~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I can see why Fitton believes this information damages RR's reputation. Only read half the 147 page packet (Steven W. is stronger than I am).
What doesn't come across in the emails is context and timing and that is where my eyebrows elevated. I'll put a few pieces of Fitton's comments below mine.
RR's cozey relationship with the media is more significant when I consider the role he was in at the time. He was tasked with determining whether a sitting president was colluding with a foreign country. At that time, RR was privately communicating, on some occaisions he specified "off the record," with the anti-Trump press.
RR knew the actions of the three press outlets he was talking with (NYTimes, WashingtonPost, 60 Minutes) toward POTUS since Trump began his run for office. Smear jobs were the lesser of their slanders. Now tasked with evaluating evidence against the President, RR decided to communicate off the record and on a collaborative basis with those outlets.
These same virulently anti-Trump press outlets worked to keep their relationship with RR mutually beneficial; for example, they gave him a story they were writing about him to which he made two corrections (which I believe he used to make himself look better) and which they incorporated and even thanked him for helping them improve their "accuracy."
WHEN has the anti-Trump press ever afforded President Trump that service?
WHY did RR, the person in charge of the Russia/Trump investigation feel it was appropriate to create a private, mutual relationship, and give "off the record" content to the anti-Trump press?
Again from Judical Watch: "In a May 16, 2017 email, sent the day before Mueller’s appointment, Rosenstein emailed former Bush administration Deputy Attorney General and current Kirkland & Ellis Partner, Mark Filip stating, “I am with Mueller. He shares my views. Duty Calls. Sometimes the moment chooses us.”
Q had said if Mueller was dirty, then RR was dirty. I can't see how the two could possibly perservere in tarnishing the president around the clock, signing fraudelent FISA applications for a period of years and still be "clean". I believe their determined, destructive actions outweigh other evidence brought forth. I've never heard a satisfactory explanation for how these two could actively work to bring down a sitting president and be "heroes" for having done so.
Excellent summary, rn; I will try to make time over the weekend to look deeper into this. I spent today on John Solomon's Ukraine docs - which were not all about Ukraine, it turns out.
It does seem there is a sizable group on this thread committed to viewing RR as a 'hero'. As I have said repeatedly, without RR there would have been no Mueller appointment - AND Mueller was just a vehicle for sailing in Weissman and all the Clintonista lawyers in order to sandbag Donald Trump. In his House appearance, Mueller appeared to be unaware of critical issues important to Russian {HRC} meddling in the 2016 election.
Point of view, I guess.