Wednesday, May 15, 2019

Russiagate: The New Sheriff in Town

A lot more on the "new" prosecutor appointed by AG Barr to look into the origins of the Trump/Russia collusion story.   Althouse read the NYT so you don't have to: "Attorney General William P. Barr has assigned the top federal prosecutor in Connecticut to examine the origins of the Russia investigation..."  and teases out the distinction between his investigation and IG Huber's.
His inquiry is the third known investigation focused on the opening of an F.B.I. counterintelligence investigation during the 2016 presidential campaign into possible ties between Russia’s election interference and Trump associates. The department’s inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, is separately examining investigators’ use of wiretap applications and informants and whether any political bias against Mr. Trump influenced investigative decisions. And John W. Huber, the United States attorney in Utah, has been reviewing aspects of the Russia investigation. His findings have not been announced."
Da Hill, Prosecutor appointed by Barr poised to enter Washington firestorm.
Durham has a reputation for nonpartisanship and investigating sensitive national security matters, including leading a Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which are now widely viewed as torture, on terrorist suspects starting in 2008 under the appointment of then-Attorney General Eric Holder. He also helped prosecute Connecticut’s former Gov. John Rowland, who is a Republican.

The attorney received a positive recommendation by his state’s two Democratic senators, Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, when he was appointed to his position in Connecticut by President Trump. The Senate confirmed Durham by voice vote.

But Democrats are blasting the purpose of the investigation, accusing Barr of fueling conspiracy theories and GOP talking points by dedicating resources to a third investigation into the origins of the Russia probe, a move they say threatens to alienate members of the attorney general’s own law enforcement team.

“It is another very professional public servant tasked with a very unprofessional and unbecoming job,” said Blumenthal.

Blumenthal said Durham risks “sullying” his long record as a straight shooter.

“This investigation of the investigators is a politically motivated distraction. And it threatens to degrade the career professionals who devote their lives — like John Durham — to law enforcement,” the Connecticut senator added.
Front Page Mag, Barr Selects Connecticut Attorney to Investigate Collusion Hoax Origins, more excoriation from Blumenthal.  From RCI, New Russiagate Prober Has Haunted FBI for Months indicates that he has truly been on the job for a while, and is the reason James Baker is under criminal investigation, and is acting nervous.
In fact, the U.S. attorney from Connecticut appears to have begun that work more than seven months ago, to judge from an underreported transcript of an October congressional interview with Baker. The Baker interview, at which Durham was not present, suggests that the prosecutor nevertheless has some people very worried.
Ace, AG Barr Appoints Prosecutor to Probe Whether Spying on Trump Campaign Was Illegal, Citing the AP, notes,
Seizure Warning Ahead:
Barr provided no details about what “spying” may have taken place but appeared to be alluding to a surveillance warrant the FBI obtained on a former Trump associate, Carter Page, and the FBI’s use of an informant while the bureau was investigating former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos.
Trump and his supporters have seized on both to accuse the Justice Department and the FBI of unlawfully spying on his campaign.
The GOP, a party comprised, apparently, almost entirely of epileptics, once again seize, this time seizing on evidence of spying to claim that there is evidence of spying.

A friend says he's amused by the AP pretending they have no idea whatsoever about what could be worthy of investigating here. I told him, "Never ascribe to malice what can be more easily explained by ignorance and incompetence, plus malice."

CNS News, Trump on AG Appointing Durham to Look into Russia Probe Origins: ‘I Didn’t Ask Him to Do That’. Via the Wombat's In The Mailbox: 05.14.19, Don Surber concludes FBI spies are Toast. I am only cautiously optimistic. Also, Just One Minute, Send Better Apologists! NY Times Loses Plot On FBI Surveillance-Not-Spying On Trump. And more bad news for the spies? NR, CIA Joins Barr in Investigating Origins of Trump Campaign Surveillance
Attorney General William Barr has enlisted the help of the CIA to investigate whether the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign was motivated by partisan bias, CNN reported Tuesday.

CIA director Gina Haspel, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and FBI director Chris Wray are all participating in the investigation, which Barr first announced publicly during a congressional hearing last month.
But will they assist or hinder? Ace, CIA Joins DOJ Probe of #Spygate Origins "But is the CIA getting involved to find the truth, or to bury it?
I still have my doubts that the Deep State, and those with friends in the Deep State, will permit any kind of real investigation to happen. And I'm quite sure that Deep State apparatchiks are completely immune to prosecution for the perjury and obstruction they charge their targets with.
 Also from RCI, MUST WATCH: John Solomon Describes What He Thinks Strzok’s ‘Insurance Policy’ Meant (Among Other Things) It truly is a great interview:

At the Epoch Times, Mark Tapscott, Judicial Watch Head: Russia Hoax Prosecutions More Important Now Than New Investigations.
“We don’t need special prosecutors at this point, we just need prosecutions,” Fitton said. “I mean people like Peter Strzok and people of that ilk who quite obviously abused their offices for political purposes.

“How much more investigating is needed here? We just need decision-making on prosecutions. I mean there’s not much else to do here. We don’t need a two-year investigation here, they should be able to figure out what they need to do.”
Nice Deb at PJ Media, Trey Gowdy: Investigators Need to 'Look for Emails Between Brennan and Comey in December of 2016'. A good start.

Insty, YES. NEXT QUESTION? Did Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS, the Clinton Campaign & DNC Make Up the Russia Collusion Hoax? PJ Media, Report: Obama White House Orchestrated Clinton Email Cover Up. Well yeah.

Margot Cleveland at Da Federalist, Why Both The Left And The Right Should Defenestrate James Comey From Public Life. It all depends on which window they choose to throw him out of. Trump Tower might be appropriate.

WaPoo (secret link) is shocked, shocked at How William Barr, now serving as a powerful ally for Trump, has championed presidential powers. How about the next Democrat President appoint an AG who will limit his authority, as an example? Also, that meanie, Trump: FBI director’s comments were ‘ridiculous’, after all, it's not spying when we do it.

Ed at Hot Air, Rosenstein: How About James Comey’s New Career As A “Partisan Pundit,” Huh? Mary Chastain at LI, Rosenstein Unleashes Fury on Comey, Defends Handling of Mueller Probe. There's a lot here, but I'll highlight this, because it summarizes my feelings about Rosenstein:
Rosenstein brought up the fact that people have tried to determine which side he lands on:
“People spend a lot of time debating whose side I was on, based on who seemed to benefit most from any individual decision” to appoint Mr. Mueller, he said. “That is because partisans evaluate things in terms of the immediate political impact, and cable TV pundits fill a lot of time by pretending there is always serious breaking news. But trying to infer partisanship from law enforcement decisions is a category error. It uses the wrong frame of reference.”
Mr. Rosenstein added: “My soul and character are pretty much the same today as they were two years ago. I took a few hits and made some enemies during my time in the arena, but I held my ground and made a lot of friends. And thanks to them, I think I made the right calls on the things that mattered.”
 PJ Media, Rosenstein Laughs When Asked if He Offered to Wear a Wire Around Trump

"Adam Mill" at Da Federalist conceives 21 Questions To Ask Robert Mueller If He Testifies To Congress, all good ones, and most not ones I would have thought to ask. This is why the democrats will probably not force Mueller to testify.
18. There is a report that you turned over the day-to-day operations of the special counsel team to Weissmann. How do you respond to that account? Is there any evidence or log of how much time you physically came to the office to supervise the team?
From the WaPoo, cited by MSN(BC), House Democrats plan marathon public reading of Mueller report. How droll.

From the WaFreeBee, Rubio Renews Push to Investigate Whether John Kerry Violated Logan Act. I think the Logan Act is unconstitutional, but I'm tired of it being hauled out every time a Republican does something to oppose a Democrat. It was cited by Sally Yates as the excuse to spy on Michael Flynn. Let's settle this once and for all. And Kerry (or rather, his wife) has deep pockets.

AmThinker, Obama's Other Investigation
Much attention has been paid to Crossfire Hurricane and rightly so. But it’s well past time that more attention was given to Obama’s other higher-level shadow investigation into Russia’s alleged efforts to put Trump in the White House to determine what information was shared, if Brennan’s operation also involved any spying on Trump’s campaign, and whether it was justified by the completely discredited, Clinton-funded Steele dossier.
William Saletin at Slate rallies the "Resistance",  Don’t Impeach - Polls show there are smarter ways for Democrats to hold Trump accountable. At the AmSPec, David Catron asks Constitutional Crisis or Dem Crisis of Confidence? Another way the losing side is losing its mind. The crisis is that they lost an election they expected to win.

Breitbart, 'Art of the Deal': Richard Burr Relents on Trump, Jr. Subpoena
Trump, Jr., will now, sources familiar with the deal that Burr and Trump, Jr.,cut early this week appear in early June sometime before the committee for between two and four hours–but no longer, terms that Burr originally opposed limiting. The scope of topics is also going to be limited. The deal that Burr has agreed to comes after last week the matter blew up in serious public fashion in Burr’s face–where an embarrassing amount of Republicans undercut Burr, including several members of his own Senate Intelligence Committee, several other committee chairs, and his own home state colleague.
AllahPundit has the sads; Donald Trump Jr Reaches Agreement With Burr On Testifying Before Senate Intel Committee
According to Axios, Junior’s lawyers told Burr that they wouldn’t agree to an open-ended interview but that Trump wouldn’t assert his right against self-incrimination if called, essentially an invitation for a time-limited interview as a compromise. Why Don Jr didn’t want to take the Fifth and refuse to testify altogether, I don’t know: Sure, the headlines would have been bad, but his father’s political enemies already assume the worst about the family’s behavior regardless of what they do. Meanwhile the right-wing commentariat would have rallied with praise for the glorious Fifth Amendment right to refuse the government’s demand that you speak, with solemn warnings that guilt must never be presumed from a witness’s reluctance to answer questions. No one’s mind about the propriety of Junior’s behavior would have been changed either way. He would have had two days of bad press but he also would have ensured that, having eluded prosecution by Mueller and the DOJ, he wouldn’t be snagged at the last moment by somehow providing false information to Congress.

No comments:

Post a Comment