Courtesy of WaPo:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently told the White House he might have to leave his job if President Trump fired his deputy, Rod J. Rosenstein, who oversees the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to people familiar with the exchange.
Sessions made his position known in a phone call to White House counsel Donald McGahn last weekend, as Trump’s fury at Rosenstein peaked after the deputy attorney general approved the FBI’s raid April 9 on the president’s personal attorney Michael Cohen.
Sessions’s message to the White House, which has not previously been reported, underscores the political firestorm that Trump would invite should he attempt to remove the deputy attorney general. While Trump also has railed against Sessions at times, the protest resignation of an attorney general — which would be likely to incite other departures within the administration — would create a moment of profound crisis for the White House.
In the phone call with McGahn, Sessions wanted details of a meeting Trump and Rosenstein held at the White House on April 12, according to a person with knowledge of the call. Sessions expressed relief to learn that their meeting was largely cordial. Sessions said he would have had to consider leaving as the attorney general had Trump ousted Rosenstein, this person said.
Another person familiar with the exchange said Sessions did not intend to threaten the White House but rather wanted to convey the untenable position that Rosenstein’s firing would put him in.
Now this may seem as if Sessions is finally sticking his chest out to defy his president, but he might be doing exactly what Trump wants him to do.
Trump has already been warned about firing Sessions by his Republican supporters, who like and support the former Senator.
But if he fires Rosenstein, who his cohorts are already vilifying, and then Sessions quits of his own accord, that leaves Trump free and clear to appoint a new Attorney General who will not have to recuse himself from the Russia investigation and can hobble Robert Mueller with new guidelines and restrictions.
This would allow Trump to gain back a little control, enough that he might even successfully neuter Mueller and make it almost impossible for him to do his job effectively.
As much as it pains me to say, the best thing for this investigation is that Jeff Sessions stays right where he is.
Of course it would also be very helpful if he did not fire Rod Rosenstein but I feel the writing is already on the wall.
Morality is not determined by the church you attend nor the faith you embrace. It is determined by the quality of your character and the positive impact you have on those you meet along your journey
Showing posts with label Jeff Sessions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeff Sessions. Show all posts
Saturday, April 21, 2018
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
Per Trump's request Jeff Sessions speeds up investigation into Hilary Clinton's e-mails. Can you say "distraction?"
Courtesy of Newsweek:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has answered President Donald Trump’s demands for America’s top law enforcement agency to speed up the delivery to Congress of more than a million documents about an FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server.
The Department of Justice and the FBI asked Chicago prosecutor John Lausch to oversee the redaction and production of documents over the weekend. Many of these concern the FBI’s investigation of Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state.
This March, the House Judiciary Committee issued a subpoena for 1.2 million documents connected to the investigation and other matters—including potential abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act during the investigation of the Trump campaign and the firing of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. The committee’s chairman, Republican Representative Robert Goodlatte of Virginia, said last month that just a few thousand documents have been delivered following his original requests last year. The subpoena is part of a joint investigation with the House Oversight Committee.
Trump took to Twitter (of course) to bitch about how long this process was taking.
How many times have they investigated Hillary now?
And there is NEVER anything revealed which would constitute criminal or unethical behaviors.
My assumption is that either Donald Trump is too deep inside the Right Wing bubble to see how transparent all of this looks to most Americans, or he is so desperate for something he can use to distract attention that he just doesn't care anymore.
NONE of this is going to slow Robert Mueller down by the way, NOR convince the media not to report on the things he uncovers during that investigation.
Trump is pissing into the wind here, and it is splashing back all over him.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has answered President Donald Trump’s demands for America’s top law enforcement agency to speed up the delivery to Congress of more than a million documents about an FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server.
The Department of Justice and the FBI asked Chicago prosecutor John Lausch to oversee the redaction and production of documents over the weekend. Many of these concern the FBI’s investigation of Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state.
This March, the House Judiciary Committee issued a subpoena for 1.2 million documents connected to the investigation and other matters—including potential abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act during the investigation of the Trump campaign and the firing of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. The committee’s chairman, Republican Representative Robert Goodlatte of Virginia, said last month that just a few thousand documents have been delivered following his original requests last year. The subpoena is part of a joint investigation with the House Oversight Committee.
Trump took to Twitter (of course) to bitch about how long this process was taking.
Hey as far as I am concerned fucking go for it!What does the Department of Justice and FBI have to hide? Why aren’t they giving the strongly requested documents (unredacted) to the HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE? Stalling, but for what reason? Not looking good!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 7, 2018
How many times have they investigated Hillary now?
And there is NEVER anything revealed which would constitute criminal or unethical behaviors.
My assumption is that either Donald Trump is too deep inside the Right Wing bubble to see how transparent all of this looks to most Americans, or he is so desperate for something he can use to distract attention that he just doesn't care anymore.
NONE of this is going to slow Robert Mueller down by the way, NOR convince the media not to report on the things he uncovers during that investigation.
Trump is pissing into the wind here, and it is splashing back all over him.
Labels:
Congress,
Donald Trump,
emails,
FBI,
Hillary Clinton,
Jeff Sessions,
Justice Department,
Newsweek,
Republicans,
Twitter
Thursday, March 29, 2018
New indications emerge that Donald Trump is preparing to have Robert Mueller fired.
Courtesy of Politico:
When President Donald Trump lashed out against Robert Mueller by name earlier this month, the president’s supporters sprang into action — treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style opposition research.
Within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel leading the Justice Department’s Russia probe, for the FBI’s clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the bureau. The independent pro-Trump journalist Sara Carter posted a story charging that Mueller, as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s, had covered up the FBI’s dealings with the Mafia informant Whitey Bulger. Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
Meanwhile, Trump supporters on Twitter circulated video of testimony Mueller gave to Congress ahead of the 2003 Iraq War in which he endorsed the view, later proved false, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets, a concerted effort to tarnish Mueller’s reputation as part of a political strategy to undermine, or even eventually fire, the Russia investigator.
“It looks like the beginnings of a campaign,” a source familiar with Trump’s legal strategy said. “It looks like they are trying to seed the ground. Ultimately, if the president determines he wants to fire Mueller, he’s going to want to make sure there’s ample public record that he can fall back on.”
There is no longer any question as to whether or not Trump will try to fire Robert Mueller, but rather WHEN he will try to fire Robert Mueller.
I actually think that these most recent firings are all designed to provide cover for Trump to fire Rod Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions, in the hopes that the media will not immediately realize that it was his goal all along.
If Trump is "shaking up" his cabinet then he can say that Sessions and Rosenstein were just part of his reshuffling, but in fact we all know that the real reason to remove them is so that he can take Mueller out.
When President Donald Trump lashed out against Robert Mueller by name earlier this month, the president’s supporters sprang into action — treating the chief Russia investigator to political campaign-style opposition research.
Within hours, the Drudge Report featured a story blaming Mueller, the special counsel leading the Justice Department’s Russia probe, for the FBI’s clumsy investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks when Mueller ran the bureau. The independent pro-Trump journalist Sara Carter posted a story charging that Mueller, as a federal prosecutor in Boston in the mid-1980s, had covered up the FBI’s dealings with the Mafia informant Whitey Bulger. Carter was soon discussing her findings in prime time with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
Meanwhile, Trump supporters on Twitter circulated video of testimony Mueller gave to Congress ahead of the 2003 Iraq War in which he endorsed the view, later proved false, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.
To some, the barrage looked coordinated among pro-Trump allies and media outlets, a concerted effort to tarnish Mueller’s reputation as part of a political strategy to undermine, or even eventually fire, the Russia investigator.
“It looks like the beginnings of a campaign,” a source familiar with Trump’s legal strategy said. “It looks like they are trying to seed the ground. Ultimately, if the president determines he wants to fire Mueller, he’s going to want to make sure there’s ample public record that he can fall back on.”
There is no longer any question as to whether or not Trump will try to fire Robert Mueller, but rather WHEN he will try to fire Robert Mueller.
I actually think that these most recent firings are all designed to provide cover for Trump to fire Rod Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions, in the hopes that the media will not immediately realize that it was his goal all along.
If Trump is "shaking up" his cabinet then he can say that Sessions and Rosenstein were just part of his reshuffling, but in fact we all know that the real reason to remove them is so that he can take Mueller out.
Saturday, March 17, 2018
Andrew McCabe's statement after being fired by Jeff Sessions.
I have been an FBI Special Agent for over 21 years. I spent half of that time investigating Russian Organized Crime as a street agent and Supervisor in New York City. I have spent the second half of my career focusing on national security issues and protecting this country from terrorism. I served in some of the most challenging, demanding investigative and leadership roles in the FBI. And I was privileged to serve as Deputy Director during a particularly tough time.
For the last year and a half, my family and I have been the targets of an unrelenting assault on our reputation and my service to this country. Articles too numerous to count have leveled every sort of false, defamatory and degrading allegation against us. The President's tweets have amplified and exacerbated it all. He called for my firing. He called for me to be stripped of my pension after more than 20 years of service. And all along we have said nothing, never wanting to distract from the mission of the FBI by addressing the lies told and repeated about us.
No more.
The investigation by the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General (OIG) has to be understood in the context of the attacks on my credibility. The investigation flows from my attempt to explain the FBI's involvement and my supervision of investigations involving Hillary Clinton. I was being portrayed in the media over and over as a political partisan, accused of closing down investigations under political pressure. The FBI was portrayed as caving under that pressure, and making decisions for political rather than law enforcement purposes. Nothing was further from the truth. In fact, this entire investigation stems from my efforts, fully authorized under FBI rules, to set the record straight on behalf of the Bureau, and to make clear that we were continuing an investigation that people in DOJ opposed.
The OIG investigation has focused on information I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor. As Deputy Director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the Director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter. It was the type of exchange with the media that the Deputy Director oversees several times per week. In fact, it was the same type of work that I continued to do under Director Wray, at his request. The investigation subsequently focused on who I talked to, when I talked to them, and so forth. During these inquiries, I answered questions truthfully and as accurately as I could amidst the chaos that surrounded me. And when I thought my answers were misunderstood, I contacted investigators to correct them.
But looking at that in isolation completely misses the big picture. The big picture is a tale of what can happen when law enforcement is politicized, public servants are attacked, and people who are supposed to cherish and protect our institutions become instruments for damaging those institutions and people.
Here is the reality: I am being singled out and treated this way because of the role I played, the actions I took, and the events I witnessed in the aftermath of the firing of James Comey. The release of this report was accelerated only after my testimony to the House Intelligence Committee revealed that I would corroborate former Director Comey's accounts of his discussions with the President. The OIG's focus on me and this report became a part of an unprecedented effort by the Administration, driven by the President himself, to remove me from my position, destroy my reputation, and possibly strip me of a pension that I worked 21 years to earn. The accelerated release of the report, and the punitive actions taken in response, make sense only when viewed through this lens. Thursday's comments from the White House are just the latest example of this.
This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally. It is part of this Administration's ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel's work.
I have always prided myself on serving my country with distinction and integrity, and I always encouraged those around me to do the same. Just ask them. To have my career end in this way, and to be accused of lacking candor when at worst I was distracted in the midst of chaotic events, is incredibly disappointing and unfair. But it will not erase the important work I was privileged to be a part of, the results of which will in the end be revealed for the country to see.
I have unfailing faith in the men and women of the FBI and I am confident that their efforts to seek justice will not be deterred.
Even if McCabe deserved to be let go, which from this statement does not seem at all clear, the fact that they did it just two days before he was eligible for his pension, is simply indefensible.
There are many who are suggesting that Trump had Sessions do this in order to damage his reputation and make it easier to fire him, thus allowing him to appoint an Attorney General who could oversee or fire Robert Mueller.
If that turns out to be the case it will identify Jeff Sessions as the biggest schmuck in Justice Department history.
As it is Trump has really crossed a red line of his own, and influential people are now coming forward to say the things we all have been saying for over a year now.
Such as this from former CIA chief John Brennan.
And this from a retired four star general.When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America...America will triumph over you. https://t.co/uKppoDbduj— John O. Brennan (@JohnBrennan) March 17, 2018
Donald Trump might believe he is keeping the true motivations for his actions secret, but obviously that is not the case.Reluctantly I have concluded that President Trump is a serious threat to US national security. He is refusing to protect vital US interests from active Russian attacks. It is apparent that he is for some unknown reason under the sway of Mr Putin.— Barry R McCaffrey (@mccaffreyr3) March 16, 2018
Labels:
Andrew McCabe,
CNN,
Donald Trump,
FBI,
fired,
Jeff Sessions,
Robert Mueller,
Twitter
Friday, March 16, 2018
Former FBI Director Andrew McCabe fired just days before he was to retire with his pension intact. Update!
Courtesy of thew New York Times:
Andrew G. McCabe, the former F.B.I. deputy director and a frequent target of President Trump’s scorn, was fired Friday after the Attorney General Jeff Sessions rejected an appeal that would have let him retire this weekend.
Mr. McCabe promptly declared that his firing, and Mr. Trump’s persistent needling, were intended to undermine the special counsel’s investigation in which he is a potential witness.
Mr. McCabe is accused in a yet-to-be-released internal report of failing to be forthcoming about a conversation he authorized between F.B.I. officials and a journalist.
In a statement released late Friday, Mr. Sessions said that Mr. McCabe had shown a lack of candor under oath on multiple occasions.
“The F.B.I. expects every employee to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity and accountability,” he said. “I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately.”
McCabe however disputes that explanation:
“The idea that I was dishonest is just wrong,” he said, adding, “This is part of an effort to discredit me as a witness.”
It should be pointed out that a Fox News draft of their article on this firing was leaked on Twitter hours before anybody else knew it was happening.
By the way we should also remember that Trump has been trolling McCabe about this possibility for months now.
This is how the president of the United States treats a man who gave over 20 years in service to his country.
Update: Check this shit out.
Andrew G. McCabe, the former F.B.I. deputy director and a frequent target of President Trump’s scorn, was fired Friday after the Attorney General Jeff Sessions rejected an appeal that would have let him retire this weekend.
Mr. McCabe promptly declared that his firing, and Mr. Trump’s persistent needling, were intended to undermine the special counsel’s investigation in which he is a potential witness.
Mr. McCabe is accused in a yet-to-be-released internal report of failing to be forthcoming about a conversation he authorized between F.B.I. officials and a journalist.
In a statement released late Friday, Mr. Sessions said that Mr. McCabe had shown a lack of candor under oath on multiple occasions.
“The F.B.I. expects every employee to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity and accountability,” he said. “I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately.”
McCabe however disputes that explanation:
McCabe was even more blunt in another interview:McCabe in a statement: "Here is the reality: I am being singled out and treated this way because of the role I played, the actions I took, and the events I witnessed in the aftermath of the firing of James Comey."— Tara Palmeri (@tarapalmeri) March 17, 2018
“The idea that I was dishonest is just wrong,” he said, adding, “This is part of an effort to discredit me as a witness.”
It should be pointed out that a Fox News draft of their article on this firing was leaked on Twitter hours before anybody else knew it was happening.
So clearly Trump's favorite "news" outlet was given a heads up well before the rest of the media was informed about this unprecedented decision.Someone at Fox News accidentally published the draft of a "McCabe fired" story, even though the firing hasn't happened. Twitterers are starting to share the link, thinking it's real. pic.twitter.com/QZPkLcyFLN— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) March 16, 2018
By the way we should also remember that Trump has been trolling McCabe about this possibility for months now.
This is how the president of the United States treats a man who gave over 20 years in service to his country.
Update: Check this shit out.
God he's a prick!Andrew McCabe FIRED, a great day for the hard working men and women of the FBI - A great day for Democracy. Sanctimonious James Comey was his boss and made McCabe look like a choirboy. He knew all about the lies and corruption going on at the highest levels of the FBI!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 17, 2018
Labels:
Andrew McCabe,
Donald Trump,
FBI,
fired,
James Comey,
Jeff Sessions,
New York Times,
Twitter
Thursday, March 15, 2018
Robert Mueller issues subpoena to Trump Organization demanding documents about Russia.
Courtesy of New York Times:
The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has subpoenaed the Trump Organization to turn over documents, including some related to Russia, according to two people briefed on the matter. The order is the first known time that the special counsel demanded documents directly related to President Trump’s businesses, bringing the investigation closer to the president.
The breadth of the subpoena was not clear, nor was it clear why Mr. Mueller issued it instead of simply asking for the documents from the company, an umbrella organization that oversees Mr. Trump’s business ventures. In the subpoena, delivered in recent weeks, Mr. Mueller ordered the Trump Organization to hand over all documents related to Russia and other topics he is investigating, the people said.
The subpoena is the latest indication that the investigation, which Mr. Trump’s lawyers once regularly assured him would be completed by now, will drag on for at least several more months. Word of the subpoena comes as Mr. Mueller appears to be broadening his investigation to examine the role foreign money may have played in funding Mr. Trump’s political activities.
Keep in mind that this is a subpoena, not a request, for these documents.
That means that Mueller is not giving the Trump Organization any wiggle room.
This of course is REALLY going to piss Trump off, and that might mean that he would pull the trigger on a plan reported by Vanity Fair to replace Jeff Sessions with somebody who could rein Mueller in a little:
Perhaps most consequential for Robert Mueller’s investigation, sources said Trump has discussed a plan to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions. According to two Republicans in regular contact with the White House, there have been talks that Trump could replace Sessions with E.P.A. Administrator Scott Pruitt, who would not be recused from overseeing the Russia probe. Also, as an agency head and former state attorney general, Pruitt would presumably have a good shot at passing a Senate confirmation hearing.
If Trump were going to make a move to get rid of Mueller, I would think that this would be the thing that would push him to do it.
And remember there is virtually NOBODY in the White House anymore to talk him down.
The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has subpoenaed the Trump Organization to turn over documents, including some related to Russia, according to two people briefed on the matter. The order is the first known time that the special counsel demanded documents directly related to President Trump’s businesses, bringing the investigation closer to the president.
The breadth of the subpoena was not clear, nor was it clear why Mr. Mueller issued it instead of simply asking for the documents from the company, an umbrella organization that oversees Mr. Trump’s business ventures. In the subpoena, delivered in recent weeks, Mr. Mueller ordered the Trump Organization to hand over all documents related to Russia and other topics he is investigating, the people said.
The subpoena is the latest indication that the investigation, which Mr. Trump’s lawyers once regularly assured him would be completed by now, will drag on for at least several more months. Word of the subpoena comes as Mr. Mueller appears to be broadening his investigation to examine the role foreign money may have played in funding Mr. Trump’s political activities.
Keep in mind that this is a subpoena, not a request, for these documents.
That means that Mueller is not giving the Trump Organization any wiggle room.
This of course is REALLY going to piss Trump off, and that might mean that he would pull the trigger on a plan reported by Vanity Fair to replace Jeff Sessions with somebody who could rein Mueller in a little:
Perhaps most consequential for Robert Mueller’s investigation, sources said Trump has discussed a plan to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions. According to two Republicans in regular contact with the White House, there have been talks that Trump could replace Sessions with E.P.A. Administrator Scott Pruitt, who would not be recused from overseeing the Russia probe. Also, as an agency head and former state attorney general, Pruitt would presumably have a good shot at passing a Senate confirmation hearing.
If Trump were going to make a move to get rid of Mueller, I would think that this would be the thing that would push him to do it.
And remember there is virtually NOBODY in the White House anymore to talk him down.
The Jeff Sessions Justice Department looking for way to take authority away from Federal Courts.
Courtesy of Mother Jones:
Last April, when a federal judge in Hawaii blocked the Trump administration’s effort to ban entry to people from six Muslim-majority nations, Attorney General Jeff Sessions took to conservative talk radio to vent his frustration. “I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an island in the Pacific can issue an order that stops the president of the United States from what appears to be clearly his statutory and constitutional power,” he told host Mark Levin.
Residents of Hawaii pointed out that it was every bit as much a state as the other 49, but Sessions was making a broader legal point, one that the Supreme Court will now consider. The Justice Department wants to permanently remove the ability of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions—orders that stop a policy from taking effect until the court has officially ruled on its legality. Instead, a Hawaiian judge overseeing a travel ban case brought by the state of Hawaii would be able to block the ban only in that state. The implications, if the Supreme Court agrees with the Justice Department, will be enormous for the future of judicial review and the federal government’s balance of power.
Federal courts have repeatedly blocked the administration’s efforts to implement a hardline immigration agenda. More than a year into Donald Trump’s presidency, attempts to crack down on sanctuary cities, end Obama-era deportation protections for Dreamers, and block nationals from Muslim-majority countries have been stopped by federal judges enacting nationwide injunctions.
Okay this might actually be the MOST troubling thing we have learned about this administration.
The Founders wanted there to be three co-equal branches of government, executive, legislative, and judicial.
And the Judicial is the one that is tasked with protecting the constitutional rights of American citizens.
If the Trump Administration were actually successful in pulling this off, that would mean that each state's court system would determine what was a constitutionally protected right in their jurisdiction ONLY.
That means that some states could block gay marriage, women's rights, civil rights, equal pay, essentially EVERYTHING.
That would overwhelm the Supreme Court almost overnight, and if Trump gets one more judge on the panel they would be loathe to do anything to challenge a state's right to remain in the dark ages.
Last April, when a federal judge in Hawaii blocked the Trump administration’s effort to ban entry to people from six Muslim-majority nations, Attorney General Jeff Sessions took to conservative talk radio to vent his frustration. “I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an island in the Pacific can issue an order that stops the president of the United States from what appears to be clearly his statutory and constitutional power,” he told host Mark Levin.
Residents of Hawaii pointed out that it was every bit as much a state as the other 49, but Sessions was making a broader legal point, one that the Supreme Court will now consider. The Justice Department wants to permanently remove the ability of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions—orders that stop a policy from taking effect until the court has officially ruled on its legality. Instead, a Hawaiian judge overseeing a travel ban case brought by the state of Hawaii would be able to block the ban only in that state. The implications, if the Supreme Court agrees with the Justice Department, will be enormous for the future of judicial review and the federal government’s balance of power.
Federal courts have repeatedly blocked the administration’s efforts to implement a hardline immigration agenda. More than a year into Donald Trump’s presidency, attempts to crack down on sanctuary cities, end Obama-era deportation protections for Dreamers, and block nationals from Muslim-majority countries have been stopped by federal judges enacting nationwide injunctions.
Okay this might actually be the MOST troubling thing we have learned about this administration.
The Founders wanted there to be three co-equal branches of government, executive, legislative, and judicial.
And the Judicial is the one that is tasked with protecting the constitutional rights of American citizens.
If the Trump Administration were actually successful in pulling this off, that would mean that each state's court system would determine what was a constitutionally protected right in their jurisdiction ONLY.
That means that some states could block gay marriage, women's rights, civil rights, equal pay, essentially EVERYTHING.
That would overwhelm the Supreme Court almost overnight, and if Trump gets one more judge on the panel they would be loathe to do anything to challenge a state's right to remain in the dark ages.
Wednesday, February 21, 2018
Donald Trump attacks (And misspells the name of) his Attorney General while ranting about "Dem crimes."
| Source |
Well so did he, about ten minutes later, so he simply removed it and then reposted the same unhinged tweet with a correction.
Yeah, nothing seems insane about that.Question: If all of the Russian meddling took place during the Obama Administration, right up to January 20th, why aren’t they the subject of the investigation? Why didn’t Obama do something about the meddling? Why aren’t Dem crimes under investigation? Ask Jeff Sessions!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 21, 2018
So if I understand this correctly Trump wants to know why the Justice Department is not investigating the Obama Administration, who started these investigations in the first place, for not doing more to stop the interference that helped him to win the White House?
Well, perhaps he should ask Mitch McConnell that last question.
Courtesy of Politico:
Joe Biden said Tuesday that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stopped the Obama administration from speaking out about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign by refusing to sign on to a bipartisan statement of condemnation.
That moment, the former Democratic vice president said, made him think “the die had been cast ... this was all about the political play.”
Now if Trump thinks the Justice Department should investigate why Mitch McConnell obstructed Obama's efforts to warn the American people, well I think we are all on board with that.
Labels:
Donald Trump,
Jeff Sessions,
Joe Biden,
Mitch McConnell,
Twitter
Tuesday, February 13, 2018
Jeff Sessions talks about the "Anglo American heritage of law enforcement." Wait, what?
Courtesy of The Hill:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday talked about the "Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement" when speaking to law enforcement officials.
Speaking to the National Sheriffs' Association, Sessions said he wanted to "thank every sheriff in America."
"Since our founding, the independently elected sheriff has been the people's protector, who keeps law enforcement close to and accountable to people through the elected process," he said, according to CNN.
"The office of sheriff is a critical part of the Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement," he said.
Sessions added that "we must never erode this historic office."
According to CNN that Anglo American part was not included in the written version of the speech.
That was just Jeffrey Beauregard Sessions letting his racist flag fly.
No wonder Sessions is so adamantly against legalizing marijuana. After all how can he lock up all of the "darkies" if he can't simply bust them for carrying around a blunt or two?
Perhaps somebody should clue Beauregard in to the honorable tradition of African American law enforcement in this country.
Or are those facts his tiny racist mind simply cannot absorb?
Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday talked about the "Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement" when speaking to law enforcement officials.
Speaking to the National Sheriffs' Association, Sessions said he wanted to "thank every sheriff in America."
"Since our founding, the independently elected sheriff has been the people's protector, who keeps law enforcement close to and accountable to people through the elected process," he said, according to CNN.
"The office of sheriff is a critical part of the Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement," he said.
Sessions added that "we must never erode this historic office."
According to CNN that Anglo American part was not included in the written version of the speech.
That was just Jeffrey Beauregard Sessions letting his racist flag fly.
No wonder Sessions is so adamantly against legalizing marijuana. After all how can he lock up all of the "darkies" if he can't simply bust them for carrying around a blunt or two?
Perhaps somebody should clue Beauregard in to the honorable tradition of African American law enforcement in this country.
Or are those facts his tiny racist mind simply cannot absorb?
Labels:
African Americans,
America,
Anglo Saxons,
Jeff Sessions,
law enforcement,
racism,
The Hill,
YouTube
Friday, February 09, 2018
Rachel Brand, the number three official at the Justice Department and the woman who would replace Rod Rosenstein if Trump fires him, has resigned.
Courtesy of the New York Times:
Rachel L. Brand, the No. 3 official at the Justice Department, plans to step down after nine months on the job as the country’s top law enforcement agency has been under attack by President Trump, according to two people briefed on her decision.
Ms. Brand’s profile had risen in part because she is next in the line of succession behind the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, who is overseeing the special counsel’s inquiry into Russian influence in the 2016 election. Mr. Trump, who has called the investigation a witch hunt, has considered firing Mr. Rosenstein.
Such a move could have put her in charge of the special counsel and, by extension, left her in the cross hairs of the president.
Ms. Brand, who became the associate attorney general in May 2017, is leaving for a job as general counsel in the private sector. She has held politically appointed positions at the Justice Department over the past three presidential administrations.
In her current job, she reports directly to Mr. Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, who has recused himself from the Russia investigation.
One has to wonder if Brand saw some writing on the wall, or if she simply finds working in the Justice Department under Donald Trump too toxic.
Brand is considered a consummate professional, and somebody who people felt could not be bullied by Trump to fire Robert Mueller, or be convinced to impede his investigation.
With her gone, and soon to be replaced with somebody of Trump's choosing, Rod Rosenstein could almost certainly find his job on the chopping block, as Trump moves to further obstruct the Russian investigation.
I think it is too early to assert that this will definitely be what happens, but I would not be at all surprised if we suddenly saw Trump attacking Rosenstein more vociferously on Twitter.
Rachel L. Brand, the No. 3 official at the Justice Department, plans to step down after nine months on the job as the country’s top law enforcement agency has been under attack by President Trump, according to two people briefed on her decision.
Ms. Brand’s profile had risen in part because she is next in the line of succession behind the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, who is overseeing the special counsel’s inquiry into Russian influence in the 2016 election. Mr. Trump, who has called the investigation a witch hunt, has considered firing Mr. Rosenstein.
Such a move could have put her in charge of the special counsel and, by extension, left her in the cross hairs of the president.
Ms. Brand, who became the associate attorney general in May 2017, is leaving for a job as general counsel in the private sector. She has held politically appointed positions at the Justice Department over the past three presidential administrations.
In her current job, she reports directly to Mr. Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, who has recused himself from the Russia investigation.
One has to wonder if Brand saw some writing on the wall, or if she simply finds working in the Justice Department under Donald Trump too toxic.
Brand is considered a consummate professional, and somebody who people felt could not be bullied by Trump to fire Robert Mueller, or be convinced to impede his investigation.
With her gone, and soon to be replaced with somebody of Trump's choosing, Rod Rosenstein could almost certainly find his job on the chopping block, as Trump moves to further obstruct the Russian investigation.
I think it is too early to assert that this will definitely be what happens, but I would not be at all surprised if we suddenly saw Trump attacking Rosenstein more vociferously on Twitter.
Wednesday, January 31, 2018
The FBI is now assessing a second Russia dossier.
Courtesy of The Guardian:
The FBI inquiry into alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 US presidential election has been given a second memo that independently set out some of the same allegations made in a dossier by Christopher Steele, the British former spy.
The second memo was written by Cody Shearer, a controversial political activist and former journalist who was close to the Clinton White House in the 1990s.
Unlike Steele, Shearer does not have a background in espionage, and his memo was initially viewed with scepticism, not least because he had shared it with select media organisations before the election.
However, the Guardian has been told the FBI investigation is still assessing details in the “Shearer memo” and is pursuing intriguing leads.
One source with knowledge of the inquiry said the fact the FBI was still working on it suggested investigators had taken an aspect of it seriously.
It raises the possibility that parts of the Steele dossier, which has been derided by Trump’s supporters, may have been corroborated by Shearer’s research, or could still be.
Well that is some interesting news.
I would imagine that Mueller has also read through this second dossier, which is not going to make a certain orange tinged Russian agent very happy.
Which brings me to another thing that we learned yesterday.
Courtesy of NBC News:
He keeps telling some in his circle that Mueller — any day now — will tell him he is off the hook for any charge of collusion with the Russians or obstruction of justice.
But Trump — who trusts no one, or at least no one for long — has now decided that he must have an alternative strategy that does not involve having Justice Department officials fire Mueller.
"I think he's been convinced that firing Mueller would not only create a firestorm, it would play right into Mueller's hands," said another friend, "because it would give Mueller the moral high ground."
Instead, as is now becoming plain, the Trump strategy is to discredit the investigation and the FBI without officially removing the leadership. Trump is even talking to friends about the possibility of asking Attorney General Jeff Sessions to consider prosecuting Mueller and his team.
"Here's how it would work: 'We're sorry, Mr. Mueller, you won't be able to run the federal grand jury today because he has to go testify to another federal grand jury,'" said one Trump adviser.
Launching an investigation against the person investigating you sounds like an act of absolute desperation, but with top level FBI agents dropping like flies, and Rod Rosenstein under constant attack, it could happen.
Which is likely why Senate Democrats are working desperately to protect Mueller and his investigation:
Senate Democrats are plotting aggressive tactics to force Republicans to consider legislation that would effectively shield special counsel Robert Mueller from presidential interference.
The party’s Senate leaders have been internally discussing the prospects of tying legislation to a must-pass government funding bill that must be considered by Feb. 8. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on Tuesday that he would “very much like to” merge those two efforts. And the appetite among the rest of the caucus for doing so is surprisingly strong, aides and lawmakers say..
“I’m keenly supporting those pieces of legislation and I think the continued arrows shot at the department and the knowledge that they took one run at Mueller already is a sign that we need to find a way to get this done,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) told The Daily Beast. “I agree with any strategy that helps get it done. That’s the prime goal.”
I have to say that with these new revelations I have stopped eating popcorn and am chewing on my fingernails instead.
Things are getting seriously tense.
The FBI inquiry into alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 US presidential election has been given a second memo that independently set out some of the same allegations made in a dossier by Christopher Steele, the British former spy.
The second memo was written by Cody Shearer, a controversial political activist and former journalist who was close to the Clinton White House in the 1990s.
Unlike Steele, Shearer does not have a background in espionage, and his memo was initially viewed with scepticism, not least because he had shared it with select media organisations before the election.
However, the Guardian has been told the FBI investigation is still assessing details in the “Shearer memo” and is pursuing intriguing leads.
One source with knowledge of the inquiry said the fact the FBI was still working on it suggested investigators had taken an aspect of it seriously.
It raises the possibility that parts of the Steele dossier, which has been derided by Trump’s supporters, may have been corroborated by Shearer’s research, or could still be.
Well that is some interesting news.
I would imagine that Mueller has also read through this second dossier, which is not going to make a certain orange tinged Russian agent very happy.
Which brings me to another thing that we learned yesterday.
Courtesy of NBC News:
He keeps telling some in his circle that Mueller — any day now — will tell him he is off the hook for any charge of collusion with the Russians or obstruction of justice.
But Trump — who trusts no one, or at least no one for long — has now decided that he must have an alternative strategy that does not involve having Justice Department officials fire Mueller.
"I think he's been convinced that firing Mueller would not only create a firestorm, it would play right into Mueller's hands," said another friend, "because it would give Mueller the moral high ground."
Instead, as is now becoming plain, the Trump strategy is to discredit the investigation and the FBI without officially removing the leadership. Trump is even talking to friends about the possibility of asking Attorney General Jeff Sessions to consider prosecuting Mueller and his team.
"Here's how it would work: 'We're sorry, Mr. Mueller, you won't be able to run the federal grand jury today because he has to go testify to another federal grand jury,'" said one Trump adviser.
Launching an investigation against the person investigating you sounds like an act of absolute desperation, but with top level FBI agents dropping like flies, and Rod Rosenstein under constant attack, it could happen.
Which is likely why Senate Democrats are working desperately to protect Mueller and his investigation:
Senate Democrats are plotting aggressive tactics to force Republicans to consider legislation that would effectively shield special counsel Robert Mueller from presidential interference.
The party’s Senate leaders have been internally discussing the prospects of tying legislation to a must-pass government funding bill that must be considered by Feb. 8. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on Tuesday that he would “very much like to” merge those two efforts. And the appetite among the rest of the caucus for doing so is surprisingly strong, aides and lawmakers say..
“I’m keenly supporting those pieces of legislation and I think the continued arrows shot at the department and the knowledge that they took one run at Mueller already is a sign that we need to find a way to get this done,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) told The Daily Beast. “I agree with any strategy that helps get it done. That’s the prime goal.”
I have to say that with these new revelations I have stopped eating popcorn and am chewing on my fingernails instead.
Things are getting seriously tense.
Labels:
Daily Beast,
Democrats,
Donald Trump,
Jeff Sessions,
NBC,
Robert Mueller,
Rod Rosenstein,
Senate,
The Guardian
Tuesday, January 23, 2018
It's finally happened. Robert Mueller is now preparing to question Donald Trump.
Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III is seeking to question President Trump in the coming weeks about his decisions to oust national security adviser Michael Flynn and FBI Director James B. Comey, according to two people familiar with his plans.
Mueller’s interest in the events that led Trump to push out Flynn and Comey indicates that his investigation is intensifying its focus on possible efforts by the president or others to obstruct or blunt the special counsel’s probe.
Trump’s attorneys have crafted some negotiating terms for the president’s interview with Mueller’s team, one that could be presented to the special counsel as soon as next week, according to the two people.
The president’s legal team hopes to provide Trump’s testimony in a hybrid form — answering some questions in a face-to-face interview and others in a written statement.
Screw the idea of written statements.
Mueller and his investigators need to interview Trump face to face, because THAT is when Trump will choke like the little bitch we know him to be.
(Remember the Lester Holt interview?)
Besides, written responses will come from his attorneys, NOT from Trump himself.
We also learned today that Mueller has ALREADY questioned Jeff Sessions.
Courtesy of the New York Times:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions was questioned for several hours last week by the special counsel’s office as part of the investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election and whether the president obstructed justice since taking office, according to a Justice Department spokeswoman.
The meeting marked the first time that investigators for the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, are known to have interviewed a member of Mr. Trump’s cabinet.
The spokeswoman, Sarah Isgur Flores, confirmed that the interview occurred in response to questions from The New York Times.
Every day Mueller just keeps getting closer and closer to his main target.
Kind of like a shark circling a wounded swimmer.
And now it appears he is stretching out his jaws to take a big bite out of Trump's tangerine tinged nether regions.
FBI Director threatened to quit if Jeff Sessions did not stop trying to get him to fire his number two guy.
| FBI Director Christopher Wray. |
Attorney General Jeff Sessions — at the public urging of President Donald Trump — has been pressuring FBI Director Christopher Wray to fire Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, but Wray threatened to resign if McCabe was removed, according to three sources with direct knowledge.
Wray's resignation under those circumstances would have created a media firestorm. The White House — understandably gun-shy after the Comey debacle — didn’t want that scene, so McCabe remains.
Sessions told White House Counsel Don McGahn about how upset Wray was about the pressure on him to fire McCabe, and McGahn told Sessions this issue wasn’t worth losing the FBI Director over, according to a source familiar with the situation.
Why it matters: Trump started his presidency by pressuring one FBI Director (before canning him), and then began pressuring another (this time wanting his deputy canned). This much meddling with the FBI for this long is not normal.
"Not normal" is a real understatement here.
If Wray had actually resigned that would mean that Trump would have lost two FBI directors in his first year.
And what is more troubling is that both of them would have been related to an ongoing investigation of the president himself, and his campaign.
We are functioning more like a banana republic every day it seems.
Labels:
Christopher Wray,
Donald Trump,
FBI,
Jeff Sessions,
Justice Department
Monday, January 15, 2018
While the Trump Administration stands idly by Russian hackers threaten, not just our information, but also our very infrastructure.
Courtesy of Fast Company:
On June 13, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions testified to the Senate Intelligence committee about Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. After fielding hours of questions about his knowledge of the plot, Sessions was greeted by an abrupt change in topic from Senator John McCain. “Quietly, the Kremlin has been trying to map the United States telecommunications infrastructure,” McCain announced, and described a series of alarming moves, including Russian spies monitoring the fiber optic network in Kansas and Russia’s creation of “a cyber weapon that can disrupt the United States power grids and telecommunications infrastructure.”
When McCain asked if Sessions had a strategy to counter Russia’s attacks, Sessions admitted they did not.
In a normal year, McCain’s inquiries about documented, dangerous threats to U.S. infrastructure would have dominated the news. His concerns are well founded: in recent years, Ukraine’s power grid has been repeatedly hacked in what cybersecurity experts believe was part a test run for the United States. Russian hackers have also hacked many centers of U.S. power, including the State Department, the White House, and everyone with a Yahoo email address in 2014, the Department of Defense in 2015, and, of course, the Democratic National Committee, Republican National Committee, state and local voter databases, and personal email accounts of various US officials in 2016.
But while the role of hacks in the election is the subject of several ongoing probes, the hacks of other U.S. institutions and infrastructures have been largely ignored by the Trump administration, even as the hacking became more aggressive throughout 2017. In June, shortly after McCain’s testimony, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI released an urgent joint report stating that U.S. nuclear power stations and other energy facilities had been hacked. In July, Bloomberg and the Washington Post confirmed that the hackers worked for the Russian government.
While U.S. government officials stressed that the public was not yet at serious risk, claiming the hackers had not yet gained the ability to control the grid, intelligence officers warned that infrastructure attacks by a hostile state can also operate as a form of political leverage. Most analyses of the 2016 election hacks have framed leverage in personal terms: kompromat stolen from hacked emails used to blackmail individuals into submission or to humiliate officials as part of a propaganda campaign. Less examined is the form of leverage McCain raised at the Sessions hearing: the possibility of vital infrastructure, like the power grid, being crippled, potentially causing massive financial and humanitarian consequences. In this formulation, an entire government could ostensibly be held hostage to another government’s whim out of fear of triggering a cataclysmic attack.
You know if I were Putin, I would try to get an agent into a position of high authority who could be guaranteed to look the other way while I worked on crippling America.
I am not sure who that might look like...
...but I have a fairly good idea.
So my question is what are the Republicans, who are currently just standing around with their thumbs up their butt, going to say in their defense when one of these cyber attacks takes down part of our power grid, or shuts down the monitoring systems on a nuclear plant, or blocks communication between the tower and planes approaching an airport?
Sorry?
On June 13, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions testified to the Senate Intelligence committee about Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. After fielding hours of questions about his knowledge of the plot, Sessions was greeted by an abrupt change in topic from Senator John McCain. “Quietly, the Kremlin has been trying to map the United States telecommunications infrastructure,” McCain announced, and described a series of alarming moves, including Russian spies monitoring the fiber optic network in Kansas and Russia’s creation of “a cyber weapon that can disrupt the United States power grids and telecommunications infrastructure.”
When McCain asked if Sessions had a strategy to counter Russia’s attacks, Sessions admitted they did not.
In a normal year, McCain’s inquiries about documented, dangerous threats to U.S. infrastructure would have dominated the news. His concerns are well founded: in recent years, Ukraine’s power grid has been repeatedly hacked in what cybersecurity experts believe was part a test run for the United States. Russian hackers have also hacked many centers of U.S. power, including the State Department, the White House, and everyone with a Yahoo email address in 2014, the Department of Defense in 2015, and, of course, the Democratic National Committee, Republican National Committee, state and local voter databases, and personal email accounts of various US officials in 2016.
But while the role of hacks in the election is the subject of several ongoing probes, the hacks of other U.S. institutions and infrastructures have been largely ignored by the Trump administration, even as the hacking became more aggressive throughout 2017. In June, shortly after McCain’s testimony, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI released an urgent joint report stating that U.S. nuclear power stations and other energy facilities had been hacked. In July, Bloomberg and the Washington Post confirmed that the hackers worked for the Russian government.
While U.S. government officials stressed that the public was not yet at serious risk, claiming the hackers had not yet gained the ability to control the grid, intelligence officers warned that infrastructure attacks by a hostile state can also operate as a form of political leverage. Most analyses of the 2016 election hacks have framed leverage in personal terms: kompromat stolen from hacked emails used to blackmail individuals into submission or to humiliate officials as part of a propaganda campaign. Less examined is the form of leverage McCain raised at the Sessions hearing: the possibility of vital infrastructure, like the power grid, being crippled, potentially causing massive financial and humanitarian consequences. In this formulation, an entire government could ostensibly be held hostage to another government’s whim out of fear of triggering a cataclysmic attack.
You know if I were Putin, I would try to get an agent into a position of high authority who could be guaranteed to look the other way while I worked on crippling America.
I am not sure who that might look like...
...but I have a fairly good idea.
So my question is what are the Republicans, who are currently just standing around with their thumbs up their butt, going to say in their defense when one of these cyber attacks takes down part of our power grid, or shuts down the monitoring systems on a nuclear plant, or blocks communication between the tower and planes approaching an airport?
Sorry?
Labels:
cyber attacks,
Donald Trump,
hackers,
Jeff Sessions,
power grid,
Putin,
Russia,
Sarah Kendzior
Friday, January 05, 2018
Republicans now take aim at the author of the Russian dossier, Christopher Steele.
Courtesy of WaPo:
A pair of GOP senators sent a letter to the Justice Department on Friday urging an investigation into Christopher Steele, the intelligence agent behind that famous dossier from the Russia investigation.
And the whole thing is rather strange.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) sent the letter to the DOJ and FBI. In it, the pair says they have reason to believe Steele might have lied about disseminating information from the dossier.
But while they make the allegation publicly in the letter, the details of Steele's potential lying are contained within an attached document marked classified. In other words, they are suggesting Steele may have lied, but don't say what he might have lied about.
As the New York Times points out these are allegations that Steele lied to the FBI, which is a crime:
More than a year after Republican leaders promised to investigate Russian interference in the presidential election, two influential Republicans on Friday made the first known congressional criminal referral in connection with the meddling — against one of the people who sought to expose it.
Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a senior committee member, told the Justice Department they had reason to believe that a former British spy, Christopher Steele, lied to federal authorities about his contacts with reporters regarding information in the dossier, and they urged the department to investigate.
Gee, I cannot begin to imagine why they are doing this. Can you?
And if you are confused keep in mind that House Republicans are also calling for Jeff Sessions to step down.
So to sum up the Senate Republicans are trying to undermine the honesty of the former spy who compiled the dossier, while the House Republicans are working to remove Sessions, so that Trump can appoint a new Attorney General, who will then put a halt to the Robert Mueller investigation.
What's the definition for "collusion" again?
Or "obstructionism?"
Or "treason."
A pair of GOP senators sent a letter to the Justice Department on Friday urging an investigation into Christopher Steele, the intelligence agent behind that famous dossier from the Russia investigation.
And the whole thing is rather strange.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) sent the letter to the DOJ and FBI. In it, the pair says they have reason to believe Steele might have lied about disseminating information from the dossier.
But while they make the allegation publicly in the letter, the details of Steele's potential lying are contained within an attached document marked classified. In other words, they are suggesting Steele may have lied, but don't say what he might have lied about.
As the New York Times points out these are allegations that Steele lied to the FBI, which is a crime:
More than a year after Republican leaders promised to investigate Russian interference in the presidential election, two influential Republicans on Friday made the first known congressional criminal referral in connection with the meddling — against one of the people who sought to expose it.
Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a senior committee member, told the Justice Department they had reason to believe that a former British spy, Christopher Steele, lied to federal authorities about his contacts with reporters regarding information in the dossier, and they urged the department to investigate.
Gee, I cannot begin to imagine why they are doing this. Can you?
And if you are confused keep in mind that House Republicans are also calling for Jeff Sessions to step down.
So to sum up the Senate Republicans are trying to undermine the honesty of the former spy who compiled the dossier, while the House Republicans are working to remove Sessions, so that Trump can appoint a new Attorney General, who will then put a halt to the Robert Mueller investigation.
What's the definition for "collusion" again?
Or "obstructionism?"
Or "treason."
New York Times reporting that Donald Trump sent top White House lawyer to stop Jeff Sessions from recusing himself from the Russia investigation.
Courtesy of the New York Times:
President Trump gave firm instructions in March to the White House’s top lawyer: stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s associates had helped a Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election.
Public pressure was building for Mr. Sessions, who had been a senior member of the Trump campaign, to step aside. But the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, carried out the president’s orders and lobbied Mr. Sessions to remain in charge of the inquiry, according to two people with knowledge of the episode.
Mr. McGahn was unsuccessful, and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous White House officials, saying he needed his attorney general to protect him.
Mr. Trump said he had expected his top law enforcement official to safeguard him the way he believed Robert F. Kennedy, as attorney general, had done for his brother John F. Kennedy and Eric H. Holder Jr. had for Barack Obama. Mr. Trump then asked, “Where’s my Roy Cohn?” He was referring to his former personal lawyer and fixer, who had been Senator Joseph R. McCarthy’s top aide during the investigations into communist activity in the 1950s and died in 1986.
Smelling more and more like obstructionism all of the time, don't you think?
The president is absolutely NOT supposed to interfere in an investigation, especially one directed at himself.
And yet here we have Trump trying to force Sessions to stay in control of the Russia probe, and then firing James Comey for continuing forward with the FBI investigation.
The reason that Trump feared an expanded investigation into his dealings with Russia is becoming increasingly clear.
Courtesy of CNN:
The Trump Organization has provided documents on a range of events, conversations and meetings from President Donald Trump's real estate business to investigators probing Russian election meddling, according to three people familiar with the matter.
The bulk of the information is focused on the period between June 2015, when Trump announced his candidacy, and his January 2017 inauguration.
The information provided in 2017 to special counsel Robert Mueller's team and congressional investigators so far involves the activities of the company's executives as well as meetings and events, including emails and calendar entries, mostly connected to campaign-related matters, according to two of the sources.
The Trump Organization produced records that include information related to the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, the billionaire Agalarov family of Russia, head of the US-based Russian American Chamber of Commerce Sergei Millian, a paid speech Donald Trump Jr. gave in October 2016 to a Russia-friendly policy think tank in Paris, Trump's foreign policy address in April 2016 at Washington's Mayflower Hotel and communications regarding WikiLeaks, two of the sources said.
Yeah, I BET he wanted Jeff Sessions to maintain control over all of this.
President Trump gave firm instructions in March to the White House’s top lawyer: stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s associates had helped a Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election.
Public pressure was building for Mr. Sessions, who had been a senior member of the Trump campaign, to step aside. But the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, carried out the president’s orders and lobbied Mr. Sessions to remain in charge of the inquiry, according to two people with knowledge of the episode.
Mr. McGahn was unsuccessful, and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous White House officials, saying he needed his attorney general to protect him.
Mr. Trump said he had expected his top law enforcement official to safeguard him the way he believed Robert F. Kennedy, as attorney general, had done for his brother John F. Kennedy and Eric H. Holder Jr. had for Barack Obama. Mr. Trump then asked, “Where’s my Roy Cohn?” He was referring to his former personal lawyer and fixer, who had been Senator Joseph R. McCarthy’s top aide during the investigations into communist activity in the 1950s and died in 1986.
Smelling more and more like obstructionism all of the time, don't you think?
The president is absolutely NOT supposed to interfere in an investigation, especially one directed at himself.
And yet here we have Trump trying to force Sessions to stay in control of the Russia probe, and then firing James Comey for continuing forward with the FBI investigation.
The reason that Trump feared an expanded investigation into his dealings with Russia is becoming increasingly clear.
Courtesy of CNN:
The Trump Organization has provided documents on a range of events, conversations and meetings from President Donald Trump's real estate business to investigators probing Russian election meddling, according to three people familiar with the matter.
The bulk of the information is focused on the period between June 2015, when Trump announced his candidacy, and his January 2017 inauguration.
The information provided in 2017 to special counsel Robert Mueller's team and congressional investigators so far involves the activities of the company's executives as well as meetings and events, including emails and calendar entries, mostly connected to campaign-related matters, according to two of the sources.
The Trump Organization produced records that include information related to the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, the billionaire Agalarov family of Russia, head of the US-based Russian American Chamber of Commerce Sergei Millian, a paid speech Donald Trump Jr. gave in October 2016 to a Russia-friendly policy think tank in Paris, Trump's foreign policy address in April 2016 at Washington's Mayflower Hotel and communications regarding WikiLeaks, two of the sources said.
Yeah, I BET he wanted Jeff Sessions to maintain control over all of this.
Thursday, January 04, 2018
The DOJ is going to reopen the investigation into Hillary's emails. They should call it "Operation Smokescreen."
![]() |
| And here we go again. |
Justice Department officials are taking a fresh look at Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she served as secretary of State, The Daily Beast has learned.
An ally of Attorney General Jeff Sessions who is familiar with the thinking at the Justice Department’s Washington headquarters described it as an effort to gather new details on how Clinton and her aides handled classified material. Officials’ questions include how much classified information was sent over Clinton’s server; who put that information into an unclassified environment, and how; and which investigators knew about these matters and when. The Sessions ally also said officials have questions about immunity agreements that Clinton aides may have made.
A former senior DOJ official familiar with department leadership’s thinking said officials there are acutely aware of demands from President Donald Trump that they look into Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of State—and that they lock up her top aide, Huma Abedin.
Just like clockwork.
Trump and his White House are under all kinds of increased scrutiny, so they throw out their favorite distraction.
Millions of taxpayer dollars, and thousands of man hours have already been wasted on this bullshit, and the Republicans came up empty.
To do this again, while there are serious investigations concerning their man in the White House, is a nakedly transparent attempt at distraction.
Top ethics watchdog files suit against DOJ concerning those FBI texts that were made public.
Courtesy of Business Insider:
A top ethics watchdog said Wednesday it is suing the Justice Department for all communications concerning the DOJ's decision to share with the press text messages exchanged between two FBI employees, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, during the 2016 election.
Many of the texts were overtly critical of President Donald Trump, and Strzok and Page mocked him at various points throughout the campaign, calling him an "idiot."
Strzok and Page also disparaged other political leaders, like the Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders and former Attorney General Eric Holder. The texts concerning Trump, however, were quickly weaponized by the most vehement critics of special counsel Robert Mueller following the DOJ's decision to release them to Congress and the press. That release came just one day before Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein testified before the House Judiciary Committee on December 13.
The department has failed to answer a significant lingering question stemming from that release: how it chose which texts, of the more than 10,000 the department obtained over the summer, to unveil publicly. Nor has it released additional messages that could provide context to the ones that were shared with lawmakers and reporters. DOJ has also not disclosed who authorized the release.
The lawsuit, filed by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington asked the " DOJ’s senior leadership offices for all communications concerning the decision" to give the texts to a small group of reporters the day before Rosenstein's testimony. CREW filed the expedited request Wednesday after the DOJ failed to respond to their initial inquiry within 20 working days.
Yeah I would like to see these questions answered as well.
Since when do private communications between lovers become the business of the DOJ unless one or more of the participants are under criminal investigation?
A top ethics watchdog said Wednesday it is suing the Justice Department for all communications concerning the DOJ's decision to share with the press text messages exchanged between two FBI employees, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, during the 2016 election.
Many of the texts were overtly critical of President Donald Trump, and Strzok and Page mocked him at various points throughout the campaign, calling him an "idiot."
Strzok and Page also disparaged other political leaders, like the Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders and former Attorney General Eric Holder. The texts concerning Trump, however, were quickly weaponized by the most vehement critics of special counsel Robert Mueller following the DOJ's decision to release them to Congress and the press. That release came just one day before Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein testified before the House Judiciary Committee on December 13.
The department has failed to answer a significant lingering question stemming from that release: how it chose which texts, of the more than 10,000 the department obtained over the summer, to unveil publicly. Nor has it released additional messages that could provide context to the ones that were shared with lawmakers and reporters. DOJ has also not disclosed who authorized the release.
The lawsuit, filed by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington asked the " DOJ’s senior leadership offices for all communications concerning the decision" to give the texts to a small group of reporters the day before Rosenstein's testimony. CREW filed the expedited request Wednesday after the DOJ failed to respond to their initial inquiry within 20 working days.
Yeah I would like to see these questions answered as well.
Since when do private communications between lovers become the business of the DOJ unless one or more of the participants are under criminal investigation?
Labels:
Business Insider,
ethics,
FBI,
Jeff Sessions,
Justice Department,
texts,
watchdog group
Thursday, December 21, 2017
Jeff Sessions orders the State Department to examine the connection between Hillary Clinton and the Uranium One deal. Can you say distraction?
![]() |
| Seriously, this again? |
On the orders of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Justice Department prosecutors have begun asking FBI agents to explain the evidence they found in a now dormant criminal investigation into a controversial uranium deal that critics have linked to Bill and Hillary Clinton, multiple law enforcement officials told NBC News.
The interviews with FBI agents are part of the Justice Department's effort to fulfill a promise an assistant attorney general made to Congress last month to examine whether a special counsel was warranted to look into what has become known as the Uranium One deal, a senior Justice Department official said.
Jesus, the Trump Administration and the Republicans are getting really desperate now.
First they suggest appointing a Special Counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton's connection to Fusion GPS to deflect from Mueller's Russia investigation, and now they are suggesting the need for one to investigate Hillary's connection to a 2010 uranium deal that she had nothing to do with personally.
Hell even Fox News deflated this conspiracy theory back in November.
This is just another taxpayer money wasting Benghazi investigation.
Clearly the point is not to discover any actual wrongdoing, but to distract attention away from the Mueller investigation which is freaking Donald Trump and his supporters out big time.
Saturday, December 16, 2017
The Simpsons' take on the Trump/Mueller situation.
Sadly this is probably very close to what's really going on behind the scenes.The Simpsons does Mueller vs. Trump.— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) December 14, 2017
"Pardon me."
"I said you—"
"Oh, I'm not talking to you. I tried to pardon myself." (via FOX) pic.twitter.com/b3m4nbjxzJ
Labels:
Donald Trump,
Jeff Sessions,
Robert Mueller,
Simpsons,
Twitter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)















