Deputy Attorney General: Special counsel Mueller needs permission to expand Russia investigation

Business Insider ^ | 8/6/17 | Maxwell Tani & Natasha Bertrand

[Lockbox]

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said on Sunday that the special counsel investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 election needs permission from the Department of Justice to expand his investigation if he finds evidence of an unrelated crime.

In an interview with Fox News Sunday, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of Russia's role in the 2016 campaign and President Donald Trump's campaign's potential ties to Russia was "not a fishing expedition."

"If he finds evidence of a crime that is within the scope of what Director Mueller and I have agreed is the appropriate scope of this investigation, then he can," Rosenstein said. "If it's something outside that scope he needs to come to the acting attorney general, at this time me, for permission to expand his investigation."

[for-q-clinton]

No way. Don’t get your hopes up. The deep state and Washington elites want the outsider gone. This is 100% about getting rid of Trump. The democrats and a handful of GOPe are in on it. McCain is probably the ring leader.

[FreeReign]

Don't believe everything you read or hear in the media. Don't you find it pathetic that I still have to remind people of this right here on FreeRepublic even in August of 2017?

Your the one who believes the NY Times Fake News that Trump didn't know who Rosenstein was.

[Alberta's Child]

1. It's kind of hard to call THAT "fake news" when the interview was recorded and the transcript can be found all over the internet.

2. I knew the whole interview was a farce as soon as I saw that one line. If the NYT reporters in the room had a collective IQ higher than that of a turnip, one of them would have asked Trump how he could possibly claim he didn't know anything about Rosenstein when he's the one who appointed him.

[FreeReign]

Trump asked the question rhetorically about Rosenstein, "Who is he?". Trump then complained that Session hardly knew who Rosesstein was, and then Trump answered the rhetorical question.

I've seen the transcript. I would suggest that you find the transcript and stop believing "pathetic" Fake News.

[Alberta's Child]

Right. I understand all that.

Trump then complained that Session hardly knew who Rosesstein was ...

My point is: Why would Trump complain that Sessions hardly knew who Rosenstein was? It wasn't Sessions who appointed him ... it was Trump.

[LS]

Kept telling people this. No one listened. Only hysteria, hysteria, hysteria.

Was at WH Friday, discussed this with Bannon. Some concern about Mulehead getting OTHER people, not concerned about Mulehead getting DT for anything. Said Sessions right to recuse. Had to shield off DOJ from Russia.

[Alberta's Child]

P.S. -- The timeline of events from Trump's standpoint completely undermines his own complaints about the matter.

1. Sessions recused himself on March 2nd.

2. Rosenstein wasn't confirmed by the Senate until April 25th.

That meant President Trump had almost eight weeks to do a little more homework on Rosenstein and perhaps withdraw his nomination if he was really all that bothered about Sessions' recusal. He didn't ... which has led me to believe -- since the day I read about it right here on FR -- that his whole NYT rant was nothing more than theatrics.

[Alberta's Child]

Thank you, Larry. You’ve been right on damn near everything about this administration since Day One!

[Defiant]

Why are you laughing about Rosenstein being part of the swamp? It’s not funny, it’s disgusting. Those who think he’s ok are deluded or nevertrumpers taking joy in the prospect of removing Trump.

[Lockbox]

I figure that the plan is to find someone, anyone to charge for whatever they can to create a media event for the 2018 elections.

[FreeReign]

That meant President Trump had almost eight weeks to do a little more homework on Rosenstein and perhaps withdraw his nomination if he was really all that bothered about Sessions' recusal. He didn't ... which has led me to believe -- since the day I read about it right here on FR -- that his whole NYT rant was nothing more than theatrics.

Sounds like a very busy President Trump relied on Session's advice to tell him which US Attorneys to keep. And that Trump isn't very happy with the recommendation of Rosenstein.

The NY Times transcripts supports that scenario.

That's far more likely than Trump, Sessions, Rosenstein, Mueller and a bunch of Democrat attorneys pulling off some super secret, "theatrical" Sting operation.

[Alberta's Child]

Those who think he’s ok are deluded or nevertrumpers taking joy in the prospect of removing Trump.

Or maybe we just recognize that President Trump -- who we've supported strongly for a long time -- appointed him, and must have had a lot of confidence in him.

Rosenstein is still there.

Sessions is still there.

All of the ranting by President Trump in his NYT interview last month seems to be just that -- ranting. LOL.

And yes ... it IS funny. Are you one of the Freepers who was posting here on the day the Trump NYT interview hit the news, and insisted to me that Sessions would be gone within 48 hours?

[TheNext]

4A

[Alberta's Child]

Sounds like a very busy President Trump relied on Session's advice to tell him which US Attorneys to keep. And that Trump isn't very happy with the recommendation of Rosenstein.

I have too much confidence in President Trump to accept that scenario.

And here's why ...

If you really believe that narrative, then you're willing to accept that Donald Trump has no business running a newspaper stand, let alone the U.S. government. Anyone who is in charge of an operation, relies on the advice of a subordinate to hire someone, and then turns around five months later and blames that subordinate for recommending that hire in the first place, is a whining f#%&ing loser of a chief executive.

And if that person actually goes public and complains about that subordinate in an interview with a media outlet that has spent two years trying to undermine him, then he ought to not just quit his job, but go jump off a bridge as well.

Which is the Donald J. Trump you voted for -- the effective leader or the whining loser?

Here's the one I voted for:

[entropy12]

There is zero evidence Donald J Trump had ANY meetings with Russian agents PERSONALLY. Besides a POTUS can pardon anyone including himself. The ONLY way the POTUS can be removed is by impeachment by House and then removal by Senate.

I do not see many GOP congress critters having the courage to go against Trump after having watched how Trump demolished experienced governors and senators and career politicians in the primaries.

However likes of Flynn could be in trouble.

[FreeReign]

Sounds like a very busy President Trump who relied on Session's advice to tell him which US Attorneys to keep. And that Trump isn't very happy with the recommendation of Rosenstein.

I have too much confidence in President Trump to accept that scenario.

So it's okay for you to have confidence in Trump but it's not okay for President Trump to have confidence in his AG to make recommendations about which US attorneys to keep?

[Alberta's Child]

He did have confidence in him. And he still does. That’s why Sessions and Rosenstein are both still there.

[dp0622]

Since “feelings” are kind of worthless, how about your reasoning behind your statement :)

[Ray76]

Sessions is not in control of the DOJ. He has failed to point out Rosenstein’s improper authorization.

Sessions doesn’t know what he’s doin. It’s been long enough to come up to speed. Time for Jeff to go.

[Ray76]

DJT has the right world view and he fights.

The R party fights him every step of the way. I hope they all die like McCain only sooner.