Andrew Kent was quoted in the Washington Post about the release of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Trump-Russia report.
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, President Trump appeared to signal openness to full release of the Mueller report. Some reporters are interpreting this to mean that Trump and his advisers are confident that it will be far less damaging than expected.
…Andrew Kent, a professor at Fordham University School of Law, tells me that the real test will reside in how the White House reacts to that effort. Trump, in consultation with his lawyers, could instruct the attorney general not to release to Congress portions of the report involving, say, Russian interference in the election, arguing that this would put classified information in jeopardy.
Or Trump’s lawyers could tell the attorney general not to release information that might shed further light on Trump’s efforts to obstruct the investigation — such as information on private conversations between Trump and top advisers — by asserting executive privilege, Kent says. (Trump’s lawyers had previously indicated that he waived executive privilege on some Mueller requests, but we have no idea whether that will hold.)
By contrast, Kent notes, if Trump really wants to “let it come out,” he could refrain from doing those things, and even facilitate the release if he chooses.
Kent notes that there are questions that can be posed to Trump and the White House to call his bluff: “Will you commit in advance that he will not assert executive privilege to block the release? Will you commit in advance to declassify information that’s contained in the Mueller report?”
Kent adds that reporters can take this further, and directly ask the attorney general and the Justice Department whether they will commit in advance to making this disclosure in response to congressional subpoenas without any involvement at all from the White House. “Because Trump is so personally implicated in this, that’s a totally fair question,” Kent says.