APTOPIX Trump Russia Probe

Special Counsel Robert Mueller walks past the White House after attending services at St. John's Episcopal Church, in Washington, Sunday, March 24, 2019. Mueller closed his long and contentious Russia investigation with no new charges, ending the probe that has cast a dark shadow over Donald Trump's presidency. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen)

There were four stories in The Advocate on the Robert Mueller/William Barr conclusions as to President Donald Trump's culpability and not a single mention, as Democrats clamor full-throat for “full disclosure now,” as to why full disclosure of two years of investigative paperwork cannot ever happen. Any Democrat with a scintilla of honest reflection and half a brain knows it. There are three reasons: executive privilege, grand jury testimony and national security concerns.

Let’s set executive privilege aside. You can argue that proposition ad infinitum and never reach a meeting of the minds as to what is permissible under executive privilege.

Grand jury testimony is supposed to be top secret. Yes, you can get a judicial ruling to OK grand jury testimony. But it will never be a blanket release of all grand jury testimony.

DOJ: Trump campaign did not coordinate with Russia in 2016, special counsel's report says

Next, national security. Only an exhaustive judicial review of grand jury testimony will determine what is not likely to impinge on a host of issues, principally national security.

As well, in the trove of information, there were 40 FBI agents spread out across the planet for two-plus years collecting information. This involved multiple foreign governments, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants and 500 witnesses that the AP did mention. The focus in the mainstream media has always been on the six in Trump’s orbit found guilty of this and that. But precious little on, mostly nothing on, the 13 Russian nationals, 12 Russian intelligence officers and three Russian companies indicted by Mueller — none of whom will ever spend a day in a U.S. court. You think there might be something in all the FBI material dealing with national security? You think?

Honest reporting demands national security and grand jury testimony be highlighted in information fed to the people by the Associated Press. But that would step all over — crush actually — the left’s foundational talking point that “full disclosure now” of the Mueller report is the only acceptable end point. Thousands of pages will have to be culled before arriving at what’s allowable.

Bet on it: There is going to be someone who wasn’t paying their nanny minimum wage or using a nanny without a green card who will have the six Democrat-controlled House committees now launching their investigations shrieking for indictments — something there to send the seething hate-Trump Democrats into apoplexy. But as for full disclosure now or ever to the American public or to congressional Democrats or those running for the 2020 presidency, ain’t gonna happen.

You would think the Associated Press would see the elements I've outlined as vitally newsworthy. But since they do not fit the mainstream media’s bad, bad Trump narrative, they get conveniently ignored.

Larry Michaud

retired journalist

Baton Rouge