Trump deep state dhe media CNN NY Times

[HFTengineer]

Deep state cifuti muller roli i tij dhe avokati i tij cifut rosenstein:


As noted earlier, on Monday evening Christopher Ruddy, chief executive of the conservative news site and TV network Newsmax, caused a media uproar when he said during an interview on "PBS NewsHour" that Trump is thinking about firing special counsel Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating Russian election interference.

As NBC noted last night, it is open to question how reliable Ruddy's comments are. "He is often described as a close friend of Trump's, and reporters spotted him leaving the White House on Monday. But a source familiar with the visit told NBC News that any meeting Ruddy was to have had with the president was postponed. Still, his remarks prompted this reply on Twitter from Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, who said the committee would simply reappoint Mueller and then advised the president: "Don't waste our time."

So following up on that particular thread, moments ago Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, speaking at a Senate Appropriations Justice, Science and Related Agencies Subcommittee hearing on Tuesday said he has not seen "good cause" to fire Robert Mueller.

Rosenstein clarified that he has the authority to hire and fire Mueller, and not Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

“Have you seen good cause for firing Mueller?” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) asked Rosenstein.

“I have not,” he replied.

The exchange was notable because the Deputy AG essentially assured the Senate that Administration will follow 28 CFR 600.7, which says that only he can fire Mueller and only for good cause.

Senator Susan Collins then pressed him on reports that the administration is considering firing Mueller, asking whether he would fire Mueller if President Trump ordered him to do so.

“I am not going to follow any orders unless I believe those are lawful and appropriate,” he said, explaining that under federal regulations, Mueller can only be fired for good cause and that reason would have to be put in writing. The deputy AG also said that Mueller may be fired "only for good cause and I am required to put that cause in writing."


Meanwhile, aside from launching several angry tweets targeting "fake news" this morning without much context, Trump has yet to make a statement either way on his view toward Mueller.

[HFTengineer]

Session merret ne pyetje:

After yet another 2+ hour public hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on alleged collusion between members of the Trump campaign and Russian spies, we are still no closer to anyone providing a shred of tangible evidence as to the validity of such claims despite Democrats and the mainstream media dedicating virtually every waking moment to the express pursuit of such evidence. That said, it all makes for great, and neverending, political theater and below are the highlights from today's episode of the continuing insanity.

Sessions set an aggressive tone for the hearing by preemptively stating during his opening remarks that "any suggestion I participated in or was aware of collusion with the Russians is an appalling and detestable lie."

"Let me state this clearly, colleagues, I have never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States, further I have no knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected to the Trump campaign... any suggestion I participated in or was aware of collusion with the Russians is an appalling and detestable lie."




But perhaps no one did a better job of thoroughly dismantling the "Russian collusion" narrative than Senator Tom Cotton who pointed out, as have we on multiple occasions, that no one, including James Comey, has seen a single shred of evidence to suggest that Trump or any of his associates colluded with Russian spies to steal emails from Hillary Clinton or the DNC and/or to generally stage a coup in the United States.

"The very simple question that should be asked is 'did Donald Trump or any of his associates in the campaign collude with Russia in hacking those emails and releasing them to the public."

"That's where we started six months ago. We've now heard from 6 of the 8 democrats on this committee and, to my knowledge, I don't think a single one of them asked that question. They've gone down lots of other rabbit trails, but not that question."

"Maybe, that is because Jim Comey said last week, as he's said to Donald Trump, that on three occasions he assured him he was not under investigation. Maybe it's because multiple democrats on this committee have stated that they've seen no evidence thus far, after six month of our investigation, and 11 months of an FBI investigation, of any such collusion."
Cotton went on to compare the efforts that would have to be undertaken by the Trump administration to pull off the conspiracy alleged by the Left and mainstream media to a Jason Bourne movie.





On the topic of whether he ever met with Russian Ambassador Kislyak at the Mayflower Hotel, Sessions confirmed that Kislyak was present for the Trump speech and wouldn't rule out short, public exchange of pleasantries, though he had no recollection of such an encounter, but he did definitively confirm that he did not have any private conversations with Kislyak at the event.




Sessions did get testy with Senator Wyden at one point when questioned about Comey's testimony last week that he expected Sessions to recuse himself earlier than he ultimately did. Those suggestions by Comey have since resulted in wild media speculation over whether Comey was in possession of undisclosed information that would link Sessions directly to the Russian interference investigation.




Multiple democrats on the panel, including Senator Heinrich, accused Sessions of "impeding this investigation" by refusing to discuss the details of conversations he may or may not have had with the President....though they all seemingly forgot that time that Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with an investigation into the "Fast and Furious" gun running scandal.





On whether he lingered outside the oval office while President Trump spoke to Comey alone because he thought it was inappropriate:

"Didn't seem to me to be a major problem....I knew Comey...could handle himself well."



Last week former FBI Director Comey testified that Sessions refused to respond when Comey approached him about not wanting to have direct 1-on-1 conversation with President trump. Sessions directly refuted that testimony by saying the following:

"I believe it was the next day that he expressed concern about being left alone with the President. That in itself is not problematic. He did not tell me, at that time, any details about anything that was said that was improper."

"I affirmed his concern that we should be following the proper guidelines of the Department of Justice and basically backed him up in his concerns and that he should not carry on any conversations with the President, or anyone else, about an investigation in a way that was not proper."



Of course, as Senator Mark Warner promised at the outset of today's hearing we're undoubtedly still in the early innings of the mass hysteria on this topic and will have the unfortunate pleasure of many more upcoming hearings where wild accusations will be tossed around all while no new facts are ever revealed.

[HFTengineer]

In a move that stunned many members of the media, on Thursday night Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who is overseeing the Russia probe due to Jeff Sessions' recusal and who earlier this week confirmed only he has authority to fire Special Counsel Robert Mueller, released an unorthodox statement to be “skeptical about anonymous allegations” following the relentless barrage of news reports emerging from the WaPo and the NYT about the evolving probe into Russia’s "election interference" and possible collusion with Trump, all based on "anonymous sources."

"Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous 'officials,' particularly when they do not identify the country — let alone the branch or agency of government — with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated. Americans should be skeptical about anonymous allegations. The Department of Justice has a long-established policy to neither confirm nor deny such allegations.
Rosenstein, who many had seen as a Trump foil at the DOJ, did not cite specific reports. The DOJ released Rosenstein’s statement after 9 p.m., shortly after The Washington Post reported that the special counsel was investigating the business dealings of Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law and adviser. That report was attributed to unnamed American officials.

As we said, the media and punditry was "stunned" by the official statement: the NYT' Maggie Haberman said "Have literally never seen a statement like this." The new leader of the Trump "resistance", Preet Bharara also chimed in, tweeting "Americans should also exercise caution before accepting as true lies about firing of FBI Director & defamation of a war hero special counsel"

https://mobile.twitter.com/PreetBhar...ymous-official


https://mobile.twitter.com/RogueCPI/...75744864202752




To be expected, Rosenstein - who the media was ambivalent about and following his recent testimony in which he said there was "no grounds" to fire Mueller, praised - promptly became the latest pariah for insinuating that the media's Trump reportage may be, in fact, fake news.

As the NYT reported this morning,

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/1...ymous-official

What to make of Rosenstein's statement?

On one hand, it could be seen as a validation of Trump's repeated allegations that much of what has emerged in press in recent weeks is "fake news." On the other, as some in the media suggested, it could be an attempt to "chill" communications and leaks to the press. Yet others saw this as a preview of what may be another upcoming story. As Bloomberg's Jennifer Epstein who said "If this statement is preemptive: oh, boy, is the story going to be explosive."

the "statement aligned with the president’s open frustration with unflattering leaks. Mr. Trump has called stories about the investigation “fake news” and complained on Twitter about a Washington Post report on Wednesday night that the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, was investigating the president himself for possible obstruction of justice. That story was also attributed to unnamed sources, as was a New York Times article that same evening about Mr. Mueller’s request for interviews with three top intelligence officials."

What to make of Rosenstein's statement?

On one hand, it could be seen as a validation of Trump's repeated allegations that much of what has emerged in press in recent weeks is "fake news." On the other, as some in the media suggested, it could be an attempt to "chill" communications and leaks to the press. Yet others saw this as a preview of what may be another upcoming story. As Bloomberg's Jennifer Epstein who said "If this statement is preemptive: oh, boy, is the story going to be explosive."



https://mobile.twitter.com/jeneps/st...ymous-official



Trump has yet to tweet his approval of Rosenstein's comment, although moments ago he did tweet the following:


https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonal...ymous-official


He followed up by tweeting "The Fake News Media hates when I use what has turned out to be my very powerful Social Media - over 100 million people! I can go around them"

[HFTengineer]

President Trump's latest twitter target seems to be his own Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein who he blasts for the hiring of a Special Counsel to investigate the firing of former FBI Director James Comey, after writing a letter himself explicitly calling for the firing of James Comey.

"I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt"


https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonal...tor-witch-hunt


Of course, Trump's message isn't crystal clear on exactly who the subject of the tweet is and has left some wondering whether he might actually be referring to Special Counsel Mueller.

That said, since Rosenstein did, in fact, draft a letter calling for the termination of James Comey, a letter which Trump revealed publicly on May 9th, it would seem more logical that the tweet is directed at him. Here is an excerpt from our post back in May:

In the letter from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, he cites the handling of Comey's Clinton investigation, and says that Comey was wrong to cite his conclusions about the Clinton email probe in July of 2016: "I cannot defend the Director's handling of the conclusion of the investigation of Secretary Clinton's emails, and I do not understand his refusal to accept the nearly universal judgment that he was mistaken," Rosenstein wrote.

Rosenstein was referring to Comey's decision to announce in July last year that the probe of Hillary Clinton should be closed without prosecution, but then declared - 11 days before the Nov. 8 election - that he had reopened the investigation because of a discovery of a new trove of Clinton-related emails. Democrats say the decision cost Clinton victory.

Rosenstein also identified several areas in which he said Comey had erred, saying it was wrong of him to "usurp" then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch's authority by announcing the initial conclusion of the email case on July 5.

Comey "announced his own conclusions about the nation's most sensitive criminal investigation, without the authorization of duly appointed Justice Department leaders," Rosenstein wrote. Comey also "ignored another longstanding principle" by holding a news conference to "release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation."








tter, critics will note that Trump later admitted that he had been considering the termination of James Comey from the moment he took office.

[HFTengineer]

Nga the hill :



http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...rs-objectivity

President Trump in a new interview with Fox News from the White House questions special counsel Robert Mueller’s objectivity, saying he is “very, very good friends” with fired FBI Director James Comey.

Trump also argues that Mueller has hired "Hillary Clinton supporters" and people who worked for Clinton's 2016 White House bid to work on his investigation, a situation he describes as “ridiculous.”


The president does not say that Mueller should recuse himself, in response to a direct question for “Fox and Friends” host Ainsley Earhardt.

“Well he’s very, very good friends with Comey. Which is very bothersome,” Trump says, with first lady Melania Trump at his side. “We’re going to have to see. But there has been no obstruction, there has been no collusion. There has been leaking by Comey. And virtually everyone agrees on that.”
Trump then fires at Mueller for his hirings.

“The people who have been hired are all Hillary Clinton supporters,” he says. “Some of them worked for Hillary Clinton. I mean the whole thing is ridiculous if you want to know the truth from that standpoint."


Trump concludes, however, by stating that Mueller is “an honorable man, and hopefully he’ll come up with an honorable solution.”

Mueller was appointed to lead the investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election, including possible links to Trump's campaign, after the president fired Comey over his handling of the investigation.

Comey has testified that he believes Trump had sought to get him to end an investigation into former national security adviser Michale Flynn. Comey's testimony has raised the possibility of Mueller bringing an obstruction of justice case against the White House.

It wasn’t immediately clear if anyone working for Mueller actually worked for Clinton.

The Hill previously reported that Jeannie Rhee, a member of Mueller’s team, donated $5,400 to Hillary for American, a political action committee affiliated with Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Another person on Mueller’s team, Andrew Weissmann, donated money to former President Barack Obama’s campaign in 2008 while working at a law firm. Weissmann is the senior lawyer on the special counsel team, Bloomberg reported.

James Quarles, who served as an assistant special prosecutor on the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, has donated to more than a dozen Democratic PACs since the late 1980s. He was also identified by The Washington Post as a member of Mueller's team.

Trump also discussed his tweet Thursday acknowledging that he did not tape conversations with Comey, whom he fired earlier this year.

Trump for more than a month suggested tapes of his conversations in the White House with Comey might have existed.

On Friday, he said they didn’t, and that his story on Comey had never changed.

“Well I didn’t tape him,” he said. “You never know what’s happening when you see that the Obama administration and perhaps longer than that was doing all this unmasking and surveillance and you read all about it and I’ve been reading about it for the last couple of months about the seriousness of the horribleness of the situation of surveillance all over the place.

“But I didn’t tape, and I don’t have any tapes, and I didn’t tape, but when he found out that there may be tapes out there, whether its governmental tapes or anything else and who knows, I think his story may have changed
Earnhardt, of Fox News, suggested that keeping the tapes was "a smart way to make sure he stayed honest in those hearings."

"Well, uh, it wasn't very stupid, I can tell you that," Trump replied. "He did admit that what I said was right, and if you look further back, before he heard about that, i think maybe he wasn't admitting that. So I think maybe you'll need to do a little investigative reporting to determine that, but I don't think it will be that hard.

“You’ll have to take a look at that. Because then he’ll have to tell what actually took place at the events. And my story never changed. My story was the straight story. My story never changed.”