Just a Thought!
First we should note the Democrats are unlikely to be appeased by the release of the Mueller Report if it is heavily redacted, particularly since there is a clear danger that critics of Trump will continue to suspect that both the summary and the act of redaction may not produce a fair representation of the report.
There are two factors that the White House and the GOP might reflect upon. The first for Trump supporters is that it is an awkward fact that with the Presidential election 2020 coming up , for a whole variety of reasons any resolution must take into account the current situation which has produced a majority of Democrats in the House coupled with a fairly set majority of those who currently are dissatisfied with the President’s performance in the White House. This means there is an urgent need to persuade the President’s opponents that at the very least justice must be seen to be done. Second we should remember both the summary report and the redacted report will both be authorized by William Barr, the man specifically chosen to represent the President’s interests on the Report. As has already been reported by the Guardian, when we are considering William Barr’s summary, it is already difficult to fail to notice that the man chosen by Barr to decide not to charge the President with Obstruction of Justice had already privately opined that the report was fatally flawed from the outset before the report had even been tabled.
To achieve a more acceptable and non partisan system of reporting I suggest:
1. Have Robert Mueller vet both the summary and the redacted report and present his opinion as to whether the summary and the redacted report are a fair presentation of the balance of what he intended to be appropriate for public consumption.
2. Have three Supreme court justices (including at least one appointed by a Democratic President appointed Justice) check Mueller’s reasoning about the fairness of the public release to decide which parts of the report are fair and reasonable to release in un-redacted form (allowing in particular for the need to hold back information which might endanger the security of the nation).
The alternative seems to be several years of bitter and poorly informed public dispute which risks further degrading the image of the Government.. OK DOJ, your call. Opinions from readers would be welcome.