DOJ-NSD FISA spying on Trump campaign...VERY BIG DEAL

[Coydog]

For Impeachment Referral, Mueller Would Need Rosenstein

The news that the controversial Nunes memo accuses Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein of misconduct underscores a crucial but often overlooked reality about Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian influence in the election: If Mueller decides that President Donald Trump obstructed justice or otherwise broke the law — and such would have quite a bit of evidence — he may well still need Rosenstein’s sign-off to do anything about it.

The pivotal position Rosenstein occupies may help explain the determination of many Trump loyalists in and out of Congress to release the Nunes memo. Rosenstein has been facing calls since last year to step down or recuse himself from the Mueller probe — and his replacement would likely be a Trump loyalist. That means that if Rosenstein is forced out and a Trump loyalist takes his place, the move could neuter the Mueller probe.

At the heart of the issue are limits on the powers of the special counsel. Many legal scholars believe a sitting president can’t be criminally indicted, meaning that if Mueller finds evidence of crimes by Trump, his strongest recourse might well be to make a referral to Congress for potential impeachment proceedings. But some of those experts tell TPM that under the regulation governing the special counsel’s office, Mueller lacks the authority to make that referral without approval from Justice Department officials overseeing his investigation.

After Kenneth Starr’s pursuit of Bill Clinton, Congress changed the laws governing special investigations in 1999: No longer could a three-judge panel appoint an “independent counsel” acting with no direct DOJ oversight. Instead, the decision to appoint a “special counsel” had to be made by the attorney general. In Mueller’s case, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself, because of meetings he had held with the Russian ambassador, leaving Rosenstein to appoint and manage Mueller and his probe.

…

If Rosenstein is fired or steps down, Trump would appoint his successor. And if Rosenstein recuses himself, the ranking official in the department of justice (DOJ) would be Rachel Brand, a Republican legal operative who worked in the George W. Bush White House*. Brand then would decide whether or not to send Mueller probe’s findings against the president, if any, to the House.

The memo, authored by the office of Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), reportedly claims Rosenstein approved an FBI application to a secret court administering the foreign intelligence surveillance act (FISA). The application sought a warrant that reportedly was used to eavesdrop on Trump campaign staffer Carter Page, who has a web of ties to Russia. The memo says the application failed to tell the judge that it relied on a controversial intelligence dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele.

[madhatter]

For Impeachment Referral, Mueller Would Need Rosenstein

The news that the controversial Nunes memo accuses Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein of misconduct underscores a crucial but often overlooked reality about Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian influence in the election: If Mueller decides that President Donald Trump obstructed justice or otherwise broke the law — and such would have quite a bit of evidence — he may well still need Rosenstein’s sign-off to do anything about it.

The pivotal position Rosenstein occupies may help explain the determination of many Trump loyalists in and out of Congress to release the Nunes memo. Rosenstein has been facing calls since last year to step down or recuse himself from the Mueller probe — and his replacement would likely be a Trump loyalist. That means that if Rosenstein is forced out and a Trump loyalist takes his place, the move could neuter the Mueller probe.

At the heart of the issue are limits on the powers of the special counsel. Many legal scholars believe a sitting president can’t be criminally indicted, meaning that if Mueller finds evidence of crimes by Trump, his strongest recourse might well be to make a referral to Congress for potential impeachment proceedings. But some of those experts tell TPM that under the regulation governing the special counsel’s office, Mueller lacks the authority to make that referral without approval from Justice Department officials overseeing his investigation.

After Kenneth Starr’s pursuit of Bill Clinton, Congress changed the laws governing special investigations in 1999: No longer could a three-judge panel appoint an “independent counsel” acting with no direct DOJ oversight. Instead, the decision to appoint a “special counsel” had to be made by the attorney general. In Mueller’s case, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself, because of meetings he had held with the Russian ambassador, leaving Rosenstein to appoint and manage Mueller and his probe.

…

If Rosenstein is fired or steps down, Trump would appoint his successor. And if Rosenstein recuses himself, the ranking official in the department of justice (DOJ) would be Rachel Brand, a Republican legal operative who worked in the George W. Bush White House*. Brand then would decide whether or not to send Mueller probe’s findings against the president, if any, to the House.

The memo, authored by the office of Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), reportedly claims Rosenstein approved an FBI application to a secret court administering the foreign intelligence surveillance act (FISA). The application sought a warrant that reportedly was used to eavesdrop on Trump campaign staffer Carter Page, who has a web of ties to Russia. The memo says the application failed to tell the judge that it relied on a controversial intelligence dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele.

of course it was only a matter of time between Mc Cabe was planning on stepping down all along and this is the beginning if some kind of conspiracy... just pure partisan lunacy...

and this will be the D platform that you think is going to win seats? hillaryous....

[Coydog]

Mueller is zeroing in on Gump and only Rosenstein, nominated by Gump, can realistically stop him. We're gonna hear a lot about this fellow in the next few days. Gump is charting an obvious course to discredit and possibly remove all those involved in the investigation. It's only a matter of time before he walks back his promise to testify, citing institutional bias or some other feeble excuse.

The right wingnuts now believe there was no Russian meddling and everybody is guilty except Gump. We'll see how far they are willing to go to convince everyone else, i.e. those who are not yet guilty.

[madhatter]

Mueller is zeroing in on Gump and only Rosenstein, nominated by Gump, can realistically stop him. We're gonna hear a lot about this fellow in the next few days. Gump is charting an obvious course to discredit and possibly remove all those involved in the investigation. It's only a matter of time before he walks back his promise to testify, citing institutional bias or some other feeble excuse.he's never going to testify...he doesn't have to and he won't..cry all you want...you loved it that every member of hillary's team took the 5th...so right back at ya...

The right wingnuts now believe there was no Russian meddling and everybody is guilty except Gump. We'll see how far they are willing to go to convince everyone else, i.e. those who are not yet guilty.

yer nuts...completely nuts...perhaps liberalism is a mental illness...we'll see how far you are willing to go to prove that...

[madhatter]

it seems leftist are absolutely immune to logic and reason...the only question is how were they immunized? is there something in the govt cheese?

[Coydog]

Mueller is zeroing in on Gump and only Rosenstein, nominated by Gump, can realistically stop him. We're gonna hear a lot about this fellow in the next few days. Gump is charting an obvious course to discredit and possibly remove all those involved in the investigation. It's only a matter of time before he walks back his promise to testify, citing institutional bias or some other feeble excuse.he's never going to testify...he doesn't have to and he won't..cry all you want...you loved it that every member of hillary's team took the 5th...so right back at ya...

The right wingnuts now believe there was no Russian meddling and everybody is guilty except Gump. We'll see how far they are willing to go to convince everyone else, i.e. those who are not yet guilty.

yer nuts...completely nuts...perhaps liberalism is a mental illness...we'll see how far you are willing to go to prove that...

You realize "taking the 5th" is a protection from self incrimination? That would be interesting. Anyway, Mueller has subpoena power to force Gump to testify in front of one of those grand juries you are so fond of.

[madhatter]

Mueller is zeroing in on Gump and only Rosenstein, nominated by Gump, can realistically stop him. We're gonna hear a lot about this fellow in the next few days. Gump is charting an obvious course to discredit and possibly remove all those involved in the investigation. It's only a matter of time before he walks back his promise to testify, citing institutional bias or some other feeble excuse.he's never going to testify...he doesn't have to and he won't..cry all you want...you loved it that every member of hillary's team took the 5th...so right back at ya...

The right wingnuts now believe there was no Russian meddling and everybody is guilty except Gump. We'll see how far they are willing to go to convince everyone else, i.e. those who are not yet guilty.

yer nuts...completely nuts...perhaps liberalism is a mental illness...we'll see how far you are willing to go to prove that...

You realize "taking the 5th" is a protection from self incrimination? that's not how lefties viewed every obama/clintonista lackey from lerner to mills...
That would be interesting. Anyway, Mueller has subpoena power to force Gump to testify in front of one of those grand juries you are so fond of.that's not how it works, the subject of an investigation doesn't testify before a grand jury..

I'm not "fond " of grand juries....it's simply how the system works when deciding to prosecute...but in this instance there won't be a grand jury, this is an "investigation" a politically motivated farce of an investigation but an investigation nonetheless...trump may be subpoenaed to meet w mueller...mueler could summon a grand jury if he finds evidence of a crime, then the grand jury could decide if the evidence warranted prosecution...don;t you already know all this?


here's how SLATE sees it

Now the president’s lawyers are reported to be “negotiating” with the special counsel over the terms of an interview. One might wonder, from Mueller’s perspective, what there is to negotiate. He is charged with conducting a thorough investigation, and he has subpoena power. Shouldn’t he be able to ask every pertinent question of any relevant witness?

The president, of course, is no ordinary witness. Among other things, he is at serious legal risk in this matter and may effectively be a target of Mueller’s. Department of Justice guidelines, and norms of criminal practice, hold that investigative targets should not be subpoenaed to testify unless doing so is essential to an inquiry.

This rule, together with the president’s extraordinary job responsibilities, gives Trump’s lawyers the ability to force Mueller to deal with their demands. And they are presumably steep: no oath, no recording or transcript, only certain people in the room, unworkable time limits, and—most pivotal in the Russia affair—limitations on what subjects Mueller’s team will raise.

The best outcome for the president might be a drastically cramped “interview” in which nothing important is accomplished but after which he can say, and repeat into November 2020, that he was an open book on Russia, and the investigation exonerated him.

The next best result for him would be no interview at all, with the president and his lawyers saying that the special counsel refused to negotiate reasonably. Citing the “witch hunt,” the president can argue that Mueller demanded unfair access.

The asymmetry in ability to use the media makes this strategy fairly easy and costless for the president and his team.

your fantasy is never going to come to fruition...

[Coydog]

You realize "taking the 5th" is a protection from self incrimination? that's not how lefties viewed every obama/clintonista lackey from lerner to mills...
That would be interesting. Anyway, Mueller has subpoena power to force Gump to testify in front of one of those grand juries you are so fond of.that's not how it works, the subject of an investigation doesn't testify before a grand jury..

Gump and his mouthpieces have repeatedly insisted he is not under investigation. Just hyperbole?

[madhatter]

You realize "taking the 5th" is a protection from self incrimination? that's not how lefties viewed every obama/clintonista lackey from lerner to mills...
That would be interesting. Anyway, Mueller has subpoena power to force Gump to testify in front of one of those grand juries you are so fond of.that's not how it works, the subject of an investigation doesn't testify before a grand jury..

Gump and his mouthpieces have repeatedly insisted he is not under investigation. Just hyperbole?perhaps he's a witness? who also would not go in front of a grand jury, in fact under no circumstances would trump go under a grand jury, that's not how it works...but good job w the red herring...do you intentionally fail to grasp the concept?sure seems it...

we have proof that comey said that trump was not under investigation...that could have changed since he left but none of us know that for certain...what we do know is that mueller wants to talk to trump for some reason but that willnot be in front of a grand jury...your painfully distorted arguments are annoying and unproductive...like all D arguments... just as you intend them to be...

[madhatter]

During an appearance on Fox & Friends this morning, Gowdy slammed Democrats for trying to keep the memo hidden.

“My Democratic colleagues didn’t want us to find this information, they did everything they could to keep us from finding this information,” said Gowdy.

Asked if the memo would be “embarrassing” for Democrats, Gowdy responded, “I think it will be embarrassing for Adam Schiff once people realize the extent to which he went to keep them from learning any of this.”

Asked to elaborate, the South Carolina Republican explained, “I mean going to court to help Fusion GPS so we can’t find out that they paid for the dossier and that they were working for the DNC. That’s a pretty big step to go to court to try to keep the American people from learning something. So look, if it were up to Adam Schiff, you wouldn’t know about Hillary Clinton’s email, you wouldn’t know about the server, you wouldn’t have known who paid for the dossier, so I find it ironic that he has his own memo now because if it were up to him, we wouldn’t know any of it.”

Schiff himself seems petrified at the prospect of the memo being released, tweeting that the vote to make it public was “cynical and destructive.”

Others have pointed out the incredible irony of much of the media being disinterested in finding out the details of the memo.

WaPo and NYT will run classified intel from anonymous sources every day but suddenly when a Republican releases a fully-sourced memo with his name on it they lose their minds,” remarked Jack Posobiec.


Language programming 101: Unverified lies about Trump are called a “dossier.” Verified truths about Democrat corruption are just, like, you know, a “memo,” quipped Stefan Molyneux.

“I’ve never seen so many journalists upset over the prospect of getting more information. Weird, right?” asked Derek Hunter.

[madhatter]

FBI officials review surveillance memo, could not cite 'any factual inaccuracies': source

Two senior FBI officials have now reviewed a controversial Republican staff memo alleging abuses of government surveillance programs during the 2016 presidential campaign, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News – adding that the officials “could not point to any factual inaccuracies.”

The two officials – one from the bureau’s counterintelligence division and the other from the legal division – followed up after an initial review of the memo during a rare Sunday trip to Capitol Hill by FBI Director Christopher Wray.

now what leftards?

[Coydog]

FBI officials review surveillance memo, could not cite 'any factual inaccuracies': source

Two senior FBI officials have now reviewed a controversial Republican staff memo alleging abuses of government surveillance programs during the 2016 presidential campaign, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News – adding that the officials “could not point to any factual inaccuracies.”

The two officials – one from the bureau’s counterintelligence division and the other from the legal division – followed up after an initial review of the memo during a rare Sunday trip to Capitol Hill by FBI Director Christopher Wray.

now what leftards?

That's good news. I guess they verified the info used from the Steele dossier. More importantly, does this mean we finally get to see the pee tape?

[Highway Star]

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM...........

https://twitter.com/datrevmeista/status ... 7991819264" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[madhatter]

FBI officials review surveillance memo, could not cite 'any factual inaccuracies': source

Two senior FBI officials have now reviewed a controversial Republican staff memo alleging abuses of government surveillance programs during the 2016 presidential campaign, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News – adding that the officials “could not point to any factual inaccuracies.”

The two officials – one from the bureau’s counterintelligence division and the other from the legal division – followed up after an initial review of the memo during a rare Sunday trip to Capitol Hill by FBI Director Christopher Wray.

now what leftards?

That's good news. I guess they verified the info used from the Steele dossier. More importantly, does this mean we finally get to see the pee tape?

yer not this stupid...I think...

[Highway Star]

http://thehill.com/policy/national-secu ... mo-release" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;