Thread: Jeff Sessions defends deputy Rod Rosenstein after impeachment move

NATE RAYMOND
Jul 26th 2018 11:31AM


BOSTON, July 26 (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Thursday defended his deputy, Rod Rosenstein, and took a swipe at fellow Republicans in Congress who moved to impeach Rosenstein, who oversees the federal probe of Russia's role in the 2016 presidential election.

"My deputy, Rod Rosenstein, is highly capable. I have the highest confidence in him," Sessions said during an appearance in Boston.

"What I would like Congress to do is to focus on some of the legal challenges that are out there," including illegal immigration, the attorney general added.

A group of Republican lawmakers on Wednesday introduced articles of impeachment to remove Rosenstein, the deputy U.S. attorney general, escalating a fight over Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into whether Republican President Donald Trump's campaign worked with Moscow to sway the 2016 vote.

10 PHOTOS

Representatives Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows, who belong to the conservative House Freedom Caucus, joined nine other members of the House of Representatives in accusing Rosenstein of hiding investigative information from Congress, failure to comply with congressional subpoenas and other alleged misconduct.

No immediate action was expected on the move. The House was scheduled to leave on Thursday for a recess that extends until September. A House Republican aide said the two lawmakers were not trying to force quick action on the measure.
Rosenstein, the No. 2 official at the Justice Department, has become a frequent punching bag for Trump supporters for appointing Mueller to take over the Russia investigation from the FBI. The president has denied any collusion with Moscow took place, and has characterized the probe as a "witch hunt." Russia has denied meddling in the election.

Democrats criticized the Republican move. House of Representatives Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi noted that Rosenstein is a Republican appointee and said the Republican lawmakers were undermining the judicial system with a politically motivated action.

"The attack on Rosenstein of course is an attack on the Mueller investigation," Pelosi said at a news conference on Thursday. (Reporting by Nate Raymond and Doina Chiacu; editing by Jonathan Oatis)

https://www.aol.com/article/news/201...move/23490216/

"What I would like Congress to do is to focus on some of the legal challenges that are out there," including illegal immigration, the attorney general added.

AG Jeff Sessions is right.

"My deputy, Rod Rosenstein, is highly capable. I have the highest confidence in him," Sessions said during an appearance in Boston.

A good crook is "capable". It is about willingness to do the job right.

What I see in Sessions' statement is support for the Swamp! If Rosenstein goes down, they might focus on Sessions next. These people are mainly looking out for their job security and posterity rather than look out for the people, which is what the job is about.

I think, if there is a case, Impeachment should be used. A shot across the bow, so to speak. Until these members of the Swamp know you will fire the gun, they will continue business as usual.

Come On, You Can’t Impeach Rosenstein, Says ….

ED MORRISSEYPosted at 8:41 am on July 26, 2018



This clip from Donald Trump’s favorite morning show is notable for both its placement and its argument against the effort to impeach Rod Rosenstein. “The people behind this are longtime friends of mine,” Judge Andrew Napolitano tells his Fox & Friends hosts, “but on this I profoundly disagree.” Impeachment is reserved for crimes, not for disagreements, Napolitano argues, and Rosenstein’s conduct falls far short of the mark, even if one agrees with the House Freedom Caucus in the dispute:

FOX & friends
✔@foxandfriends


.@Judgenap on efforts to impeach Rosenstein: Improperly signing off on a FISA warrant & staying in a position of a conflict of interest are good arguments for ethical violations, but not for impeachable offenses
7:53 AM - Jul 26, 2018

• 
  149
• 
  171 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Reps. Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan disagree with that, obviously:

“We’re tired of the Justice Department giving us the finger and not giving us the information we’re entitled to to do our constitutional duty,” Jordan said Wednesday night in a Fox News Channel appearance alongside Meadows. “More importantly, the American people are sick of it. That’s why we filed the resolution.”

Rep. Matt Gaetz says it’s time for Congress to flex its muscle:

In an appearance on Fox Business Network on Wednesday, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said that while the next step remains uncertain as the House leaves town for its summer recess at the end of this week, “it was very important for those of us who believe that norms have been violated to step out and say Rod Rosenstein needs to be impeached.”

“The mountain of evidence against Rod Rosenstein is very compelling when you look at the extent to which documents and witnesses have been withheld,” said Gaetz, one of the lawmakers who introduced the resolution.

If that’s the issue, why not take the case to court? Disputes between Congress and the executive branch routinely get handled by federal courts. It’s far more normal to do that than to impeach executive-branch officials over disputes like access to materials. It’s an option that apparently hasn’t yet been tried, either, and seems a lot less disruptive than impeachment … and perhaps a little more likely to succeed.
Napolitano’s right on impeachment, of course. It’s not going to happen, in part because of the norms Napolitano cites here. Impeachment and removal are rare events in Congress; only 19 people have ever been impeached by the House, and only eight of those got removed from office by the Senate — all of whom were federal judges. (At least one of them, Alcee Hastings, later joined Congress.) While in theory the House can impeach on any grounds they can fit into “high crimes and misdemeanors,” in practice they have limited the effort to provable crimes, and for good reason. Without that limiting principle, Congress would constantly be firing people in the executive branch for all sorts of misdeeds and incompetencies, usurping the role of the executive in dealing with those issues.

That brings us to the other reason that it won’t happen in this case. Republican leadership isn’t going to do Donald Trump’s job for him, forcing out Rosenstein to allow Trump to appoint a deputy AG that will shut down the Robert Mueller probe. It’s all but over anyway, as the transfer of cases out of his office strongly suggests. If Trump wants to fire Rosenstein, he has full authority to do so, but then he’ll be responsible for the consequences.

That might be Napolitano’s point, too, in delivering that message on Trump’s must-see-TV show.

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/07/...tm_campaign=nl

“The people behind this are longtime friends of mine,” Judge Andrew Napolitano tells his Fox & Friends hosts, “but on this I profoundly disagree.” Impeachment is reserved for crimes, not for disagreements, Napolitano argues, and Rosenstein’s conduct falls far short of the mark, even if one agrees with the House Freedom Caucus in the dispute:

Failing to comply with a subpoena IS A CRIME! Eric Holder failed to comply with a subpoena and now envisions running for President. If he had been impeached, he might not be where he is today and Rosenstein wouldn't be playing the same game!

It is more difficult when they have to depend on the Justice Department to enforce their subpoenas and Justice is who they are subpoenaing.

If that’s the issue, why not take the case to court? Disputes between Congress and the executive branch routinely get handled by federal courts.

And who represents them in that court action? The Justice Department? That's like Xavier Becerra taking a suit against California over Sanctuary cities.

Republican leadership isn’t going to do Donald Trump’s job for him, forcing out Rosenstein to allow Trump to appoint a deputy AG that will shut down the Robert Mueller probe.

Another conundrum! If the President fires him, Congress has to approve his replacement. We already know the President will get blamed no matter what!

The Mueller investigation is a scam prosecution based on a fraudulent hoax. The harm and damage it is causing is outrageous and needs to stop. Unfortunately, due to the way the system and politics works in this country, with the recusal of Jeff Sessions, you might as well have thrown this Presidency over to the Antifa. Same thing, except the consequences are much worse. If Robert Mueller had a good reputation that he deserved which I'm not sure that was ever the case, he will no longer and will go down in infamy and richly deserve that.

To start an investigation of anyone without a valid premise, cause and starting point is inexcusable, yet that is exactly what he did.

How you solve this at this point, other than the President declassifying everything to do with the Russia Hoax, I have no idea. It's a Catch 22, otherwise.