report, will those chairs and ranking members of the judiciary committees then tell the public what bill barr has told them? and what counts as mueller s principal conclusions anyway? how much detail is that? i mean, how much is the attorney general going to tell those two house members and two senators as soon as this weekend? we do not know. not yet. but then here s the last substantive part of the letter and i think it s probably the most important part of the letter while also being the most frustratingly vague. again, this is bill barr s letter, quote, separately i intend to consult with deputy attorney general rod rosenstein and special counsel robert mueller to determine what other information from the report can be released to congress and the public consistent with the law including the special counsel regulations and the department s long standing practices and policies. quote, i remain committed to as much transparency as possible and will keep you informed as to the statu
at law, regulation and the department s long standing practice. it involves information. the department s long standing practices and policies can be read anyway barr wanlts to do i. if it includes decisions of who the special counsel declined to prosecute, which i suspect it will. he can decline any information that is derogatory about individuals close to the president or the president himself. if you are a democrat in congress, you are asking for political reasons, but institutional reasons to see not just the report but the underlying information. the justice department said it is congress, not the justice department that is the arbitor. if it s tru, you have to give us information you have about the president s conduct to exercise
the long standing practices and policies. you can read there, will they give us information about people they don t prosecute. it is like in the hillary clinton case. i will keep you informed as to the status of my review. and he concludes and says i have so determinedly disclose this later to the public after delivering it to you. very nice, julie. this weekend do you think he will tell us the big conclusions this weekend? so they have been preparing for this. in hindsight everything is clearer. so rod rosenstein s replacement was set up a long time ago. he stayed put to help with this moment, his office has been
procedures, long standing practices of the milwaukee police department where they are given wide discretion in these cases and where there is no obligation whatsoever to try to deescalate once there s a threat. that their training allows them to shoot until the threat is stopped. and i think that the justice department ought to come in not only because the hamilton, we have seen this, i can go all the way back to earnest lacy and daniel bell, and we think there is something systemically wrong with the way our police operate and the training that they engage inful. let me ask you in terms of those past practices and systemically wrong practices