Who do you think is right about Rosenstein VS GOP House Members

[Athanasius68]

The justice department is part of the executive branch but the Justice Department is accountable first and foremost to the law, not the President.

There is a chain of command. Everyone there has a boss. It ends at the White House.

 

[OscarLevant]

1. You, and these "many" you mention, are totally delusional about GOP House member's motivation. They are not interested in protecting Trump at all. At this point, they are only interested in investigating activities by members of the Obama administration.

The House Intel Committee, led by Nunes, seem to be more interested in investigating Mueller's investigation, Obama, Hillary, etc., than they are of Russian interference in the 2016 election. All of this is what the President wants them to do, because he doesn't want the
Russian meddling investigation to continue because it might prove his presidency is illegitimate. The motivation is definitely to help Trump.
Though they weren't successful investigating the FBI/Hillary/Obama, they did shut down the investigation long before Dems were able to exhaust all available leads, Nunes blocking legit subpoenas, etc. Definitely to help Trump, so you are wrong.

2. You are also totally delusional about the DOJ/FBI motivations for withholding information from Congress. It has nothing to do with any investigation or the Constitution. Their investigation is done. They are beginning their criminal proceedings. They are reluctant to give information that is part of "criminal proceedings" to a political entity who leaks like a sieve. That's all.

Mueller just requisitioned 70 blank subpoenas, so it doesn't seem like he is finished with his investigation. If you are going to accuse someone of being "delusion", make sure you are not delusional, first. I agree Rosenstein doesn't want to give docs to house repubs, but the fact that they "leak like a sieve" is only part of it. The other part is that the repubs will forward the docs to the White House. But, the main reason, for reasons elegantly articulated by FDR's AG Robert Jackson, it's not DOJ's policy to release information on ongoing investigations.

[...]

I think you'll find very soon that the whole Congressional investigation will be unnecessary. Soon we'll see people...the very people Congress wants to investigate...being charged with crimes and brought to trial.

Wishful thinking. There really is no chance of it, and I'm not seeing any evidence of this.

So, I suggest you abandon your partisan notions and get ready to have your pro-Obama world rocked to its core. It's not going to be pretty.

Yeah, right.


Let only he who is without partisan notions accuse others of partisan notions.

As far as the premise of "Obama world rocked to its core", well, dream on.

 

[OscarLevant]

Think you went overboard on that rebuttal...

Could you trim it down a bit, your side might get confused with all the facts and logic you jammed in there.

Fair enough, per your request (which I can infer from your snarky comment ), I replied in greater detail to the Mycroft post.

 

[OscarLevant]

The DOJ is subject to congressional oversight. The DOJ isn't a "seperate" power. There's no such thing as a "seperate power" in The United States government.

It's true that the DOJ is subject to legitimate congressional oversight, the operative word being "legitimate". A narrow section of the repub caucus is abusing it's authority in this regard, the aim of which is to undermine the Mueller investigation in an attempt to do the white house's bidding. Evidence for this is abound.

This is why there are, indeed, "separate powers", for when one dept is imposing a so-called "check" on another dept., that other dept. has a right to impugn the integrity of that check when it is warranted, as is the case with Rosenstein refusing the demands of congress on releasing docs of an ongoing investigation.

Rosenstein knows that the Nunes faction is a paper tiger, and their impeachment threat of him will fall flat, and that their real motives are purely political.

 

[Mycroft]

The House Intel Committee, led by Nunes, seem to be more interested in investigating Mueller's investigation, Obama, Hillary, etc., than they are of Russian interference in the 2016 election. All of this is what the President wants them to do, because he doesn't want the
Russian meddling investigation to continue because it might prove his presidency is illegitimate. The motivation is definitely to help Trump.
Though they weren't successful investigating the FBI/Hillary/Obama, they did shut down the investigation long before Dems were able to exhaust all available leads, Nunes blocking legit subpoenas, etc. Definitely to help Trump, so you are wrong.



Mueller just requisitioned 70 blank subpoenas, so it doesn't seem like he is finished with his investigation. If you are going to accuse someone of being "delusion", make sure you are not delusional, first. I agree Rosenstein doesn't want to give docs to house repubs, but the fact that they "leak like a sieve" is only part of it. The other part is that the repubs will forward the docs to the White House. But, the main reason, for reasons elegantly articulated by FDR's AG Robert Jackson, it's not DOJ's policy to release information on ongoing investigations.



Wishful thinking. There really is no chance of it, and I'm not seeing any evidence of this.



Yeah, right.


Let only he who is without partisan notions accuse others of partisan notions.

I don't have any desire to repeat myself. You have your partisan opinion. So it goes...

I'll just address the part of your post that I highlighted.

This is irrelevant to my point and irrelevant to your thread topic. We are talking about Rosenstein and Congress.

 

[OscarLevant]

There is a chain of command. Everyone there has a boss. It ends at the White House.

If you are implying that the DOJ must report to the White House, that's factually incorrect.

 

[OscarLevant]

I don't have any desire to repeat myself. You have your partisan opinion. So it goes...

I'll just address the part of your post that I highlighted.

This is irrelevant to my point and irrelevant to your thread topic. We are talking about Rosenstein and Congress.

You wrote that the investigation was "done." I inferred that you meant the Mueller investigation. I mean, of the three investigations that were going on, the Mueller investigation is the one they (House Intel Repubs) are concerned with.

If I drew the inference correctly, then the highlighted assertion, which refutes that assertion, is therefore relevant, i.e., Rosenstein is in charge of the Mueller investigation, and by virtue of the fact that 70 subpoenas were recently requisitioned by Mueller, it does not appear the investigation is "done".

I've addressed the issue of Rosenstein and congress, and you haven't refuted those comments.

 

[Athanasius68]

If you are implying that the DOJ must report to the White House, that's factually incorrect.

That is indeed factually correct. The Justice dept is in the executive department for whom a single president is in charge.

 

[apdst]

It's true that the DOJ is subject to legitimate congressional oversight, the operative word being "legitimate". A narrow section of the repub caucus is abusing it's authority in this regard, the aim of which is to undermine the Mueller investigation in an attempt to do the white house's bidding. Evidence for this is abound.

This is why there are, indeed, "separate powers", for when one dept is imposing a so-called "check" on another dept., that other dept. has a right to impugn the integrity of that check when it is warranted, as is the case with Rosenstein refusing the demands of congress on releasing docs of an ongoing investigation.

Rosenstein knows that the Nunes faction is a paper tiger, and their impeachment threat of him will fall flat, and that their real motives are purely political.

There is a seperation of powers. The DOJ isn't a power, nor a branch of government. Congress has every authority to oversee the DOJ, whether you, or Rosenstein like it, or not. Rosenstein doesn't have the authority to question Congress' motives for conducting said oversight. What Rosenstein calls "extortion" is the ****ing law and he is required to abide by it.

 

[apdst]

No you missed most of the discussion because like most of your posts, all you care about is a result...like saving Dear Leader and his Corrupt Administration...A Result. Keystrokes and keystrokes ago, I said the prosecutors would give up an un-redacted version to the judge. Its not the judge I am worried about. Do you read at all before you post?

Rosenstein will be giving up an unredacted version of the memo to Congress, or face impeachment.

 

[apdst]

As for Trump ordering Rosenstein to give up material to Congress about an ongoing investigation, that is a procedural matter. I suspect that is outside the scope of Sessions recusal and I suspect Sessions will step up and protect Rosenstein's decision if that happens. So you are right back to Saturday Night Massacre scenario.

You know some of you folks should just move to N. Korea if you actually want a Dear Leader this badly. Your not going to get one here. Get used to it.

When did that happen?

 

[apdst]

Trump could simply order Rosenstein to release the documents.

And if he refused, he can be fired.

 

[Mycroft]

You wrote that the investigation was "done." I inferred that you meant the Mueller investigation. I mean, of the three investigations that were going on, the Mueller investigation is the one they (House Intel Repubs) are concerned with.

If I drew the inference correctly, then the highlighted assertion, which refutes that assertion, is therefore relevant, i.e., Rosenstein is in charge of the Mueller investigation, and by virtue of the fact that 70 subpoenas were recently requisitioned by Mueller, it does not appear the investigation is "done".

I've addressed the issue of Rosenstein and congress, and you haven't refuted those comments.

The investigation I was talking about is the DOJ OIG investigation.

 

[OscarLevant]

That is indeed factually correct. The Justice dept is in the executive department for whom a single president is in charge.

Okay, but that statement requires qualification as you seem to imply a command line similar to that of the prez and the military.

Well, that's a technicality, i.e., although the AG, head of the DOJ, is a member of the President's cabinet, they MUST give their allegiance to the Constitution, and they are not there to serve the demands and whims of the president. This idea that there is the kind of command line structure from the President to the DOJ as there is with the President and the Military, I'm not buying that, and if that is your point, that point is factually incorrect.

The Prez can fire and hire within his authority, as long as it is done without corrupt intent (pertaining to the AG and DOJ appointments), and where such is suspected, it's subject to challenge, the ultimate arbiter would be the Supreme Court. In a sense, it's SCOTUS that's above everything, since everything has to do with law, and they are the final arbiters of law, noting that the prez and the senate can influence the direction of the court via their appointments.

The Prez has authority over the DOJ, but it's limited. That being said, the DOJ is subject to congressional oversight (as long as that oversight is done with integrity).

All of these things pertain to the checks and balances designed by the forefathers who wrote the constitution. First and foremost, the AG, and the DOJ, and the FBI, swear their allegiance to the constitution, not the prez.

 

[OscarLevant]

There is a seperation of powers. The DOJ isn't a power, nor a branch of government. Congress has every authority to oversee the DOJ, whether you, or Rosenstein like it, or not. Rosenstein doesn't have the authority to question Congress' motives for conducting said oversight. What Rosenstein calls "extortion" is the ****ing law and he is required to abide by it.

The DOJ does not give out information on ongoing criminal investigations, and there are very few exceptions, and Rosenstein has every right to defy such a demand of congress. We've been down this road before, read up on Robert Jackson, FDR's AG, when he elegantly rebutted your "whether I like it or not" BS.

Unless the prez or the AG don't fire Rosenstein ( not likely ) The only recourse congress has is impeachment of Rosenstein, which is likely to fall flat.

So, your point really doesn't matter.

 

[apdst]

The DOJ does not give out information on ongoing criminal investigations, and there are very few exceptions, and Rosenstein has every right to defy such a demand of congress. We've been down this road before, read up on Robert Jackson, FDR's AG, when he elegantly rebutted your "whether I like it or not" BS.

Unless the prez or the AG don't fire Rosenstein ( not likely ) The only recourse congress has is impeachment of Rosenstein, which is likely to fall flat.

So, your point really doesn't matter.

This isn't information on an ongoing investigation. It's the memo that contains Mueller's orders from the deputy AG.

 

[jnug]

This isn't information on an ongoing investigation. It's the memo that contains Mueller's orders from the deputy AG.

Which initiated the ongoing investigation which means that what is in that memo is the specific elements the prosecutors are looking for, which is invaluable to the parties under investigation. They would know exactly what to hide, exactly what to try to defuse etc etc etc.

Just stop. Its getting embarrassing. I ten year old child would have gotten this by now and you have turned an entire thread into a circular argument.

 

[Casper]

If your concern is arrogance, perhaps you might check yourself since it was you who made the initial claims about the 2018 elections that we are discussing, not me.

You know where you file your BS, Skippy....

 

[lurchadams]

Several GOP House members are trying to force Rosenstein to give up documents concerning the Mueller investigation. It has been a long standing policy of the DOJ that you don't give up such info during a continuing investigation. Many believe that the reason for the requests by the GOP is two fold. One to get the information to help them protect the president by knowing where the investigation is going and providing such information to the Whitehouse to be used as ammunition against Mueller. The second is to force Rosenstein to say no and thus to give them ammo to impeach him. Rosenstein makes two arguments. The first is that it has been a long standing policy not to give up such information, especially knowing the use it would be used for. The second is more of a constitutional argument, that it involves the separation of powers. The GOP House members are part of the legislative branch of government and the DOJ is part of both the executive branch or the judicial branch depending on your outlook. So do you think that the GOP House members should use Rosenstein's refusal to give up the information as an excuse to impeach him, or do you think that Rosenstein is doing the right thing in refusing?

Nixon tried the same thing during watergate. Next stop, for Trump: another "Saturday Night Massacre"!

This is what happens when a president feels they have unlimited power.

History is repeating itself.

 

[Fletch]

You know where you file your BS, Skippy....

The only reason you and I are conversing on this thread is because of your claim regarding ending the investigation and the 2018 election. That puts the arrogance and BS squarely on you

 

[late]

Nixon tried the same thing during watergate. Next stop, for Trump: another "Saturday Night Massacre"!

This is what happens when a president feels they have unlimited power.

History is repeating itself.

Does have the feel of a rerun, doesn't it.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

No, he's legally and historically flat out correct. Congressional oversight (assuming that and not political meddling is what it is) comes after not during a DOJ criminal investigation.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/...n-delivers-remarks-bar-association-montgomery

Thats a very nice speech.

What criminal investigation? For there to be a criminal investigation there must be a proffered crime, what crime was it, specifically? Collusion which is not a statutory offense? Obstruction?

If obstruction, and if we are going to be so all upstanding, why hasnt Rosensteinks recused himself? He does have a conflict correct? He is a witness and participant by drafting the first letter to fire Comey. One cannot very well supervise the investigation of an alleged crime in which one may be called as a witness or may have some culpability as a participant...

Right?


Rod Rosenstein's letter recommending Comey be fired - BBC News


Letter from Deputy AG to the AG, Sessions.

 

[lurchadams]

Think you went overboard on that rebuttal...

Could you trim it down a bit, your side might get confused with all the facts and logic you jammed in there.

Dream on.

 

[lurchadams]

I don't have any desire to repeat myself. You have your partisan opinion. So it goes...

I'll just address the part of your post that I highlighted.

This is irrelevant to my point and irrelevant to your thread topic. We are talking about Rosenstein and Congress.

LOL - nice try to dodge. You got served and you know it my friend!

 

[Mycroft]

LOL - nice try to dodge. You got served and you know it my friend!

Not at all. I gave my take...he gave his. I dismissed his deflection.

That's all there is to it.