BREAKING: Nadler Holds Off Criminal Contempt Charge Against Barr After Agreement Reached With DOJ

WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 09: House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) attends a news conference on April 9, 2019 in Washington, DC. House Democrats unveiled new letters to the Attorney General, HHS Secretary, and the White House demanding the production of documents related to Americans health care in the Texas v. United States lawsuit. (Photo by Zach Gibson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON—House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler announced Monday afternoon that the Justice Department reached an agreement with his Committee over getting key evidence in the Mueller Report related to “possible obstruction of justice by President Trump.”

A criminal contempt vote was originally scheduled for Tuesday against Attorney General Bill Barr, but following the agreement.  According to the Chairman, all members of the Judiciary Committee, both Democrats and Republicans will be able to view the evidence and, as of now, a criminal contempt charge against Barr will be held off.

The criminal contempt vote was originally scheduled for Tuesday.

“I am pleased to announce that the Department of Justice has agreed to begin complying with our committee’s subpoena by opening Robert Mueller’s most important files to us, providing us with key evidence that the Special Counsel used to assess whether the President and others obstructed justice or were engaged in other misconduct.  The Department will share the first of these documents with us later today,” Nadler said in a statement.

“Given our conversations with the Department, I will hold the criminal contempt process in abeyance for now.  We have agreed to allow the Department time to demonstrate compliance with this agreement.  If the Department proceeds in good faith and we are able to obtain everything that we need, then there will be no need to take further steps,” Nadler said.

However, Nadler warned that if key information is held back, then “we will have no choice but to enforce our subpoena in court and consider other remedies.”