The difference between Starr and Mueller report

[SHRED]

Isn't it that Ken Starr reported to Congress whereas Mueller submits his report to the Attorney General?
Isn't that the difference?

A flawed difference if you ask me.

[Nevilledog]

1. Here are the details of how the Special Counsel is to report

There are specific laws pertaining to Special Counsel reports.


A Justice Department Veteran Explains Why Trump Can’t Suppress the Mueller Report

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/mueller-report-public-777215/

Article has a link to a Twitter thread by Neal Katyal, one of the authors of the laws.

[SHRED]

2. Thanks!!

[Nevilledog]

6. YW

[seaglass]

3. Pretty sure I read the full Starr Report in the NYT when it came out. Mueller Report should

be given the same publication (although I would prefer the Washington Post).

[dawg day]

4. Starr's report was long and salacious and made public

In fact, it was sold as a paperback. (That was in the days before documents would just be put on the web.)

The scuzziness of Starr's report was one reason the special prosecutor powers were scaled back. Mueller is on a much tighter leash.

[zaj]

5. Starr Report was a narrative of all facts collected... Everything

It was created under a different (and now expired) law.

Mueller's report won't be a narrative of all the facts collected in the investigation, because by law and DOJ policy, it can only be a narrative of the crimes committed.

Everything that doesn't relate to an indictable crime, won't be reported out.

That's the legal and policy limits of his investigation because he wasn't appointed under the same laws as Ken Starr.

So even a full report by Mueller will fall far short of the Starr report and of explaining everything.