Dianne Feinsten slams Republican probe into Christopher Steele while stating emphatically that "nothing in the Steele dossier has been refuted."

Courtesy of the Washington Examiner:  

Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., slammed the criminal referral of Christopher Steele by Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., saying it has numerous “flaws” and “omits key facts.” 

In a five-page analysis released Friday, Feinstein says the criminal referral is “not based on any allegation” that Steele, the author of the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, lied to FBI investigators about former Trump aide Carter Page, or what was included in the dossier. 

“[N]either provide any evidence that any of the information in Steele’s dossier is wrong. Instead, the referral is limited to a single baseless allegation: that Steele lied about his contacts with the press,” the analysis says. 

This week Grassley made public more details from the Jan. 4 unclassified criminal referral of Steele. The referral asks the Department of Justice to investigate whether Steele lied to FBI investigators about his communications with the press.

Feinstein goes on to say this:  

Feinstein’s analysis concludes that the criminal referral “fails to make a case” that Steele actually lied o the FBI. 

“The criminal referral contains no new information. All the information in the criminal referral was already available to the FBI and the Department of Justice,” the analysis concludes. “In fact, the referral relies on publicly available information and information that was provided to Congress from DOJ and the FBI.” 

In a statement accompanying the analysis, Feinstein said the Grassley-Graham referral has goals that include “undermining the FBI and Special Counsel [Robert] Mueller’s investigation, attacking Christopher Steele and deflecting attention from collusion and obstruction of justice investigations. 

“Not a single revelation in the Steele dossier has been refuted. Unfortunately, the claims in the criminal referral rely on classified information, so it’s difficult to fully repudiate them here. However, as much as possible using unclassified information, the following points lay out the flaws in the criminal referral,” she said.

Here is a link to the analysis to which Feinstein is referring.

"Not a single revelation in the Steele dossier has been refuted."

I bet that every single time that is mentioned it just pisses Donald Trump off to no end.

It really appears that the Republicans are essentially in a blind panic right now.

These tactics are so transparent and obvious that you would think they would be embarrassed to be caught using them.

It kind of makes you wonder if the Russians do not have kompromat on the entire Republican party.

The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman announces that he will release transcripts of interviews with Donald Trump Jr. and others who attended that notorious Trump Tower meeting.

Courtesy of Politico:  

The Senate Judiciary Committee will soon release the transcript of its interview with Donald Trump Jr. as well as other witness testimony related to a controversial 2016 meeting at Trump Tower with a Kremlin-linked lawyer, Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said Thursday. 

Grassley's comments Thursday come the day after two Democrats on the committee publicly pressed for the release of the panel's closed-door interview transcripts to special counsel Robert Mueller. Even as partisan disputes roil the House's Russia investigation, Grassley's alignment with Democrats on releasing the transcripts signals that the Senate — for now, at least — remains in a more collaborative mode. 

The committee is finished with work related to the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, attended by President Donald Trump's eldest son and his son-in-law Jared Kushner as well as campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Grassley said. "So, now it’s time to start releasing the transcripts of all witness interviews we have done related to that meeting. Let’s get them out there for everyone to see." 

In addition to Trump Jr., who sat for an interview in September, the committee also has received written responses from Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer who said the Trump team pressed her for negative information about Hillary Clinton during the 2016 meeting.

Well this should prove to be some interesting reading, assuming of course all the juicy parts have not be redacted.

Apparently the committee has still not managed to get Jared Kushner locked down for an interview, which is too bad because somehow I think he would crack the minute somebody turned off the air conditioning.

Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirms that they will definitely still be interviewing Jared Kushner. Court date for Paul Manafort announced.

Courtesy of Newsweek: 

The Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed Friday that President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, will still be interviewed as part of the committee’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

“Kushner is still going to be interviewed,” Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, of Iowa, said at a town hall meeting in western Iowa. “We’re getting some more documents, and that’s not done.”

Grassley assured constituents Friday that the interview would happen just days after expressing hesitation that his committee could easily secure a voluntary interview with Kushner after his Democratic counterpart, Senator Dianne Feinstein, published a 312-page transcript detailing a private interview with the founder of Fusion GPS, the organization behind the so-called Trump dossier. Grassley said Friday that the committee is just waiting on documents that Kushner has delayed in handing over before conducting the interview. 

“We’re going to do that,” Grassley said as an Iowan rebuked him over the committee’s five-month delay in interviewing Kushner. “Right now, Senator Feinstein is wanting more documents, and we wait until we get the documents, go through the documents, then we have a basis for the interviews that we’re going to have.”

While we are on the topic it appears that Paul Manafort and his associate , Richard Gates, have a shiny new court date to look forward to.

Courtesy of Reuters:  

U.S. Special Counsel in the Russia probe Robert Mueller will request a trial date of May 14 for Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Manafort’s associate Richard Gates, Mueller said in a court filing in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Friday.

Just a reminder that while all of these distractions about Trump's racism and piggish behavior are dominating the news cycle that the wheels of justice are still slowly moving forward. 

I think we can stop pinning our hopes on the Senate Judiciary Committee to get to the truth about the Trump/Russian collusion.

Courtesy of Mother Jones: 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and ranking member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) have broken up over Russia. 

The committee’s once bipartisan investigation into whether President Donald Trump obstructed justice or his campaign colluded with Russia has hit a partisan wall, with Republicans and Democrats saying they will now conduct their own probes. “We made the decision to go and carry it out ourselves,” Feinstein told Mother Jones on Tuesday. “They can go ahead and do whatever it is they wanted to do.” A Grassley spokesman also said the chairman had decided to proceed with a Republican-only investigation. 

Judiciary’s Russia investigation is the latest congressional probe to stall out over GOP efforts to pursue matters Democrats see as gambits to distract or provide cover for the Trump administration. The partisan sparring within the committees looking into various aspects of the Russia scandal has caused concern among Democrats and other observers that Republicans will fail to complete rigorous probes but will still declare their investigations did not find significant collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. 

While I have virtually NO confidence in Congress's ability, or desire, to  get to the truth. I kind of thought that the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees might have a fair shot at it.

After all they were saying all the right things, and Senate does not seem nearly as partisan as the House.

However apparently that faith has been misplaced.

And now we see why having the Robert Mueller investigation working independently is so damn important.

If Trump finds away to sabotage that, then this whole thing will simply disappear forever and we will NEVER learn the truth.

Apparently the Senate Judiciary Committee is not really involved in the Russia investigation, instead they are focused on investigating the FBI.

Courtesy of the Daily Beast:  

The Senate Judiciary Committee has demanded documents on Russian meddling from the CIA, interviewed Donald Trump Jr. about his infamous Trump Tower meeting, and subpoenaed Paul Manafort, the president’s Kremlin-friendly former campaign chairman. 

In May, the committee held a subcommittee hearing called “Russian Interference in 2016 United States Election.” In June, Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley issued a pair of press releases about his “Russia Probe.” One of them, produced with fellow committee Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, asked for documents from the FBI, citing the committee’s “investigations into allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.” 

But the Judiciary Committee is not, in fact, running a Trump-Russia investigation—at least, not a full-fledged one. 

A staffer for Grassley, speaking on the condition of anonymity to give his candid assessment, told The Daily Beast that the committee is instead engaged in routine oversight of the Justice Department—though under extraordinary circumstances.

“The Judiciary Committee is not running a comprehensive Trump/Russia investigation,” the staffer added. “Intel matters are the purview of the Intelligence Committees. The Judiciary Committee is engaged in the DOJ oversight for which it’s responsible and related issues that intersect with the Russian meddling in our democratic system.” 

The staffer also said Grassley’s team is not trying to determine whether anyone broke the law. 

“The Judiciary Committee does not have a prosecutorial function and does not conduct criminal investigations,” the staffer said, adding that committee investigators will share any evidence of crimes they find with law enforcement.

While I am a little unclear as to why the Judiciary Committee wanted to talk to Junior, it may help to explain why they subpoenaed two FBI agents and wanted to know if the FBI warned Donald Trump that some of his staff had ties to Russia.

Chairman Grassley also seems a little overly concerned that the FBI is relying too much on the Steele Dossier.

Courtesy of Politico: 

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley on Friday asked the FBI to explain how foreign intelligence sharing has affected its use of an unverified dossier containing salacious allegations about President Donald Trump for its Russia investigation.

Noting that the dossier was passed on to the U.K. government according to lawyers representing author Christopher Steele, Grassley asked the FBI to clarify whether the document's contents could have been "surreptitiously funneled into U.S. intelligence streams through foreign intelligence sharing." 

Steele, a former British intelligence agent, initially compiled the dossier — replete with unproven details of alleged Russian efforts to compromise Trump — for the firm Fusion GPS. 

If the FBI had interpreted a foreign intelligence service's receipt of the Steele dossier as a de facto confirmation, "it would be alarming," Grassley wrote on Friday to FBI Director Christopher Wray. 

"Mr. Steele’s dossier allegations might appear to be 'confirmed' by foreign intelligence, rather than just an echo of the same 'research' that Fusion bought from Steele and that the FBI reportedly also attempted to buy from Steele."

So at this point one might ask themselves if Grassley and his committee were simply providing oversight to make sure that the FBI and Justice Department are doing their jobs effectively, or if the Iowa Republican is attempting to undermine the validity of any evidence connected to the Russian dossier?

I already have my opinion.

Simply put I do not trust any of these Republicans to REALLY work hard to get to a truth which might invalidate the election of their president, and worry that they are working instead to provide cover for Trump, or to slow down the process until the policies of the GOP agenda can be put firmly into place before he is removed from office.

Donald Trump is now at that point in the Russia investigations where it is time to discredit former FBI Director James Comey.

Team "outlined why Comey would make an unsuitable witness, calling him prone to exaggeration." Maybe Trump lawyers charge by unit of irony. https://t.co/DAjB0wdav9

— Preet Bharara (@PreetBharara) August 31, 2017

Courtesy of WSJ: 

Lawyers for Donald Trump have met several times with special counsel Robert Mueller in recent months and submitted memos arguing that the president didn’t obstruct justice by firing former FBI chief James Comey and calling into question Mr. Comey’s reliability as a potential witness, people familiar with the matter said. 

The legal arguments and meetings offer the first detailed look at the interplay between the wide-ranging investigation and the team that is representing the president since the special counsel was appointed by the Justice Department on May 17. 

One memo submitted to Mr. Mueller by the president’s legal team in June laid out the case that Mr. Trump has the inherent authority under the constitution to hire and fire as he sees fit and therefore didn’t obstruct justice when he fired Mr. Comey as director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in May, these people said. 

Another memo submitted the same month outlined why Mr. Comey would make an unsuitable witness, calling him prone to exaggeration, unreliable in congressional testimony and the source of leaks to the news media, these people said.

This was only the first salvo.But it was unlikely that Robert Mueller, who knows James Comey quite well, was going to buy into the idea that he is "prone to exaggeration."

So it was quickly followed by this, courtesy of CNN:

Former FBI Director James Comey drafted a statement exonerating former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for running her government emails through a private email server before completing the investigation, according to two Republican senators. 

 Comey prepared the draft exoneration for Clinton before conducting interviews with top Clinton aides who were offered immunity for their cooperation, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley and Sen. Lindsey Graham said Thursday in a joint statement, citing transcripts of interviews with former Comey aides obtained by the Senate judiciary committee. 

Comey would go on to announce in July 2016 that the FBI would not recommend charges against Clinton -- although he sharply chastised her decision to conduct State Department business through a private email server. 

"Conclusion first, fact-gathering second -- that's no way to run an investigation. The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy," Grassley and Graham wrote in a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray seeking more information -- including all drafts of Comey's final statement on Clinton's emails by September 13.

Senator Chuck Grassley? Now why does that name seem rife with irony? 

Just had ph call from Pres Trump + he assured me he's pro ethanol +I'm free 2 the ppl of Iowa he's standing by his campaign PROMISE

— ChuckGrassley (@ChuckGrassley) August 30, 2017

Oh yeah, that's right.

Just to prove all of this is being orchestrated by Trump he went ahead and all but signed his name to it.

Wow, looks like James Comey exonerated Hillary Clinton long before the investigation was over...and so much more. A rigged system!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 1, 2017

Oh yeah, he just heard about this. It's not like he is manipulating things behind the scenes or anything.

My personal feeling is that James Comey realized early on that nothing Hillary did was really illegal and so being the paperwork geek that he is he simply prepared that draft ahead of time.

However let's also remember that it was only a draft, which means it was not the final document, and the final document, along with that last minute reopening of the case based on "evidence" in Weiner's laptop, REALLY fucked up Hillary's chances of winning the election.

This is also a ridiculous toothless attack on Comey's character, which means that Trump is flat terrified of what he will say to Mueller.

So damn, I can hardly wait to hear it.

P.S. According to the New York Times Mueller has a letter written by Donald Trump concerning his reasons for firing James Comey, that his lawyers stopped him from sending. So before Trump attempts to discredit Comey with an early draft of his letter, he might take a moment to worry about what HIS letter reveals.

Donald Trump realizes that we can see him openly trying to influence these Russia investigations right?

Just had ph call from Pres Trump + he assured me he's pro ethanol +I'm free 2 the ppl of Iowa he's standing by his campaign PROMISE

— ChuckGrassley (@ChuckGrassley) August 30, 2017

(I think that "the" was supposed to be a "tell.")

Tlkd 2 @realDonaldTrump about ethanol +he knows that ethanol is good good good

— ChuckGrassley (@ChuckGrassley) August 30, 2017

(Actually Ethanol's days are numbered, as we are rapidly moving toward electric automobiles all around the world.)

Courtesy of WaPo:  

President Trump called the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee to talk about one of his most important parochial issues — ethanol — shortly before the committee is slated to interview his son in its ongoing Russia probe. 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley’s panel will be hosting Trump’s son next month for an interview behind closed doors in its ongoing Russia probe — something the committee has been trying to do since it was revealed that Donald Trump, Jr. accepted a meeting in Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer claiming Kremlin connections during the campaign. 

Headlines about that committee meeting, which Grassley (R-Iowa) has been trying to set up for weeks, gripped headlines and cable news chyrons on Tuesday night. On Wednesday morning, Grassley announced via Twitter that the president had called him to discuss not Russia, but ethanol, proudly announcing that “he assured me he’s pro ethanol” and that Grassley was free to tell the people of Iowa “he’s standing by his campaign PROMISE.”

Wait, so just days after it was announced that Eric "The Dumb One" Trump was going to be testifying before the Senate  Judiciary Committee, which Grassley chairs, Donald Trump suddenly makes these calls in support of Grassley's favorite bio-fuel?

What a coinky dink.

Please, does this orange tinted asshole think we are all as stupid as his supporters?

Obviously that is a rhetorical question.

Methinks we better keep an eye on ole Chuck "I Love Ethanol" Grassley.

Is Senator Chuck Grassley urging conservative FBI agents to break the law by leaking information about the Clinton email probe? Quite possibly.

Hey I'm not telling anyone to break the law, just saying how awesome it would be if somebody broke the law.

Courtesy of The Des Moines Register:  

U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley suggested on Friday that the FBI might leak reports of its investigation into presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of state. 

Grassley, Iowa’s senior senator and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said an anonymous and unauthorized release of FBI investigative materials could result if officials at the agency believed prosecution of Clinton was stymied for political reasons. 

“Is there going to be political interference? If there’s enough evidence to prosecute, will there be political interference?” Grassley wondered aloud during a breakfast meeting with the Des Moines A.M. Rotary club on Friday. “And if there’s political interference, then I assume that somebody in the FBI is going to leak these reports and it’s either going to have an effect politically or it’s going to lead to prosecution if there’s enough evidence.”

When asked later if he was encouraging somebody to leak this information Grassley back pedaled: 

“I wouldn’t be encouraging it because if it’s a violation of law, I can’t be encouraging a violation of law,” he said. “This is kind of my own opinion, this is something I’ve heard.”

Nice try Grassley. It's something he hears alright, something he heard right after he said it.

The President has already assured the country that there will be no interference, and that the Justice Department is determined investigate this case like they would any other.

So for Grassley to suggest that the fix is in and then to further suggest that a Federal agent should break the law and put their job at risk for purely political reasons is incredibly irresponsible.

I would suggest that this is a sign of desperation on the part of Republicans who are becoming convinced that this latest attempt to destroy Hillary Clinton's campaign will fail like all of the ones that came before it.