Aa
Firing Mueller or Rosenstein 'could precipitate a constitutional crisis'
Washington (CNN)The No. 2 Democrat in the Senate says Republicans may be setting the stage for a "constitutional crisis" if they use the Nunes memo to end the special counsel's Russia investigation.
"To say that that's the end of the investigation, that this is all that Donald Trump needs to fire (Deputy Attorney General Rod) Rosenstein or to fire (special counsel Robert) Mueller, I'll just tell you, this could precipitate a constitutional crisis," Sen. **** Durbin, D-Illinois, said on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday.
The four-page memo alleges FBI abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, accusing the agency of improperly using information paid for in part by Hillary Clinton's campaign to obtain a FISA warrant for Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page. Trump has said the memo "totally vindicates" him in the Russia probe.
"If House Republicans believe that they've set the stage for this President to end this investigation, they are basically saying that in America, one man is above the law, and that's not a fact," Durbin added.
California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, argued in an Esquire op-ed that Trump is seeking to seize the FBI for political ends.
"The norms and institutions protecting the Department of Justice from political interference in the years since have been tested, but never before as they are under President Donald Trump," Schiff wrote. "What we have witnessed during the first year of the Trump Administration is a determined effort to demolish the separation between politics and the fair administration of justice -- an attempt to turn the DOJ's investigative powers into the personal political tool of the President."
Last month, The New York Times reported that Trump tried to fire Mueller in June, though Trump denies this. And on Friday, Trump refused to say whether he would fire Rosenstein, who oversees the Russia investigation.
"You figure that one out," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office when asked about Rosenstein's potential termination.
When asked about Rosenstein's potential firing, White House deputy press secretary Raj Shah said Friday on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" that "no changes are going to be made" at the Justice Department.
White House spokesman Hogan Gidley made similar remarks on "Anderson Cooper 360" Friday night.
When asked if there were conversations about possibly firing Rosenstein, Gidley said: "No, not to my knowledge."
The firing of Mueller or Rosenstein would be "an extreme event" that "could lead to a confrontation we do not need in America," Durbin said.
Durbin would not predict how Democrats would react if either official is fired, but stressed that Republicans would have to "stand up for the rule of law" in such a scenario.
"We understand what the Constitution says we must do, and that is hold everyone in the United States, including the President of the United States, accountable if they've violated the law," Durbin said.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/04/politics/****-durbin-constitutional-crisis-cnntv/index.html
"To say that that's the end of the investigation, that this is all that Donald Trump needs to fire (Deputy Attorney General Rod) Rosenstein or to fire (special counsel Robert) Mueller, I'll just tell you, this could precipitate a constitutional crisis," Sen. **** Durbin, D-Illinois, said on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday.
The four-page memo alleges FBI abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, accusing the agency of improperly using information paid for in part by Hillary Clinton's campaign to obtain a FISA warrant for Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page. Trump has said the memo "totally vindicates" him in the Russia probe.
"If House Republicans believe that they've set the stage for this President to end this investigation, they are basically saying that in America, one man is above the law, and that's not a fact," Durbin added.
California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, argued in an Esquire op-ed that Trump is seeking to seize the FBI for political ends.
"The norms and institutions protecting the Department of Justice from political interference in the years since have been tested, but never before as they are under President Donald Trump," Schiff wrote. "What we have witnessed during the first year of the Trump Administration is a determined effort to demolish the separation between politics and the fair administration of justice -- an attempt to turn the DOJ's investigative powers into the personal political tool of the President."
Last month, The New York Times reported that Trump tried to fire Mueller in June, though Trump denies this. And on Friday, Trump refused to say whether he would fire Rosenstein, who oversees the Russia investigation.
"You figure that one out," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office when asked about Rosenstein's potential termination.
When asked about Rosenstein's potential firing, White House deputy press secretary Raj Shah said Friday on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" that "no changes are going to be made" at the Justice Department.
White House spokesman Hogan Gidley made similar remarks on "Anderson Cooper 360" Friday night.
When asked if there were conversations about possibly firing Rosenstein, Gidley said: "No, not to my knowledge."
The firing of Mueller or Rosenstein would be "an extreme event" that "could lead to a confrontation we do not need in America," Durbin said.
Durbin would not predict how Democrats would react if either official is fired, but stressed that Republicans would have to "stand up for the rule of law" in such a scenario.
"We understand what the Constitution says we must do, and that is hold everyone in the United States, including the President of the United States, accountable if they've violated the law," Durbin said.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/04/politics/****-durbin-constitutional-crisis-cnntv/index.html
I came across this, this morning while reading the news. I think it explains the whole situation pretty well:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/02/opinions/prosecutor-take-on-nunes-memo-callan-opinion/index.html
I also see that the Democrats memo has been released to the President. It remains to be seen whether he agrees to release it to the public. It's my understanding that if he chooses not to, it goes back to the full House to decide. Am I correct on that?
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/02/opinions/prosecutor-take-on-nunes-memo-callan-opinion/index.html
I also see that the Democrats memo has been released to the President. It remains to be seen whether he agrees to release it to the public. It's my understanding that if he chooses not to, it goes back to the full House to decide. Am I correct on that?
I mostly posted the article in order to ask a question; or a few questions...
Was it just me or did all the scuffle over the Nunes memo turn out to be a lot of hype? Devin Nunes stepped down as head of the Intelligence Service Committee, so why is he coming up with this memo, at this point?
I'm hearing Trump say that the memo "vindicated" him and Trump Jr is saying that it's "sweet revenge"... I can't really see that the memo "vindicated" anyone; am I missing something important?
Now, they want to prevent the Democrats from releasing a memo that counters the one Nunes released. Isn't it likely the Democrats will just "leak" their memo like so much other information has been leaked? What legal recourse is there, if they do?
Are the Republicans, only, trying to discredit/shut down the Russia investigation or are they trying to keep the populace occupied while something else, more important is going on. or both?
Was it just me or did all the scuffle over the Nunes memo turn out to be a lot of hype? Devin Nunes stepped down as head of the Intelligence Service Committee, so why is he coming up with this memo, at this point?
I'm hearing Trump say that the memo "vindicated" him and Trump Jr is saying that it's "sweet revenge"... I can't really see that the memo "vindicated" anyone; am I missing something important?
Now, they want to prevent the Democrats from releasing a memo that counters the one Nunes released. Isn't it likely the Democrats will just "leak" their memo like so much other information has been leaked? What legal recourse is there, if they do?
Are the Republicans, only, trying to discredit/shut down the Russia investigation or are they trying to keep the populace occupied while something else, more important is going on. or both?
2 Comments
"...Isn't it likely the Democrats will just "leak" their memo like so much other information has been leaked? What legal recourse is there, if they do?..."
They could be charged with leaking classified information depending on what the proposed memo revealed. That's why you want to vet this stuff but with the republicans trying to block and an unsympathetic president it's not easy to really respond.
I don't think you're missing anything Barb. I believe you see it clearly for what it is - and I find it disgraceful. But it is what it is and we voted this guy in.
I doubt he'll be bragging about the market today anyway.
They could be charged with leaking classified information depending on what the proposed memo revealed. That's why you want to vet this stuff but with the republicans trying to block and an unsympathetic president it's not easy to really respond.
I don't think you're missing anything Barb. I believe you see it clearly for what it is - and I find it disgraceful. But it is what it is and we voted this guy in.
I doubt he'll be bragging about the market today anyway.
Thank you, Mike; I appreciate your response. I've been trying to figure out why everyone is singing praises for Nunes and hailing him as a "hero". He was already found to be dishonest, once and isn't it true that the memo does leave out certain information?
It really looks like they're trying to hide something - at least, to me. If they have nothing to worry about, as they claim, they should just sit down and shut up, so Meuller can finish his investigation, then it will be over and they can get on with business.
Yeah, I saw that markets took a dive today. You're right, I don't think he'll be bragging about that. I wonder who he'll find to blame it on; surely he'll not connect it to anything HE did.
I'm finding a lot of things with this administration disgraceful, but you're right - it is what it is and we voted the guy in.
It really looks like they're trying to hide something - at least, to me. If they have nothing to worry about, as they claim, they should just sit down and shut up, so Meuller can finish his investigation, then it will be over and they can get on with business.
Yeah, I saw that markets took a dive today. You're right, I don't think he'll be bragging about that. I wonder who he'll find to blame it on; surely he'll not connect it to anything HE did.
I'm finding a lot of things with this administration disgraceful, but you're right - it is what it is and we voted the guy in.
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
