Rosenstein Breaks Silence on Barr’s Handling of Mueller Repor~Criticiism bizarre

B

Bill

Malarkeyville

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was the person who appointed Robert Mueller as Special Counsel in the first place, due to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal from overseeing the Russia probe. Ever since William Barr was installed as Attorney General, Rosenstein has been an increasingly invisible figure, even though he apparently agreed with Barr that the evidence “wasn’t sufficient” to allege that President Donald Trump obstructed justice.

Rosenstein, having witnessed the backlash over Barr’s four-page letter detailing Mueller’s “principal conclusions,” decided to comment on recent events Thursday in the Wall Street Journal.

Rosenstein said that, contrary to what critics have said, Barr has been “as forthcoming as he can” about the reductions of Mueller’s 400-page Russia report.

Barr has said that there would be redactions in four key areas: grand jury information, intel sources and methods, information on peripheral/uncharged third parties, and information that would jeopardize ongoing DOJ prosecutions. Barr said these redactions would be “color-coded” and accompanied by “explanatory notes.” He also said that the “special counsel and his staff are helping select the information in the report that falls into those [four] categories.” Barr further stated that Mueller declined to review the controversial four-page letter.

Rosenstein stated the idea that Barr is trying to be deceptive is off-base and “bizarre.”​

“He’s being as forthcoming as he can, and so this notion that he’s trying to mislead people, I think is just completely bizarre,” he said.

“It would be one thing if you put out a letter and said, ‘I’m not going to give you the report,'” he added. “What he said is, ‘Look, it’s going to take a while to process the report. In the meantime, people really want to know what’s in it. I’m going to give you the top-line conclusions.’ That’s all he was trying to do.”

Rosenstein also said Americans should have “tremendous confidence” in Barr.

Notably, Rosenstein didn’t comment about Barr suggesting that there may have been “unauthorized surveillance” of the Trump campaign in 2016. Barr clarified that he didn’t have evidence of that and wasn’t stating as fact that it happened.

Rosenstein is expected to depart the DOJ soon.
 
Bill said:

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was the person who appointed Robert Mueller as Special Counsel in the first place, due to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal from overseeing the Russia probe. Ever since William Barr was installed as Attorney General, Rosenstein has been an increasingly invisible figure, even though he apparently agreed with Barr that the evidence “wasn’t sufficient” to allege that President Donald Trump obstructed justice.

Rosenstein, having witnessed the backlash over Barr’s four-page letter detailing Mueller’s “principal conclusions,” decided to comment on recent events Thursday in the Wall Street Journal.

Rosenstein said that, contrary to what critics have said, Barr has been “as forthcoming as he can” about the reductions of Mueller’s 400-page Russia report.

Barr has said that there would be redactions in four key areas: grand jury information, intel sources and methods, information on peripheral/uncharged third parties, and information that would jeopardize ongoing DOJ prosecutions. Barr said these redactions would be “color-coded” and accompanied by “explanatory notes.” He also said that the “special counsel and his staff are helping select the information in the report that falls into those [four] categories.” Barr further stated that Mueller declined to review the controversial four-page letter.

Rosenstein stated the idea that Barr is trying to be deceptive is off-base and “bizarre.”​

“He’s being as forthcoming as he can, and so this notion that he’s trying to mislead people, I think is just completely bizarre,” he said.

“It would be one thing if you put out a letter and said, ‘I’m not going to give you the report,'” he added. “What he said is, ‘Look, it’s going to take a while to process the report. In the meantime, people really want to know what’s in it. I’m going to give you the top-line conclusions.’ That’s all he was trying to do.”

Rosenstein also said Americans should have “tremendous confidence” in Barr.

Notably, Rosenstein didn’t comment about Barr suggesting that there may have been “unauthorized surveillance” of the Trump campaign in 2016. Barr clarified that he didn’t have evidence of that and wasn’t stating as fact that it happened.

Rosenstein is expected to depart the DOJ soon.
Click to expand...

The jack ass party loved Barr and loved Mueller.
The jack ass party felt they were honorable men.
However because the investigation didn’t go their way Barr and Mueller are pieces of shit.
This is par for the hypocrites of the Jack ass party.
 
Tkaffen said:
The jack ass party loved Barr and loved Mueller.
The jack ass party felt they were honorable men.
However because the investigation didn’t go their way Barr and Mueller are pieces of shit.
This is par for the hypocrites of the Jack ass party.
Click to expand...
Totally delusional, as usual. I don't recall anything about Barr before Trump picked him as his protector. And I haven't seen any change in the respect given Mueller by the few honest posters here, or the lack of respect displayed by the Trump sycophants.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Rosenstein stated the idea that Barr is trying to be deceptive is off-base and “bizarre.”

“He’s being as forthcoming as he can, and so this notion that he’s trying to mislead people, I think is just completely bizarre,” he said.

“It would be one thing if you put out a letter and said, ‘I’m not going to give you the report,'” he added. “What he said is, ‘Look, it’s going to take a while to process the report. In the meantime, people really want to know what’s in it. I’m going to give you the top-line conclusions.’ That’s all he was trying to do.”

Rosenstein also said Americans should have “tremendous confidence” in Barr.
Click to expand...
Rosensteins's Redemption ploy. we do love our repentant bad guys
 
Darth Beto Omar said:
He’s on record saying he would wear a wire around a president.

Rosenstein is lucky he wasn’t fired on the spot for that—or worse.
Click to expand...

Rosenstein appointed a special counsel to investigate Russian state interference (since well authenticated) in a US presidential election, and any criminal matters arising.

The winning candidate repeatedly denied that there had been any Russian interference, apparently basing this on what the Russian president told him and on what he wanted to believe.

Who is in need of "redemption"?
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Rosenstein appointed a special counsel to investigate Russian state interference (since well authenticated) in a US presidential election, and any criminal matters arising.

The winning candidate repeatedly denied that there had been any Russian interference, apparently basing this on what the Russian president told him and on what he wanted to believe.

Who is in need of "redemption"?
Click to expand...
Trump questioned da Russians did it. He said it could be other actors.
Asange said the same - "the leak did NOT come from any state actor" - so what does the IC do?
Invent a 'cutout' go between. how convenient.

No i'm not going to explain why the Weasel needs redemption. either you get Weasels' filing a SC when there
was NO EVIDENCE of collusion ( per Lisa Page) despite prior year of the counterintelligence investigation, or you don't
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Rosenstein appointed a special counsel to investigate Russian state interference (since well authenticated) in a US presidential election, and any criminal matters arising.

The winning candidate repeatedly denied that there had been any Russian interference, apparently basing this on what the Russian president told him and on what he wanted to believe.

Who is in need of "redemption"?
Click to expand...

I would say, given that Rosenstein and you are now proven wrong, those who need redemption should be obvious......
 
CosmicRocker said:
Trump questioned da Russians did it. He said it could be other actors.
Asange said the same - "the leak did NOT come from any state actor" - so what does the IC do?
Invent a 'cutout' go between. how convenient.

No i'm not going to explain why the Weasel needs redemption. either you get Weasels' filing a SC when there
was NO EVIDENCE of collusion ( per Lisa Page) despite prior year of the counterintelligence investigation, or you don't
Click to expand...

Hopefully, Barr is serious about examining the ‘sufficiency of the evidence’ for the origin of the Russian investigation *and especially* the appointment of an SC.

If he is serious, I’d give it a 90% probability that serious chips will begin to fall.
 
Darth Beto Omar said:
Hopefully, Barr is serious about examining the ‘sufficiency of the evidence’ for the origin of the Russian investigation *and especially* the appointment of an SC.

If he is serious, I’d give it a 90% probability that serious chips will begin to fall.
Click to expand...
Nunes referrals to DoJ / 302's and FISA releases /Howowitz-Huber / Barr...you have to hope something will stick.
 
CosmicRocker said:
either you get Weasels' filing a SC when there was NO EVIDENCE of collusion ( per Lisa Page) despite prior year of the counterintelligence investigation, or you don't
Click to expand...

I do get it. In fact I think "Weasel" would have been remiss not to do it, after Trump's controversial firing of Comey.

This is Rosenstein's commission to Mueller:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...nt-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html

Is there something there that needs "redemption"?
 
rjhenn said:
Totally delusional, as usual. I don't recall anything about Barr before Trump picked him as his protector. And I haven't seen any change in the respect given Mueller by the few honest posters here, or the lack of respect displayed by the Trump sycophants.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Lol, is anyone surprised at your ignorance? No.

You realize Barr has been AG before, right?
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
I do get it. In fact I think "Weasel" would have been remiss not to do it, after Trump's controversial firing of Comey.

This is Rosenstein's commission to Mueller:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...nt-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html

Is there something there that needs "redemption"?
Click to expand...
so now exercising POTUS plenary power to fire Comey is obstruction? is that your bottom line?
where was the intent to obstruct if there was no crime of "collusion" ( conspiracy etc.)
 
countryboy said:
He was kept on for a reason. This is really the first peep we've heard out of him in a while.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

Some conservative pundits were befuddled by the budding bromance between Trump and his buddy Rod lol. It’s almost as if Rosenstein is acting like Trump ‘has something’ on him.

Wouldn’t surprise me in the least and it would be highly amusing under the circumstances.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
Rosenstein appointed a special counsel to investigate Russian state interference (since well authenticated) in a US presidential election, and any criminal matters arising.

The winning candidate repeatedly denied that there had been any Russian interference, apparently basing this on what the Russian president told him and on what he wanted to believe.

Who is in need of "redemption"?
Click to expand...

I think it’s more a matter of ‘what’ needs redemption at this point.

Specifically, the origin of the Russian investigation. Finally, it will get a serious look by someone who has the authority to convene grand juries and/or hand out indictments. Congress is too partisan to do it effectively.

It certainly appears as if the Comey firing ‘was a little too convenient’ a means of gassing-up a Russian Collusion investigation that was on life support at the time Comey provoked[?] Trump into firing him. Lisa Page testified to Congress that ‘they still didn’t know if there was anything to it’ at the time Mullet was appointed and Comey himself, publicly admitted[?!] to leaking in order to get an SC appointed.

That fact pattern is suggestive of a criminal conspiracy and needs looked into.

Here’s where they went wrong: the Russian investigation should have been allowed to proceed without an SC since it WAS a counterintelligence investigation at the time. If they wanted to appoint an SC to look at obstruction *the first thing* that should have happened was that Rosenstein should have recused.

And then appoint someone else to oversee the SC *and limit* the investigation to obstruction. Had they done that, the Russian counterintelligence investigation would have proceeded unmolested and Trump would have been cleared or convicted of obstruction by now.

But they started an open-ended crime search on Trump instead—which appears to be exactly what they wanted to happen.

Democrats, anti-Trump Rhinos and Deep Staters should prepare themselves for a very ugly outcome over this.

Because it is entirely conceivable it’s going to happen.
 
Tkaffen said:
The jack ass party loved Barr and loved Mueller.
The jack ass party felt they were honorable men.
However because the investigation didn’t go their way Barr and Mueller are pieces of shit.
This is par for the hypocrites of the Jack ass party.
Click to expand...

They were God-like when the dim-dims thought that they were going to nail President Trump.

Now, not so much.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
I do get it. In fact I think "Weasel" would have been remiss not to do it, after Trump's controversial firing of Comey.

This is Rosenstein's commission to Mueller:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...nt-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html

Is there something there that needs "redemption"?
Click to expand...

"Controversial," you say. Are you aware that the Chief Executive can fire any appointee for anything? Wearing the wrong colored tie, mismatching socks...anything,.

You need redemption and a course in Civics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top