to the "collusive" efforts of the Clinton campaign re that fake dossier.

  • rlsintx Saratoga Springs, UT
    April 18, 2019 11:43 a.m.

    This report is a perfect setup for Congress to go investigate and try to impeach on pretty arguable intent to commit obstruction.

    Everything they need to get going in depth is detailed. Mueller has it all laid out, the AG had his whack at spinning it and not Congress can pick it up and proceed. Mueller et al did a nice job of keeping things objective and stated with their reservations and bases.

    Savvy guy Mueller. History will treat him well for his team's work.

    (republican guy, didn't vote for Trump or Clinton).

  • rlsintx Saratoga Springs, UT
    April 18, 2019 11:29 a.m.

    The release today is the 1st course in what is going to be a many, many course mail. Time to be ready to pick up the next fork in when Congressional investigation gets plated up.

  • Herbert Gravy Salinas, CA
    April 18, 2019 11:27 a.m.

    Too bad our elected folks in Congress can't put forth just HALF the effort to protect our borders and national sovereignty as they do chasing "collusion" ghosts.

    When will they start doing what they were elected to do?

    I, for one, did not vote for "Sherlock Holmes".

  • Weston Jurney West Jordan, UT
    April 18, 2019 9:13 a.m.

    Where is Julian Assange when we really need him?!

    April 18, 2019 8:45 a.m.


    Why can't we believe "our Leader?" Because he's an established pathological liar. Why would you believe anything Donald Trump says? Even if you're a supporter who likes what he does, you have to recognize that he has never, nor will ever, but a trustworthy person.

  • WeThePeople Sandy, UT
    April 17, 2019 10:18 p.m.

    It's a shame that this report is still an issue. Why can't our nation believe our Leader, when he tells us the report exonerates him? I trust Trump!

    But if anyone is going to look into these unfair and unwholesome claims, I trust Rep. Stewart. He, like President Trump, is a true Conservative, and a righteous Man.

  • JaneB Wilsonville, OR
    April 17, 2019 9:59 p.m.

    NoNamesAccepted wrote: "Obviously, never-Trumpers have their minds made up and facts no longer matter. One can disagree with Trump's policies regardless of whether he committed crimes. But can you emotionally admit he is innocent?"

    Seems to be it's the Trumpers who have their minds made up. We haven't seen the report. We don't know everything. It's the facts we want. Fact do matter to us. We already know an awful lot of questionable things that went on with Trump and co. We already know Trump lied a lot about Russia. We know his people lied, too. Why did they lie if they weren't doing anything wrong?

    I think it's the Trump supporters who have a problem admitting anything about Trump, tbh.

  • Fullypresent Salt Lake City, UT
    April 17, 2019 9:41 p.m.

    Stewart needs to remember his loyalty needs to be to his country first before party or Trump. In the end this is the only loyalty which matters for the survival of our country and democracy.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    April 17, 2019 9:27 p.m.

    We have one interminable obfuscation from Trump and Stewart.

  • IcemanCometh SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 17, 2019 9:01 p.m.

    Stewart said he expects Democrats, who have been "vested in the this story and have been for a couple of years," to look to "exaggerate" part of the report to hurt Trump.

    Unlike the GOP who are "vested in the this story and have been for a couple of years," to look to "bury" all of the report.

  • Jim Chee Lahaina, HI
    April 17, 2019 8:58 p.m.

    NoNamesAccepted - St. George, UT
    April 17, 2019 8:20 p.m.

    "But let me ask a simple and crucial question. Is there any amount of information that will persuade you to concede that Trump did not collude with the Russians, did not obstruct justice?"

    There are two things to consider in response to your question. First, it has been discussed, and I acknowledge, that a sitting president cannot be indicted according to the DOJ. Although I may not like that decision placing a sitting president above the law, it factors into all that is being discussed here.

    The second is the requirement of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" which can be a problem in even the most high-profile murder case. However, there has always been the question of whether Republicans could get behind an impeachment investigation considering the popularity Donald Trump enjoys with Republican voters. Many don't want to face a primary because they choose to do something unpopular with the base.

    The collusion (conspiracy) charge always appeared very difficult to attain since much of what we saw with Russian interference appeared to be the Russian government working on behalf of Trump . . . [more]

    1 of 2

  • Jim Chee Lahaina, HI
    April 17, 2019 8:58 p.m.

    2 of 2


    . . . without a direct request by the Trump campaign. Although there have been multiple interviews and indictments/convictions for Russian contacts, the man most knowledgeable about collusion, Paul Manafort, chose to go to prison rather than testify. There was no credible evidence in various news reports to suggest that Trump or his campaign staff actually sat down with Russian officials and plan out a strategy to help get him elected. Perhaps the Russians did it all with the expectation of getting favorable treatment from a friendly client, and Trump wanted help but without acknowledging that help. We would need other corroborating evidence, maybe from Russian players and their communications with the Trump campaign. So I have my doubts, but I can accept the result, just as I did for O.J. Simpson.

    The obstruction case is more complex. I believe there was deliberate obstruction of justice beginning with the James Comey firing. But because Mueller refused to issue an indictment, I want to see the report. That's important. If Mueller said Trump committed obstruction, he would be compelled to indict him which he couldn't. So it's left to the voters in 2020.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    April 17, 2019 8:20 p.m.

    @Impartial7: "All members of Congress with sufficient security clearances should see the entire redacted report."

    Under law, grand jury testimony is sealed from all external review unless a judge releases it.

    Now, I've said for well over a year that if the Mueller report finds credible evidence of working with Russia to alter our election, then Trump must resign or be impeached. Ditto if there is credible evidence of Trump obstructing justice. It is clear to me that evidence simply doesn't exist.

    But let me ask a simple and crucial question. Is there any amount of information that will persuade you to concede that Trump did not collude with the Russians, did not obstruct justice?

    If judicial approval is obtained, and the unredacted report is given to cleared members of both parties, and they concede there isn't sufficient evidence for them to take any action against Trump, will you admit you have been wrong in this regard?

    If not, why bother to release any of it. Obviously, never-Trumpers have their minds made up and facts no longer matter.

    One can disagree with Trump's policies regardless of whether he committed crimes. But can you emotionally admit he is innocent?

  • Mad Hatter Santa Fe, NM
    April 17, 2019 7:41 p.m.

    Chris Stewart is only a member of the House Intelligence Committee and will be allowed to see much of the Mueller report as the article states. However, Adam Schiff and Devan Nunes, Chair and Ranking Member, have called that the entire report be given to them without redaction.

    This is an unusual move from Nunes since he was instrumental in getting highly secret FBI interview and FISA court records released to the intelligence committee when he was chairman and trying to intervene in the Mueller probe on behalf of Donald Trump. This activity by Nunes obviously set a precedent about secrecy within the DOJ that runs counter to what William Barr is trying to re-establish. Any judge called upon to consider what should and what should not be redacted in the reports will look at this precedent and possibly request that certain redactions violate the people's right to know.

    As we have seen over the past two years, Trump prefers to work in a world of secrecy. Everything he does is kept from the public unless it is favorable to him. Controlling the message helps to cover-up wrong doing and relieves him from responsibility. The "exoneration" that Trump claims may not be in the report.

  • Mackenzie Iwamoto Bronx, NY
    April 17, 2019 7:20 p.m.

    There is absolutely no reason any information should be withheld from any member of the House Intelligence Committee. These congressional members are privileged to see any information due to the nature of their work responsibilities. This includes anything dealing with national security and grand jury testimony if a judge rules to allow it. Although William Barr said he would not seek a judge's approval to release grand jury testimony, it had be customary for an AG to request this approval as a matter of course for specific House committees.

    Foot-dragging by the AG, after identifying four general areas for redaction, appears to be more to appease Donald Trump and his desire to hide anything that might implicate him in violating the public trust than simple operation under the law. However, it appears that the full report, unredacted, except for some very critical parts dealing with national security and methods and perhaps on-going investigations, will come out as lawsuits begin to be filed.

    As the public sees more of a potential cover-up, there will be pressure to follow Robert Mueller's original plan to release his team's findings with minimal redactions.

  • The Dark Knight Salt Lake City, UT
    April 17, 2019 6:36 p.m.

    I don't believe Rep. Stewart can be trusted to excercise honesty or good judgment in this matter. He seems to put hyperpartisan loyalty to the President above all else.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    April 17, 2019 6:28 p.m.

    As others have pointed out, there are portions of the full report that must not be made public lest intelligence sources be endangered, tactics be compromised, or innocent 3rd parties be unfairly smeared. Rep. Stewart has succinctly and clearly explained this.

    Sad thing is, far too many members of congress, far too many executive branch employees, have taken it as their mission to damage President Trump in any way possible and so justify violation of their legal obligation to hold certain information confidential. Whatever the whole congress gets, will be spun and leaked.

    The members of the intel committees have clearances and have been proven trustworthy. They--not their staff, but they alone--should see a nearly un-redacted report. As Stewart reminds us, even these officials are not entitled to see certain aspects of Grand Jury testimony.

    If there were evidence of collusion or other treasonous activity, Mueller would have already released that one way or other. If there were sufficient evidence of obstruction to consider indictment or impeachment, that would be public.

    We caught some tax cheats and some guys who lied about otherwise legal activites. Good.

    Move on.

  • Chessermesser West Valley City, UT
    April 17, 2019 6:20 p.m.

    I’m afraid no matter how much is given, there will be requests for more. It’s time to move on, Congress.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    April 17, 2019 6:01 p.m.

    All members of Congress with sufficient security clearances should see the entire redacted report. Anything less is a cover up. What is trump so afraid of?