Who’s Running This Country Anyway?

 

Judging from the actions (or lack thereof) of the Department of Justice and its stepchild, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, they think that they are running the country. And I see no one—not the President, not the Congress, getting in their way. Forget about the three co-equal branches of government; they don’t exist in that manner today.

I am appalled at the behavior and actions of Asst. AG Rod Rosenstein at the DOJ, for one. He appears to be the one in charge, since almost everything I’ve seen from AG Jeff Sessions indicates he is feckless and unengaged. And saying that about Sessions disturbs me greatly, since I thought he could make a difference when Trump selected him.

Rod Rosenstein might as well be our chief executive. He speaks derisively about anyone who criticizes him, thinks he has the last say about which documents can be released, and how they can be released, and has chosen to slow-walk almost every document requested. When questioned about the potential impeachment draft being developed by the House Freedom Caucus, he commented on May 1:

‘As you think about the importance of separation of powers on Law Day here, any reaction to news that certain members of the House Freedom Caucus have talked about drafting Articles of Impeachment despite your best efforts to comply with their document requests?’

Rosenstein had to pause to laugh before he could move on to answering the question.

‘They can’t even resist leaking their own drafts,’ he said, then paused again as the entire audience joined his continued guffawing at Congress.’

His public disdain for members of Congress is shocking.

It also appears that in spite of Rosenstein’s denying many months ago that the Mueller investigation wasn’t a fishing expedition, critics of Mueller say that he has far exceeded the original scope. As a result, Rosenstein authorized Mueller to investigate Paul Manafort. To date, no crime regarding the Trump campaign has been identified, yet the case continues. Judge T.S. Ellis III was appointed to preside over the special counsel’s criminal case against Paul Manafort:

Ellis said that he believes the special counsel is only interested in Manafort to squeeze him for information ‘that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his impeachment.’

The judge said prosecutors wanted the former Trump campaign official to ‘sing,’ but he worried that Manafort might also ‘compose.’

Ellis then opined that the American people do not want a special counsel with unfettered power and even went so far as to ask when the investigation would conclude.

In fact, Judge Ellis, a Reagan-appointee, asked for a copy of the scope of Mueller’s investigation.

Meanwhile, Devin Nunes sent a memo to AG Jeff Sessions threatening a contempt of Congress charge. Sessions responded with the following remarks:

Congress has made inquiries concerning an issue of great importance for the country and concerns have been raised about the Department’s performance. I have great confidence in the men and women of this Department. But no Department is perfect.

Really.

So I will now take a deep breath in order to ask all my questions, in no particular order, of those of you out there who understand more about the operations of the federal government than I do:

Why doesn’t President Trump simply declassify all the relevant documents as determined by a trusted outside expert with previous experience with the FBI?

How can Sessions allow Rosenstein to take full control, essentially, of the Department of Justice?

Why doesn’t Jeff Sessions fire Rod Rosenstein?

Why doesn’t the President fire Rosenstein?

Why didn’t Judge Ellis rule that the scope of the Mueller investigation be released?

Why bother citing Sessions with contempt of Congress, since it will make no difference in his role?

Why aren’t Rosenstein and/or Sessions impeached?

Can’t anyone compel Rosenstein to respond to Congressional oversight?

The answer to almost all of these questions is that no one has the courage to stand up for what’s right or to hold people accountable. No one is really interested in serving the American people. No one is concerned that laws have been broken. No one cares that the DOJ is running roughshod over everyone else. No one is prepared to expose the duplicity, fraud, and disrespect that has been shown for anyone who isn’t in the DOJ or FBI.

So who is running this country, anyway?

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 104 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    The other thing is, DOJ has a hell of a lot of power but it was created by statute, not constitutionally. It is under Congress and Trump, with no exceptions except impeaching Trump. 

    Think about it. Law enforcement has to do many things in secret but there isn’t ONE GUY over them, Trump or one single congressman, that they can be completely forthright to on what they are doing. This is what they are saying, right? 

    What am I missing? 

    If I wanted to live in Honduras etc., I would move there. 

    • #31
  2. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    I so appreciate this picture!! And it seems plausible, if everything falls into place. Not everyone would agree with your 2018 predictions, though.

    We can hope and pray for that wonderful outcome. 

    • #32
  3. Jim George Member
    Jim George
    @JimGeorge

    BalticSnowTiger (View Comment):

     

    Is there a transcript available? When may we read your note?

    Working on it right now; transcript is available on Scribd.com and I assume other sites as well. I got the lead for the one I got from Powerlineblog.com.Jim

    • #33
  4. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Instugator (View Comment):
    Wouldn’t the short form be AuH20W?

    Well, most of my Ricochet friends call me GWW. I like it!

    • #34
  5. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Either we have a British Civil Service or we don’t. We will have unless someone takes the SES and all the rest and shakes them like a terrier shakes a rat.

    • #35
  6. BalticSnowTiger Member
    BalticSnowTiger
    @BalticSnowTiger

    Jim George (View Comment):
    Scribd.com

    Found it. 

    • #36
  7. Jim George Member
    Jim George
    @JimGeorge

    BalticSnowTiger (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    Scribd.com

    Found it.

    For anyone who might want to study the transcript, here is the cite: file:///C:/Users/Jim/Documents/Manafort%20hearing%20May%204%2018%20Judge%20Ellis/378289370-US-v-Manafort-Full-Text-Transcript-Hearing-Motion-May-4-2018.pdf

    • #37
  8. Jim George Member
    Jim George
    @JimGeorge

    Jim George (View Comment):
    Jim George  

    BalticSnowTiger (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    Scribd.com

    Found it.

    For anyone who might want to study the transcript, here is the cite: file:///C:/Users/Jim/Documents/Manafort%20hearing%20May%204%2018%20Judge%20Ellis/378289370-US-v-Manafort-Full-Text-Transcript-Hearing-Motion-May-4-2018.pdf

    Sorry, here is the correct cite: https://www.scribd.com/document/378289370/US-v-Manafort-Full-Text-Transcript-Hearing-Motion-May-4-2018#from_embed

    • #38
  9. ctlaw Coolidge
    ctlaw
    @ctlaw

    Jim George (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    Jim George

    BalticSnowTiger (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    Scribd.com

    Found it.

    For anyone who might want to study the transcript, here is the cite: file:///C:/Users/Jim/Documents/Manafort%20hearing%20May%204%2018%20Judge%20Ellis/378289370-US-v-Manafort-Full-Text-Transcript-Hearing-Motion-May-4-2018.pdf

    Sorry, here is the correct cite: https://www.scribd.com/document/378289370/US-v-Manafort-Full-Text-Transcript-Hearing-Motion-May-4-2018#from_embed

    Not a scribd fan. Try:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20180505195158/https://file.io/0fO8Ll

    It’s searchable, etc.

    • #39
  10. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Either we have a British Civil Service or we don’t. We will have unless someone takes the SES and all the rest and shakes them like a terrier shakes a rat.

    Gosh, I like that picture. . .

    • #40
  11. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    There’s (yet another) important piece at Conservative Treehouse.

    Somehow the sketchy lawyer for Stormy Daniels obtained a list of treasury filings attached to the name Michael Cohen; the same name as President Trump’s lawyer. It is likely someone within the Treasury Department, or the DOJ with search access to the Treasury Department, leaked this list to Michael Avenatti in an effort to assist his dubious motives.

    Unfortunately, at least two of the people Avenatti is now accusing of scurrilous financial transactions are not the same Michael Cohen the dubious lawyer is seeking to attack.  One is a Canadian Michael Cohen, the other is an Israeli Michael Cohen; both have financial transactions in the United States.  The latter just sending his brother money….

    The previous incorrect search result on ‘Cohen travel’, contained in the Clinton-Steele Dossier, likely came from unlawful FISA-702(17) “about” queries (opposition research) and was passed along from Fusion-GPS to Steele -laundered into an intelligence product- and later passed back to the FBI via the dossier.  Today’s incorrect search results likely came from a U.S. government agency with access to Treasury Department records.

    The U.S. Treasury Department has now opened an internal Inspector General investigation to see if they can find out who accessed the records, conducted an unauthorized search under the search name “Michael Cohen”, and unlawfully passed the results to the porn star’s lawyer, Michael Avenatti….

    Agents, employees, private contractors, and entities within government agencies with political motives and agendas, how (sic.) have the ability to weaponize information against people they consider their political opposition.

    This was always the danger of allowing corrupt left-wing ideologues to have the ability to control the mechanics of government. This is part of Obama’s “fundamental change” that people allowed in 2009 through 2017.

    After eight years of access and promotion of the processes, there are now thousands of like-minded political ideologues within government that will abuse their access to data in an effort to assist their allies. Leaking information has evolved into specific targeting as the process has become more refined and frequent.

    The italicized sentence may help elucidate who’s running the country.

    • #41
  12. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Ontheleftcoast (View Comment):

    There’s (yet another) important piece at Conservative Treehouse.

    Somehow the sketchy lawyer for Stormy Daniels obtained a list of treasury filings attached to the name Michael Cohen; the same name as President Trump’s lawyer. It is likely someone within the Treasury Department, or the DOJ with search access to the Treasury Department, leaked this list to Michael Avenatti in an effort to assist his dubious motives.

    Unfortunately, at least two of the people Avenatti is now accusing of scurrilous financial transactions are not the same Michael Cohen the dubious lawyer is seeking to attack. One is a Canadian Michael Cohen, the other is an Israeli Michael Cohen; both have financial transactions in the United States. The latter just sending his brother money….

    The previous incorrect search result on ‘Cohen travel’, contained in the Clinton-Steele Dossier, likely came from unlawful FISA-702(17) “about” queries (opposition research) and was passed along from Fusion-GPS to Steele -laundered into an intelligence product- and later passed back to the FBI via the dossier. Today’s incorrect search results likely came from a U.S. government agency with access to Treasury Department records.

    The U.S. Treasury Department has now opened an internal Inspector General investigation to see if they can find out who accessed the records, conducted an unauthorized search under the search name “Michael Cohen”, and unlawfully passed the results to the porn star’s lawyer, Michael Avenatti….

    Agents, employees, private contractors, and entities within government agencies with political motives and agendas, how (sic.) have the ability to weaponize information against people they consider their political opposition.

    This was always the danger of allowing corrupt left-wing ideologues to have the ability to control the mechanics of government. This is part of Obama’s “fundamental change” that people allowed in 2009 through 2017.

    After eight years of access and promotion of the processes, there are now thousands of like-minded political ideologues within government that will abuse their access to data in an effort to assist their allies. Leaking information has evolved into specific targeting as the process has become more refined and frequent. The italicized sentence may help elucidate who’s running the country

     Thanks! I’m beginning to have more and more appreciation for the OIG. Let’s hope if they request one that he’ll be free of Leftist influence. It’s impossible to know who to trust anymore. Sure would like to see the upcoming IG report . . . now.

    • #42
  13. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    Good work Susan. Glad to see you come around.

    I am hoping the good Judge Ellis will just tell Rosenstein that the Special Counsel law demands a crime be identified to prosecute of which none has been identified, therefore Rosenstein’s Special Counsel scope in unlawful and should be ended immediately.

    You are absolutely right, Rosenstein and his very good friend of many years Mueller, have gone completely  off the lawful rails and both need to be fired, if not prosecuted for horrendously malicious prosecution.

    One of the most disturbing aspects of this Special Counsel has been the prosecution of Michael Cohen.  Apparently, the Special Counsel Office  leaked information gleaned from their illegal search of Cohen’s office to Stormy Daniels Attorney.  It is  an Oh My Gawd ! moment.  Unbelievably dishonest and unlawful conduct that eviscerates any sense of Attorney/Client  privilege.

    But then there is that illegal search. From John Dellaportas at the Federalist:

    “The FBI, on referral from Special Counsel Robert Mueller, raided the office, home, and hotel room of Michael Cohen, the president’s personal lawyer, and hauled off “thousands if not millions” of pages of documents. In court filings, the feds further revealed that, for weeks prior to the search, they had been secretly reading Cohen’s emails as he was sending them.

    Moreover, prosecutors apparently convinced a federal magistrate to issue this warrant on the flimsiest of pretenses—the so-called “crime-fraud exception” to the attorney-client privilege. ”

    “The crime-fraud exception is an exceedingly narrow exception that courts have applied in only the rarest and most extreme of circumstances. The privilege is not removed simply because the attorney has committed a crime. It is the client, not the attorney, who owns the privilege, and he or she is not to be punished for attorney misconduct of which he or she was not involved. It certainly is not removed merely because criminal acts are discussed. Indeed, that would put the entire criminal defense bar out of business, and negate the Sixth Amendment.”

    “In these cases, the most important question is always Who gets to judge what falls within the exception? Here we arrive at the most extraordinary aspect of the Cohen affair. The prosecutor’s office has declared that it gets to decide, by having the materials first reviewed by a so-called “taint team” of fellow prosecutors and FBI agents supposedly uninvolved with the case. In other words, their colleagues from down the hall. The whole thing is absurd.”

    “It is also illegal. The Supreme Court, in a unanimous 8-0 decision in a case called United States v. Zolin, held that the applicability of the crime-fraud exception to privileged materials is to be adjudicated through an in camera inspection by the presiding judge. ”

    Yet Radical Lefty Judge Kimba Wood  appointing a special master to review the materials after the fact  despite the fact that there should be a ‘fruit of the poisoned tree” problem with all of this evidence .  More Crimes.

    • #43
  14. Jim George Member
    Jim George
    @JimGeorge

    @susanquinn, my notes about the transcript just went up; hope they are helpful in some small degree. Sincerely, Jim

     

    • #44
  15. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    More from John Dellaporta at the Federalist:

    “What about the weeks the FBI already spent peering into Cohen’s emails before conducting its raid? As the Supreme Court explained in Maness v. Meyers, once privileged materials are disclosed, the court cannot “unring the bell.” Knowledge, once known, cannot be forgotten.”

    “Unfortunately, Wood waved off such concerns. “I have faith in the Southern District U.S. Attorney’s Office,” she said. “Their integrity is unimpeachable.” That is nice of her to say, but it flies in the face of reality.

    In the very weekend Wood was considering Cohen’s TRO application, a series of tabloid-worthy stories from Cohen’s files came flooding out, cited to persons with “knowledge of” the privileged materials—presumably one or more members of the supposedly unimpeachable “taint team.” Nor is this an aberration. The leaks spewing out of the special counsel’s Paul Manafort prosecution have been so extensive that Manafort’s attorneys have demanded the judge investigate.”

    Now we have not just leaking but giving privileged material to the opposing counsel.

    “Unless respected mainstream media sources are routinely fabricating sources and stories, Mueller’s team have committed a slew of crimes. As the Department of Justice—the agency that vested Mueller with his prosecutorial authority—explains on its own website, the unauthorized disclosure of grand jury information is illegal and punishable under a number of criminal statutes, such as 18 U.S.C. § 1503.

    “The leaks are only part of the problem. The bigger issue is the underlying criminality of the investigation itself. An onscreen prostitute allegedly got paid $130,000 to stop her from spilling the beans. There is a crime there, but curiously not the one being investigated.

    In New York, the crime is called “Larceny by Extortion.” It is a class B felony punishable by up to 25 years in prison. Under N.Y. Penal Law 155.05(2)(e)(v): “A person obtains property by extortion when he compels or induces another person to deliver such property to himself or to a third person by means of instilling in him a fear that, if the property is not so delivered, the actor or another will … [e]xpose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject some person to hatred, contempt or ridicule”

    “But if the prostitute’s lawyer is to be believed, Mueller is in active collaboration with the extorter against the victim. Also, on “referral” from Mueller, the U.S. Attorney’s Office has now undertaken an egregious breach of privilege. In other words, the special counsel’s investigation has become, in itself, a criminal enterprise.”

    “In his obsessive pursuit of the president, Mueller has plainly employed this and other improper means to deprive Trump of his right to the counsel of his choice. The precedents set for Trump today will apply tomorrow to all Americans. For the good of us all, any prosecution brought by …Mueller should be dismissed.”

    • #45
  16. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Unofficial poll:  In the next three comments, you will have 3 choices about what to do. You can Like only one. Choose wisely.

    • #46
  17. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Fire Rosenstein

    • #47
  18. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Fire Sessions

    • #48
  19. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Fire Sessions and Rosenstein

    • #49
  20. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Unsk (View Comment):

    Good work Susan. Glad to see you come around.

    I am hoping the good Judge Ellis will just tell Rosenstein that the Special Counsel law demands a crime be identified to prosecute of which none has been identified, therefore Rosenstein’s Special Counsel scope in unlawful and should be ended immediately.

    You are absolutely right, Rosenstein and his very good friend of many years Mueller, have gone completely off the lawful rails and both need to be fired, if not prosecuted for horrendously malicious prosecution.

    One of the most disturbing aspects of this Special Counsel has been the prosecution of Michael Cohen. Apparently, the Special Counsel Office leaked information gleaned from their illegal search of Cohen’s office to Stormy Daniels Attorney. It is an Oh My Gawd ! moment. Unbelievably dishonest and unlawful conduct that eviscerates any sense of Attorney/Client privilege.

    But then there is that illegal search. From John Dellaportas at the Federalist:

    “The FBI, on referral from Special Counsel Robert Mueller, raided the office, home, and hotel room of Michael Cohen, the president’s personal lawyer, and hauled off “thousands if not millions” of pages of documents. In court filings, the feds further revealed that, for weeks prior to the search, they had been secretly reading Cohen’s emails as he was sending them.

    Moreover, prosecutors apparently convinced a federal magistrate to issue this warrant on the flimsiest of pretenses—the so-called “crime-fraud exception” to the attorney-client privilege. ”

    “The crime-fraud exception is an exceedingly narrow exception that courts have applied in only the rarest and most extreme of circumstances. The privilege is not removed simply because the attorney has committed a crime. It is the client, not the attorney, who owns the privilege, and he or she is not to be punished for attorney misconduct of which he or she was not involved. It certainly is not removed merely because criminal acts are discussed. Indeed, that would put the entire criminal defense bar out of business, and negate the Sixth Amendment.”

    “In these cases, the most important question is always Who gets to judge what falls within the exception? Here we arrive at the most extraordinary aspect of the Cohen affair. The prosecutor’s office has declared that it gets to decide, by having the materials first reviewed by a so-called “taint team” of fellow prosecutors and FBI agents supposedly uninvolved with the case. In other words, their colleagues from down the hall. The whole thing is absurd.”

    “It is also illegal. The Supreme Court, in a unanimous 8-0 decision in a case called United States v. Zolin, held that the applicability of the crime-fraud exception to privileged materials is to be adjudicated through an in camera inspection by the presiding judge. ”

    Yet Radical Lefty Judge Kimba Wood appointing a special master to review the materials after the fact despite the fact that there should be a ‘fruit of the poisoned tree” problem with all of this evidence . More Crimes.

    @unsk, it’s all so difficult to comprehend. It sounds like an absurd crime novel, doesn’t it? I can’t even keep track of all the lies, crimes, fraud–I can’t even find enough adjectives to describe what’s been going on. At what point does someone finally say, Enough!! Do you think it will start with Judge Ellis? Thank you so much for laying all of this out.  I had hoped (as you alluded to) that we could just let everything play out. I wonder (since I’m still a fan of Trey Gowdy) what Gowdy is saying right about now. Unbelievable.

    • #50
  21. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Jim George (View Comment):

    @susanquinn, my notes about the transcript just went up; hope they are helpful in some small degree. Sincerely, Jim

     

    Jim, I read the transcript–Judge Ellis is really something, isn’t he? But I’m not sure where your notes are–are they saved in a different spot? I’ll be checking in the morning–time to sign off for now. The transcript was fascinating and explains a lot! Thank you.

    • #51
  22. Rōnin Coolidge
    Rōnin
    @Ronin

    Et fortes fortuna iuvat (Fortune favors the brave/strong).  Now tell me we are not at war; a cold, hard, mean civil war.  We are witness to a slow motion soft coup d’état.  I don’t know how this will end, badly for someone I’m sure (I suspect Jeff won’t be around after the mid-terms), but I’ll leave you with my final thoughts on the subject.

     

     

    • #52
  23. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    ctlaw (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    Jim George

    BalticSnowTiger (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):
    Scribd.com

    Found it.

    For anyone who might want to study the transcript, here is the cite: file:///C:/Users/Jim/Documents/Manafort%20hearing%20May%204%2018%20Judge%20Ellis/378289370-US-v-Manafort-Full-Text-Transcript-Hearing-Motion-May-4-2018.pdf

    Sorry, here is the correct cite: https://www.scribd.com/document/378289370/US-v-Manafort-Full-Text-Transcript-Hearing-Motion-May-4-2018#from_embed

    Not a scribd fan. Try:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20180505195158/https://file.io/0fO8Ll

    It’s searchable, etc.

    Direct PDF link. https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/US-v-Manafort-full-text-transcript-hearing-motion-may-4-2018.pdf

    H/T Power Line Blog.

    • #53
  24. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    @susanquinn, maybe Trump lets the tense and unjust status quo continue, because it’s galvanizing support on the center right. Look how many Trump skeptics have been forced to admit that Mueller et al are on a witch hunt. Look how few Trump skeptics have shown up to posts like this one to defend Mueller et al. It’s indefensible, so it’s a good focal point.

    • #54
  25. Clifford A. Brown Contributor
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Jim George (View Comment):

    @susanquinn, my notes about the transcript just went up; hope they are helpful in some small degree. Sincerely, Jim

     

    Jim, I read the transcript–Judge Ellis is really something, isn’t he? But I’m not sure where your notes are–are they saved in a different spot? I’ll be checking in the morning–time to sign off for now. The transcript was fascinating and explains a lot! Thank you.

    http://ricochet.com/516916/here-comes-de-judge-this-ones-for-you-special-counsel-mueller/ 

    Great work by @jimgeorge.

    • #55
  26. Misthiocracy, Joke Pending Member
    Misthiocracy, Joke Pending
    @Misthiocracy

    Remember when distrusting the FBI was a Democratic Party staple?

    Bring back J. Edgar Hoover.

    • #56
  27. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    @susanquinn, maybe Trump lets the tense and unjust status quo continue, because it’s galvanizing support on the center right. Look how many Trump skeptics have been forced to admit that Mueller et al are on a witch hunt. Look how few Trump skeptics have shown up to posts like this one to defend Mueller et al. It’s indefensible, so it’s a good focal point.

    I don’t think he’d want it to go much longer. His twitter rants show his impatience, and I don’t think that strategy would appeal to him, although it does make sense. Interesting thought, @bloodthirstyneocon!

    • #57
  28. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Fire neither Sessions nor Rosenberg.  Both are doing their job.

    • #58
  29. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Limbaugh is reporting that the WSJ opinion section thinks  the FBI had a plant in the Trump campaign. I hope it was a Special Agent. LOL 

    • #59
  30. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Fire neither Sessions nor Rosenberg. Both are doing their job.

    Congress should also do its job and play hardball about its oversight responsibilities. It might be interesting if the House leadership were to twist arms and get a contempt vote or two through.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.