Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, he has served in the Justice Department for 27 years. He was one of the Investigators who was hired to investigate the Whitewater Case against Clinton. He was appointed by Bush.
Quote:
Just last week, Rosenstein was relatively unknown to the American public. And only the week before that had he been appointed to the position of deputy attorney general, a role that put him at the head of the investigation into alleged connections between the Trump administration and Russia. His confirmation late last month, although part of a contentious transition, came with wide bipartisan support. He has served under five presidents, and he was one of only three U.S. attorneys—out of 93 nationwide—asked to stay on when the White House switched hands from George W. Bush to Barack Obama. He is meek in appearance and mild in tone...In the mid-1990s Rosenstein was recruited to a team of prosecutors that handled the Whitewater Development Corporation investigation....When Trump came to the White House, he was the only remaining holdover from the Bush era.
The Bush administration nominated Rosenstein to the federal appeals court in Richmond in 2007, but his nomination was blocked by Maryland's two Democratic senators at the time, Barbara Mikulski and Benjamin Cardin, who argued they needed Rosenstein in Maryland, not Virginia.
"In the twilight of the Bush administration, we don't need an acting US attorney in Maryland," Mikulski said at the time.
When President Barack Obama entered office, Rosenstein was asked to stay on and served for all eight years of the president's term. The feat makes him the only Bush-appointed US attorney to serve all eight years under Obama.
His time under Bush, Obama and then Trump made him the longest-serving US attorney in the nation's history when he was confirmed to his current role under Sessions.
Everything about this Witch Hunt reeks of very bad intentions, to overthrow an elected President by all means necessary.
Then you have the media, weaponizing the SJW's.
This isn't going to turn out like the Democrats and the deepstate think.
I agree. Even if they are successful, they are going to face a huge backlash, the likes we have never seen in this country imo. Included in that backlash will be moderates from their own party.
I agree. Even if they are successful, they are going to face a huge backlash, the likes we have never seen in this country imo. Included in that backlash will be moderates from their own party.
You should try a new source for news. There is no Comey "malfeasance of office" offense.
There is no Lynch obstruction offense.
That's the point. I could have said he was walking a dog on the wrong side of the street or anything else.
There is no Trump collusion or obstruction.
The collusion is Comey and Lynch.
Quote:
There is a request to describe the email investigation as a "matter" to Congress, not an investigation. There is no direction or request to terminate the investigation. Comey didn't think there was, either. He just didn't think the request was that big of a deal.
Again, from Comey's testimony:
CORNYN: ... did on multiple occasions. And that heightened your concerns about the appearance of a conflict of interest with the Department of Justice, which caused you to make what you have described as an incredibly painful decision to basically take the matter up yourself, and — led to that July press conference. COMEY: Yes, sir. I can — after the — President Clinton — former President Clinton met on the plane with the attorney general, I considered whether I should call for the appointment of a special counsel, and had decided that that would be an unfair thing to do, because I knew there was no case there.
We had investigated very, very thoroughly. I know this is a subject of passionate disagreement, but I knew there was no case there. And calling for the appointment of special counsel would be brutally unfair because it would send the message, aha (ph), there’s something here.
That was my judgment. Again, lots of people have different views of it. But that’s how I thought about it.
. . . . LANKFORD: And then you made a comment earlier about the attorney general — previous attorney general — asking you about the investigation on the Clinton e-mails, saying that you’d been asked not to call it an “investigation” anymore, but to call it a “matter.”
And you had said that confused you. Can you give us additional details on that? COMEY: Well, it concerned me, because we were at the point where we had refused to confirm the existence, as we typically do, of an investigation, for months, and it was getting to a place where that looked silly, because the campaigns were talking about interacting with the FBI in the course of our work.
The — the Clinton campaign, at the time, was using all kind of euphemisms — security review, matters, things like that, for what was going on. We were getting to a place where the attorney general and I were both going to have to testify and talk publicly about. And I wanted to know, was she going to authorize us to confirm we had an investigation?
And she said, yes, but don’t call it that, call it a matter. And I said, why would I do that? And she said, just call it a matter.
And, again, you look back in hindsight, you think should I have resisted harder? I just said, all right, it isn’t worth — this isn’t a hill worth dying on and so I just said, OK, the press is going to completely ignore it. And that’s what happened.
When I said, we have opened a matter, they all reported the FBI has an investigation open. And so that concerned me because that language tracked the way the campaign was talking about FBI’s work and that’s concerning. LANKFORD: It gave the impression that the campaign was somehow using the same language as the FBI, because you were handed the campaign language and told to be able (ph) to use the campaign language...
(CROSSTALK) COMEY: Yeah — and — and again, I don’t know whether it was intentional or not, but it gave the impression that the attorney general was looking to align the way we talked about our work with the way a political campaign was describing the same activity, which was inaccurate.
We had a criminal investigation open with — as I said before, the Federal Bureau of Investigation. We had an investigation open at the time, and so that gave me a queasy feeling.
Comey isn't creditable. His testimony is vindictive and self-serving. Butt hurt former employee.
Why liberals can't win with the SC Mueller investigation. Gregg Jarrett makes the case.
Lets try something new and stick to the issues and leave out the personal attacks on those involved. ( Its not a requirement, only a request, I'm not expecting it to work but worth a try ).
This spells a conflict of interest. Trumps is not the problem it is the Fascist Left driving these false narrative even after Comey said no collusion and no Obstruction of Justice.
No Russian connection by most of the Obama Hold overs. Many times over!
It seems clear that all this disparagement of mueller is simply being done in order to cast doubt among the trumpissts about the validity of any findings of the investigation. That is trump's goal - not to fire him, but to make as much division as possible over the investigation.
I spent this week socializing with a lot of Democratic friends.
Other than a few, they were mostly appalled at what is going on and they were calling the investigations witchhunts.
I was quite surprised.
I think you must be quite ill informed about how many moderate Dems there are out there that don't approve of the Democratic effort to bring a president down no matter the cost to the country.
I spent this week socializing with a lot of Democratic friends.
Other than a few, they were mostly appalled at what is going on and they were calling the investigations witchhunts.
I was quite surprised.
I think you must be quite ill informed about how many moderate Dems there are out there that don't approve of the Democratic effort to bring a president down no matter the cost to the country.
The only ones who can bring a President down, or who would want to are the Republicans at this point in time.
The Democrats certainly prefer Trump to the alternatives. So when you get through all the smoke you have Republicans investigating Republicans...but trying to blame it on the Democrats.
The only sin for the Democrats is enjoying the Republican discomfort too much. You still have to pay attention and keep the pressure on. Maximize the damage Trump does to the Republican cause...and that the Republicans do to themselves.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
