Rep. Jerry Nadler, the head of the House Judiciary Committee, said it would constitute a "cover-up" whose lawyer William Barr failed to release the entire Special Council report along with the underlying evidence that led Robert Mueller to his conclusions.  According to the law, the Justice Department believes that a president cannot accuse the congress, the Congress should be able to see the Mueller report in order to fulfill its constitutional oversight task, the New York Democrat said on Sunday.
"If so, and they cannot hold him accountable, the only institution that can hold a president accountable is Congress, and congress therefore needs evidence and information," Nadler said at "Fox News Sunday. " 19659002]" And for (DOJ) to decide that we will not provide information because he is not accused as a normal person who is not accused of missing evidence, corresponds to a cover-up and undermines its only ability to hold the president accountable, "Nadler added. "And the president no more than anyone else can not be over the law."
Mueller turned to the report of his nearly two-year study of Russian interference in the 2016 election and any confusion of Trump or his campaign on Friday.
Barr has said he is planning to release as much of the report as possible to Congress as soon as the weekend – but he just has to send lawmakers a summary of Mueller's conclusions.
Nadler and other Democrats are also seeking the release of the underlying information that led Mueller to his results.
Nadler was asked for CNN's "Union of State" if he would accept Mueller's report at "face value."
"We are likely to see what Barr characterizes as the main conclusions of the Mueller report, and we accept them, but subject to seeing all of the underlying data," Nadler said. "We have to judge the American people to judge how they founded these conclusions or Barr's summary of the conclusions is."
"I suggest people judge and these judgments may be right or wrong" Nadler continued.
If the Ministry of Justice does not release the report, Nadler said he would consider using a summons to get it and would "absolutely" take the question to the Supreme Court altogether.
"We will try to negotiate. We will try everything else first. But if we have to, yes, we issue remuneration to get that information," he said.