[Cboldt]

-- B.S. If he signed it, he is personally certifying it. There is no other reason for him to sign it. --

That's your point of view, but I submit it is not Rosenstein's point of view, nor is it the DOJ's point of view. If Roesenstine believed he was personally responsible for the contents, and in any way personally liable for errors within, he would have behaved differently.

-- If the others lied to him, they are liable. --

Are they? That seems a contradiction to your previous assertion, that Rosenstein is personally liable. Otherwise, you say, what is the point of him signing it?

[gibsonguy]

apparently the FISA court judge has no problem with the fact that false evidence was presented to them. I can’t imagine why /s.

[marktwain]

— If the others lied to him, they are liable. —

Are they? That seems a contradiction to your previous assertion, that Rosenstein is personally liable. Otherwise, you say, what is the point of him signing it?

---

No contradiction. People in charge of agencies are supposed to put in place safeguards and procedures so that when they sign things, they have a reasonable expectation that what they are signing is correct. If they have doubts, they are supposed to ask questions.

If they have been lied to, then the burden is shifted. Rosenstein has not made any allegation that he was lied to, as far as it appears.

What he appears to be saying is this:

I just sign paperwork. I have no responsibility for what is in the paperwork. I only sign it.

There is no point in him signing paperwork if he has no responsibility for what is in it.