Wednesday, February 7, 2018

Why firing Rod Rosenstein would be like firing Robert Mueller

Now the House Freedom Caucus is trying to "fire"Rosenstein: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Tuesday compared articles of impeachment drafted against him by members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus to an extortion attempt.
“There have been people who have been making threats privately and publicly against me for quite sometime and I think they should understand the Department of Justice is not going to be extorted,” he said speaking at The Newseum’s Law Day event. “We are going to do what is required by the rule of law and any kind of threats anybody makes are not going to affect the way we do our job.”
The House Freedom Caucus, which is chaired by Rep. Mark Meadows, North Carolina Republican, have drafted eight articles of impeachment against Mr. Rosenstein, multiple media outlets reported late Monday. Those drafts reportedly accuse Mr. Rosenstein of abusing his authority when he renewed a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on Trump campaign aide Carter Page ahead of the 2016 presidential campaign.
From the Washington Times, May 1, 2018

https://www.c-span.org/video/?444870-1/justice-department-extorted-articles-impeachment-rosenstein

 https://www.factcheck.org/2017/07/trumps-power-pardon/

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon

 http://www.newsweek.com/trump-leak-mueller-questions-experts-906857


 This post was written the last time rumors were Donald Trump was threatening to fire those investigating him, but it is a relevant now as rumors are rampant now, 4 11 18
Revised February 8, 2018

 Update: April 20, 2018: AG Sessions threatens to quite if Rosenstein is fired:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/384221-sessions-warned-white-house-he-could-quit-if-trump-fired-rosenstein

 Why do some in Congress equate firing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein with the same importance as  firing  Special Counsel Robert Mueller? We know the Deputy Attorney General has the power to fire Mueller and the President must go through him to do it, but whoever sits in the Deputy Attorney General's chair also  has the ability  to influence the outcome of the Mueller investigation even if Mueller is not fired. The Deputy AG has the power to limit the  scope of the investigation and to make  the  decision whether  to release the Mueller report in some form to the US public.  

 Rosenstein's tenure is in jeopardy. CNN quotes  President Trump as having said of Rosenstein, “Let's fire him, let's get rid of him,” but was talked out of it.  Soon after the Nunes memo came to the public's attention, it was seen by critics as an attempt to create a pretext for the President to fire him. Mr. Trump revived the possibility. When asked if he would fire Rosenstein,  Trump  answered "you figure it out".  In a letter to President Trump, Democratic Congressional leaders wrote "Firing Rod Rosenstein, DOJ Leadership, or Bob Mueller could result in a constitutional crisis of the kind not seen since the Saturday Night Massacre." They were referring to  similar actions Richard Nixon took in Watergate. Even Paul Ryan, House Majority  Leader, said : "Rod Rosenstein is doing a fine job."  
Donald Trump has his own self-interested reasons to want to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Assuming President Trump believes firing Special Counsel Robert Mueller would certainly trigger serious impeachment attempts, firing Rosenstein would be a tempting alternative. Rosenstein has already indicated he was not a Trump team player when his Department of Justice  objected to the release of the Nunes memo.The Nunes memo was also  viewed by many as an attempt to provide  Donald Trump with a public rationale  to fire Rosenstein  for alleged “deep state bias” and  for  FBI alleged  incompetence in a single  court filing to renew a FISA warrant for surveillance of Carter Page. The Nunes memo was also seen as an attempt to damage the credibility of the FBI so that their findings would be viewed as biased. Polls show that strategy is working with the GOP rank and file
Some senators have warned him firing Rosenstein also could backfire on him just as did the the firing of FBI Director James Comey. Comey was investigating President Trump's associates' with contacts with Russians. That firing resulted in the appointment of Mueller to investigate if the President or his associates were obstructing justice or they conspired with Russians to interfere in the 2016 elections, or even if financial crimes were committed, all possible impeachable offenses.

 Another possible temptation for Donald Trump to fire Rod Rosenstein would be to limit the scope of Mueller’s report. The Deputy AG has the power to put the report in a desk drawer if he does not see release of it would be in the public's interest, whatever that means. A new deputy AG could take money laundering off the table or out of the report, for example. Mr. Trump has made it clear that subject was a red line he thought Mueller should not cross.

The game could then become delay, delay, delay until after the November Congressional elections. Firing Rosenstein and replacing him with a Trump loyalist could a result in drawn out court challenges, congressional hearings, and a confirmation vote of the Senate, though it would not halt the investigation since it could continue under Rosenstein's deputy. Donald Trump could also contend his reason try to avoid testifying to the Mueller team or taking the 5th was that the FBI was too politically biased against him. That issue could also be tied up in the Courts past the November 2018 election.

Win or lose the court challenges, resulting delays could benefit the GOP and President Trump. The GOP fear is the 2018 midterms could flip control of the  House that  has impeachment powers to Democrats. The GOP now has the majority in the House and while they have control, it is realistic to believe they would not impeach their President. Delays would give Donald Trump an opportunity to keep up the morale of his base through November and keep Congress in GOP hands. It might work. In the midst of Watergate, Nixon was re-elected to a second term by a large majority. It was not until after that  election he was forced by the courts to release the tapes that his role in the Watergate cover up was revealed to the public and impeachment was begun.

There are two unforeseen circumstances that could change this scenario: the Mueller findings could be
so explosive even House Republicans could not ignore them and would proceed with impeachment or
that Mueller would indict the president and shortcut impeachment proceedings. Whether he has the power to do the latter is an unsettled legal matter and would depend upon a Supreme Court ruling..


____________________________________________________________________


 https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/12/republicans-quietly-warn-trump-dont-fire-mueller/

 https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2517

 https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/12/mueller-trump-deutsche-bank

 https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/26/politics/donald-trump-rod-rosenstein-frustration/index.html

 https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/02/democrats-trump-obstruction-386078

 http://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/372215-house-intel-gop-rep-memo-doesnt-give-trump-reason-to-fire

 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-gop-leaders-hold-weekly-press-conference-ahead-of-sotu-live-stream/

 https://www.factcheck.org/2018/02/qa-nunes-memo/

 http://www.businessinsider.com/mueller-threatened-to-subpoena-trump-over-negotiations-for-interview-2018-5

“What happens when the special counsel’s investigation is complete?

Rosenstein’s order notes that if Mueller deems it “necessary and appropriate,” he is “authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.” The federal code states that at the conclusion of a special counsel’s investigation, he must provide the acting attorney general with a confidential report explaining decisions about whether or not prosecutions are warranted. The acting attorney general could decide to make that report public. According to the code, the “Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions.”
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Saturday, February 3, 2018

Winners and losers in the Nunes memo fiasco

Revised Feb. 4 2018

A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News February 5-6 -7, 2018
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/winners-losers-of-the-nunes-memo/


 There  are several takes on winners and losers in the "Nunes memo “ fiasco. The  ‘memo” was put forth by  Rep. Devin Nunes , chair of the House Intelligence Committee, after cutting out or  squelching  objections by the US intelligence community, the Department of Justice, and the committee Democrat members. If the memo was a bombshell as the right wing claims, the shrapnel hit the wrong target, American national security  interests and  the credibility of the GOP House Intelligence Committee and its chair.


 The only winner was Putin per a press release from U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee who commented that the Russians succeeded in a goal  of “fueling political discord and dividing us from one another.” He continued: “The latest attacks on the FBI and Department of Justice serve no American interests – no party’s, no president’s, only Putin’s. The American people deserve to know all of the facts surrounding Russia’s ongoing efforts to subvert our democracy, which is why Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation must proceed unimpeded. Our nation’s elected officials, including the president, must stop looking at this investigation through the warped lens of politics and manufacturing partisan sideshows. If we continue to undermine our own rule of law, we are doing Putin’s job for him.”

For a right wing take, go to a print version from https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/3/winners-and-losers-from-the-house-memo-detailing-f/?utm_source=onesignal&utm_campaign=pushnotify&utm_medium=push  or listen to Fox News. For example, the Washington Times claims the winners were the American people who know now how the FISA courts work and how the FBI works with them.. By Nunes outing information based on  classified documents,  not only does the American public know a bit more about FISA warrants , so do Russian intelligence services, who were running bots promoting the release of the memo.



Who were other  losers?   Lost is the entire credibility of the GOP led House Intelligence Committee due to  their partisanship and refusal to let the minority party rebut before the "memo" was released.  Forget the committee's marching orders to come up with ways to prevent foreign powers to interfere in our elections or even to provide bi-partisan oversight of the intelligence community. They have destroyed their non-partisan credibility to carry out such functions.

Trump media,.the White House and the GOP were piously claiming this has nothing to do with the Special Counsel Muller’s investigation while celebrating it hurt the FBI. Don't kid yourself. This was all about impeachment. Donald Trump saw it. He was quick to tweet the memo vindicated him. The effect of the memo was to paint Deputy Attorney Rod Rosenstein as corrupt and incompetent as a pretext to fire him..  A new deputy AG loyal to Trump or caving into White House demands could  put pressure on Special Counsel Robert Mueller to resign and/or  hamstring  the investigation.


Another loser was Nunes. He was exposed as an intellectually dishonest partisan by making  his  whole memo case resting  on  the controversial  Steele dossier   as the only element  presented by the FBI as a reason of renewing a FISA warrant for surveillance of Carter Page. The Department of Justice warned him the memo omitted information in the filing. Nunes left out other evidence presented to the FISA court and the Department of Justice pointed that out when they objected to the memo's release. One premise advanced by Nunes was that the FBI failed to tell the FISA court the dossier was funded by political partisans. At least three major media investigative reporters tapping various source confirms that the filings did cite a partisan origin,of the Steele dossier, though it did not name the partisan sources.. 

 The  memo's last paragraph  shoots down a wider GOP argument , that the entire Russian "witch hunt" was based on the Steele dossier. The memo admits that the reason the FBI got involved in the investigation into Russian interference, was not Steele or Carter Page: it was the Australian ambassador's report of a conversation with  George Papadapoulis. Page’s Russian connections were on FBI radar  long before the Steele dossier came to light. Page is only one of many being investigated with contacts with the Russians.

Update Feb. 5:
While Donald Trump claims the Nunes memo vindicated him, Rep. Trey Gowdy who had access to the underlining classified FISA document, says the memo had no bearing on the Mueller probe, which will go on. However, it does have a bearing on the probe because it is an attempt to paint the FBI as incompetent and unfairly anti-trump, to damage the credibility of any findings of the Mueller probe and the FBI investigation as partisan motivated. That attempt failed. It failed because it also underlined the probe case does not depend on the Steele dossier and
the filing did tell the FISA court it originated from partisan interests, though it did not identify them specifically..No, Mr. President, the Nunes memo did not show a deep state FBI conspiracy against you.




Republicans Say Russia Probe Will Continue, Despite Controversial Memo
Republicans on the Sunday talk show said the release of a controversial memo critical of the FBI had nothing to do with the investigation of the Trump campaign's…
NPR.ORG








https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-tweets-memo-totally-vindicates-him-russia-inquiry-n844406


https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/03/politics/memo-dossier-christopher-steele-carter-page/index.html

 https://www.fox4now.com/news/national-politics/steele-dossier-s-political-motivation-disclosed-in-fisa-application-wapo-nyt-wsj-report















http://thehill.com/homenews/house/372054-gowdy-nunes-demo-does-not-discredit-mueller-probe-in-any-way





http://www.businessinsider.com/release-the-memo-campaign-russia-linked-twitter-accounts-2018-1

 https://www.factcheck.org/2018/02/qa-nunes-memo/

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Friday, February 2, 2018

Is Donald Trump considering taking the 5th?


“No person shall….. be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,..”  The 5th Amendment of the Constitution.
There is speculation on Morning Joe this morning that the game President Trump , Rep. Devin Nunes, and Speaker  Paul Ryan, are playing is to try to damage the FBI so badly, the President could even take the 5th if he is forced to be interviewed by the special prosecutor’s office.
Those who take the 5th only do so at their own peril since that is sometimes believed  by the public as an admission of  guilt. It is a risky move.  However, there are also other risky  moves: firing Special  Prosecutor  Robert  Mueller, for one, and even being interviewed by Mueller is another. By taking the 5th, Donald Trump might even be able to survive impeachment attempts if he can damage the FBI’s credibility enough.
With steps   recently  to  damage and discredit the FBI engineered by the White House, Trump’s  favored media, and loyal members of Congress, taking the 5th makes as much sense as a  strategy of  just  drumming up pretexts to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Mueller.    I can see how this could  play out.  At the point Donald Trump takes the 5th if he is issued a Grand Jury subpoena,or refuses to be “interviewed” by the Special Counsel Robert Mueller , Mueller could release his report to the public without Trump’s interview/testimony  with enough  credible details that the case will be in the hands of voters in time for the November midterms.  The court of public opinion would become  the jury and vote, throwing the House  into the hands of a Democratic majority..  Trump would then be counting on his core base who will stand by their man as his firewall against a Senate vote to convict.  The House of Representatives can impeach, similar to an indictment, the Senate holds the trial, and  if a vote of two thirds of the Senate convicts, the President is removed from office. While the  GOP is the majority in the House, an impeachment process is likely not to begin, regardless of the Special Counsel’s report..
One  of the strategy  friends of the  Trump administration  have employed  to  damage the FBI’s credibility as been  to gin up  a case of anti Trump text messages between Agent  Peter Strzok and his girlfriend, but Strzok was removed from the investigation last summer. Another strategy is to paint Deputy AG Rod  Rosenstein as "not on his team". The pitch is the Strzok case is evidence every other FBI agent is politically corrupted.  The Nunes memo has been in the process  for some weeks  as another try   to paint  Rosenstein and the FBI as being  so inept , they  relied  solely on the Steele Dossier  in renewing a FISA warrant.  That would the justification for  removing Rosenstein  because of competence  and the FBI would be given another black eye.
If the Trump strategy  has been  try to fire Rod Rosenstein,  the Deputy Attorney General  who has the  power to fire Mueller,  and replacing him with a loyalist,   he may be having second thoughts.   There are enough members of the GOP in the Senate who have let  it be  known that  firing Mueller would lead to impeachment and conviction. Firing Rosenstein would  raise serious alarm bells., The Trump administration and Ryan have piously, deceptively contended that Nunes’ memo has nothing to do with the Russian investigation. Even House Majority Leader Paul Ryan yesterday said he had confidence in Rosenstein and Mueller, while backing up the release of the Nunes memo.

The  current issue before the White House is  how or whether Donald Trump should be “interviewed” by  Special Counsel Robert Mueller, under oath,  or not under oath, or under subpoena before the Grand Jury.  His verbosity, his record of bald face lying,  and lack of understanding of  the difference between punching back and obstruction of justice  has his legal team worrying he will commit perjury.   Mueller’s representatives and the White House are negotiating now when and how he will speak to Mueller. That explains, too,  why   the Trump media hypes  the line that Trump’s legal team  fears  he will walk into a “perjury trap”.  A perjury trap is challengeable because that refers to a  defined disallowed technique interrogators could use to trick him to lie and experienced prosecutors will not go there. Mueller is if anything one of the most experienced prosecutors in the US.

The irony of this is that the FBI and Director James Comey violated FBI rules to announce Hillary Clinton was under investigation for possible criminal abuse of classified documents in her emails. He did it twice, once just ten days before the 2016 election. Her poll numbers dipped and many believe that led to  her defeat.  What has also come to light that whatever Peter Strzok’s feelings about Hillary Clinton, he drafted the memo used by Comey to make those fatal disclosures that resulted in Trump’s win.  If the FBI was so slanted toward the Democrats and they were full of agents also inclined, they certainly did not act like it in 2016. https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/politics/strzok-fbi-comey-clinton-letter/index.html

http://time.com/5127815/donald-trump-rod-rosenstein-team/


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,

Thursday, February 1, 2018

The Nunes memo is sheer BS..Carter Page's Russian connection was already public knowledge.

The Nunes memo centers on the Steele dossier being used as the sole
reason to seek a FISA warrant to investigate Carter Page. The FBI has
been on to Page from other sources per this Politico article, which puts
a lie to the Nunes premise that the FBI messed up on the FISA Warrant on Page because it relied only on the Steele dossier.  In fact, Page was on the radar of the FBI since 2013, well before the Trump campaign .https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/01/31/what-we-know-about-the-warrant-to-surveil-carter-page/?utm_term=.d76ed75a2fc6
Here is the background written in September 2016 by Politico and published a month before the FBI met with Steele. The FISA Warrant date was October 19, 2016.  and renewed 4 times.
The Mueller team did not meet with Steele until the summer of  2017.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Russia_dossier…
Why this is important is that Nunes is trying to destroy the reputation
of the FBI should the Mueller investigation comes up with negatives on Trump.
That Carter Page's connection with Russia was just discovered by this Steele dossier
is sheer BS and evidence of Nune's dishonest memo.The FBI was ontohim with good reason to go in for the FISA warrant. He was a known Russian connection for some years. A Russian spy ring tried to recruit him, per Buzzfeed: https://www.buzzfeed.com/alimwatkins/a-former-trump-adviser-met-with-a-russian-spy?utm_term=.pmAxX1B8z#.rqpB97gvl..In short, the FBI did not need to rely solely on the Steele dossier in order to present a reason to the FISA Court to get permission for surveillance. https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-trump-aide-carter-page-was-on-u-s-counterintelligence-radar-before-russia-dossier-1517486401Even after the election, Page had made numerous trips to Russia, information that probably went into the request to renew the FISA warrant.  That the FBI was incompetent in following Carter Page's Russian Connection is going to be a hard sell or that the FISA warrant was not "warranted" will be difficult to believe.




The Mystery of Trump’s Man in Moscow
Reports of deep Russian ties swirl around Trump adviser Carter Page. Oddly, nobody in Russia seems to have heard of him.
POLITICO.COM

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)