Former FBI Director Robert Mueller, special counsel will take over FBI Russia campaign interference investigation

Bowing to public and Congressional pressure, Deputy U.S. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Bob Mueller on Wednesday to be a special counsel overseeing the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 campaign, Justice Department officials said.

Mueller will take command of the prosecutors and FBI agents who are working on the far reaching Russia investigation, which spans multiple FBI field offices on both coasts.

Mueller led the FBI for 12 years under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. He is second only to J. Edgar Hoover for longest tenure for an FBI chief.

The FBI, with the help of the Treasury Department, the CIA and other agencies, has been examining evidence of possible contacts, money transfers and business relationships between a variety of President Trump's associates and Russian officials, sources say.

The investigation goes well beyond a possible American connection, to include how Russian intelligence services carried out the campaign of fake news and leaking hacked emails that intelligence officials say was meant to hurt Hillary Clinton and benefit Trump.

But the question of whether Trump associates colluded with Russia is consuming public interest. No evidence has surfaced publicly linking Trump himself to the Russian interference effort.

Views: 129

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Maybe now they will conclude that there is no there there.

Basic research indicates the Attorney General is the one who designates exactly what the special prosecutor will investigate.

It's unclear as to whether or not there may be additions/changes made once the AG makes designation---I expect such variation is quite permissible, and perhaps because the President himself demands it.

So the special prosecutor intends to investigate, in broad terms, the 2016 election.  Such election happens to be characterized by a candidate who lied to Congress, obstructed justice, received $2 million Russian money for selling our uranium, and whose husband was paid $500,000.00 Russian money during the relevant time frame.

Now lets combine all this with the following campaign pledge, made by the President to a national audience:

It seems most likely to me that Clinton, et. al, has had it.

I think the left bit off more than they can chew with the call for a special prosecutor or special council. The whole past administration will more than likely be pulled into this! That is awesome.  

Here's my take on it;


The President has called recent developments a "witch hunt"---that's exactly what we need, and we all know who the witch is.
Proper perspective requires understanding that the Attorney General specifies exactly what Mueller is responsible for investigating.  In looking at exactly what is said, we find the following:
"The letter announcing the appointment says that Mueller is authorized to investigate "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and ANY MATTERS THAT AROSE OR MAY ARISE DIRECTLY FROM THE INVESTIGATION."
The point to be gained is, at the beginning we see the investigation may include consideration other than the President's campaign.
And it's possible  this broad designation can be modified in the future, by the Attorney General.
And as if that's not enough, the President can demand, perhaps even order, the special prosecutor to evaluate Clinton's conduct---you know---the Democrat candidate who sold our uranium to the Russians and received million of dollars in payment to her "foundation".
As you consider what is herein said, remember the President is a man who prides himself in keeping campaign promises---so look at the video and consider the promise he has yet to keep:

That is wonderful to hear, Dwight. Nothing will be better than to see the Clintons go down, along with a lot of others as well. 

It's quite probable that this investigation will point to financial dealings between Russia and Democrats. Hmmm....

Much will depend upon exactly what We the People demand.

As per link to President Trump's pledge for a special counsel, it's easy to fully agree with his astonishment at how overwhelming Clinton's obstruction of justice and lying to Congress is.  However, it bears mention that her situation is greatly worsened by sale of uranium and other considerations, which the President left unmentioned.

Therefore, I do not believe America can just ignore what she has done, being consoled by fact she was not elected---there's simply been an overwhelming amount of unacceptable conduct on her part, but we should not believe she's been brought to justice, or that what all has been done is too much to prosecute.

As per Comey, it's been clear all along:  give him enough rope, and he'll hang himself.  Sean Davis' post, below, adds about another mile of rope, to an already substantial amount.

Well said. I still believe that President Trump is playing chess while the others, including media and Dems and Repubs, are playing Candyland.

Former Bush AG On Comey’s 2007 Brush With Scandal: ‘Jim’s Loyalty W...

This isn't the first time James Comey placed himself at the center of a partisan attempt to oust a top Republican. He did the same thing in 2007.
Sean Davis

The revelation by fired former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) di... that he has kept meticulous records detailing President Donald Trump’s alleged attempts to improperly influence an ongoing FBI investigation has sent Washington into a tailspin. Did Trump really threaten a sitting FBI director in a private meeting? Did the former FBI director accurately record what happened? Could this be the beginning of the end of Trump?

At the moment, untangling fact from fiction is difficult, given that the event Comey allegedly describes took place only between Comey and the president. With no ability at this time to independently verify either man’s account, we are instead left with a he-said/he-said explanation of events, which means the credibility of the two men involved becomes the prime determinant of one’s view of the situation.

The narrative from the Acela corridor media establishment is that Trump is a known liar and Comey is an honest public servant above reproach, so clearly Comey’s word must be believed, the total absence of any other corroborating evidence notwithstanding. An examination of Comey’s history as the consummate Beltway operator, however, raises questions about whether the towering former U.S. attorney, deputy attorney general, and FBI director is as open and forthright as his allies would have you believe.

In fact, the current episode is not the first time Comey and his associates plotted to oust a sitting Republican official through highly orchestrated political theater and carefully crafted narratives in which Comey is the courageous hero bravely fighting to preserve the rule of law. To understand how Comey came to be FBI director in the first place, and how he operates in the political arena, it is important to review the last scandal in which Comey had a front-row seat: the 2007 U.S. attorney firings and the fight over the 2004 reauthorization of Stellar Wind, a mass National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance program designed to mitigate terrorist threats in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

The pivotal scene in the Comey-crafted narrative, a drama that made Comey famous and likely paved the road to his 2013 appointment by President Barack Obama to run the FBI, occurred in a Beltway hospital room in early 2004. In Comey’s view, Comey was the last honest man in Washington, the only person standing between a White House that rejected any restraints on its power, and the rule of law protecting Americans from illegal mass surveillance.

A former White House counsel and attorney general with extensive first-hand experience dealing with Comey, however, paints a very different picture of what happened in that hospital room, and disputes numerous key details. In this account, Comey’s actions showcase a duplicitous, secretive schemer whose true loyalties were not to the officials to whom he reported, but to partisan Democrats like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). To fully understand and appreciate Jim Comey’s approach to politics, the writings and testimony of Alberto Gonzales, who served as both White House counsel and attorney general during the events in question and is intimately aware of Comey’s history of political maneuvering, is absolutely essential.

Gonzales’s descriptions of his interactions with Comey, included in his 2016 book “True Faith And Allegiance,” are detailed and extensive. While his tone is measured, the language he uses to describe Comey’s actions in 2004 and 2007 leaves little doubt about the former top Bush official’s views on Comey’s character. Gonzales’s opinion is clearly colored by the fact that Comey cravenly used him to jumpstart his own political career by going public with surprise (and questionable) testimony that Gonzales had attempted to take advantage of a deathly ill man in order to ram through authorization of an illegal surveillance program.

Bush’s Attorney General John Ashcroft had taken ill and was in the hospital at a pivotal time. The legal authorization of a surveillance program meant to find and root out terrorist threats was days from expiring. What happened in Ashcroft’s hospital room in March of 2004 later became political fodder for a hearing in which Senate Democrats used Comey to dredge up the 2004 hospital meeting to tar Gonzales’ credibility and suggest he was unfit to continue serving as attorney general. As the 2004 and 2007 sagas show, Comey is clearly no stranger to using the unarguably legal dismissal of government employees as the backdrop for casting himself as the story’s protaganist standing up to the forces of corruption.

“[I] told my security detail that I needed to get to George Washington Hospital immediately. They turned on the emergency equipment and drove very quickly to the hospital,” Comey testified. “I got out of the car and ran up — literally ran up the stairs with my security detail.”

“I was concerned that, given how ill I knew the attorney general was, that there might be an effort to ask him to overrule me when he was in no condition to do that,” Comey said.

Comey’s use of the phrase “overrule me” is especially noteworthy, given that the authority he referenced belongs not to the deputy attorney general, but to the attorney general himself. However, unbeknownst to anyone at the White House on that day, Comey had assumed for himself the authorities attendant to Ashcroft’s position. Rather than personally informing anyone at the White House, including the president, the vice president, the White House chief of staff, or the White House counsel, the Department of Justice sent a mere fax to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue noting the change in power. For some reason, the newly designated acting attorney general didn’t feel compelled to personally inform any of his superiors that he was now a cabinet official.

It’s at this point in the narrative that Comey’s testimony took a turn for the dramatic:

I sat down in an armchair by the head of the attorney general’s bed. The two other Justice Department people stood behind me. And Mrs. Ashcroft stood by the bed holding her husband’s arm. And we waited.

And it was only a matter of minutes that the door opened and in walked Mr. Gonzales, carrying an envelope, and Mr. Card. They came over and stood by the bed. They greeted the attorney general very briefly. And then Mr. Gonzales began to discuss why they were there — to seek his approval for a matter, and explained what the matter was — which I will not do.

And Attorney General Ashcroft then stunned me. He lifted his head off the pillow and in very strong terms expressed his view of the matter, rich in both substance and fact, which stunned me — drawn from the hour-long meeting we’d had a week earlier — and in very strong terms expressed himself, and then laid his head back down on the pillow, seemed spent, and said to them, ‘But that doesn’t matter, because I’m not the attorney general.’


And as he laid back down, he said, ‘But that doesn’t matter, because I’m not the attorney general. There is the attorney general,’ and he pointed to me, and I was just to his left. The two men did not acknowledge me. They turned and walked from the room. And within just a few moments after that, Director Mueller arrived. I told him quickly what had happened. He had a brief — a memorable brief exchange with the attorney general and then we went outside in the hallway.

Gonzales was taken aback by Comey’s appearance and testimony. It turns out that was by design. Comey kept secret his pre-hearing planning with Schumer and his staff to maximize the fallout of the bomb he planned to drop on Gonzales and the Bush administration. In a significant breach of protocol, Comey also refused to share with the White House or the Department of Justice that he had planned to testify about his work at DOJ, a move which made it impossible for the White House to consider whether it needed to assert executive privilege over portions of Comey’s planned testimony.

As fate would have it, the Schumer staffer who spearheaded the entire spectacle was none other than Preet Bharara, a former employee of Comey’s in the U.S. attorney’s office in New York. Bharara, like Comey, was fired by President Donald Trump earlier this year. And Bharara, like Comey, owes his most recent position of authority in the U.S. government to Schumer and President Barack Obama.

“When I found out from our DOJ legislative liaison that Comey was testifying, I was surprised,” Gonzales wrote after noting that Comey hadn’t worked at DOJ for years when the U.S. attorneys were fired. “It was also odd that we had received no notice at DOJ regarding the appearance of one of the former members of our leadership team at a Senate hearing.”

“I called the White House counsel Fred Fielding, and Fred confirmed that he had no prior notice of Comey’s testimony either,” Gonzales continued. “I was disappointed that the man who had been given so much in his legal career — appointed by President Bush as a U.S. attorney and then as deputy attorney general — did not even notify the White House or me in advance of his testimony.”

“It felt to me that Jim’s loyalty was more to his friend Preet Bharara and to Chuck Schumer,” he wrote.

Gonzales also questioned whether Bharara’s role in ambushing the previous Republican presidential administration was the reason Obama later appointed Bharara to Comey’s old job as U.S. attorney for the southern district of New York.

Comey’s 2007 testimony went off just as he, Bharara, and Schumer planned. It was shocking and dramatic. Comey weaved a tale that involved him being notified at the last possible second that Bush’s chief of staff and counsel planned to ambush Ashcroft in his hospital bed and force him against his will to sign a legal document authorizing an ongoing mass surveillance program that Comey and his deputy, Jack Goldsmith, had very recently decided was illegal despite multiple DOJ and National Security Agency legal opinions to the contrary. According to Gonzales, despite having been on the job for months, Comey and Goldsmith didn’t disclose their concerns to the White House counsel about the legality of the surveillance initiative until March 6, just five days before the program’s authorization expired.

The narrative Comey provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee was riveting. But according to Gonzales, it didn’t actually happen.

The narrative Comey provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee was riveting. But according to Gonzales, it didn’t actually happen the way it was presented. And the conflicting details between Comey’s and Gonzales’ account, given Comey’s current attempts to use his credibility and recollection of events witnessed only by himself to take down a Republican official, raise significant questions about the trustworthiness of Comey’s current claims.

According to Gonzales, rather than sitting directly next to Ashcroft, Comey and his two deputies, Goldsmith and Pat Philbin, never made their presence known, and neither Gonzales nor Andy Card, Bush’s chief of staff, had any clue they were there during the 10-minute meeting. To the contrary, Gonzales noted in his book that he assumed the small handful of people hiding in the periphery of a darkened room were actually Ashcroft’s security detail doing their best to stay out of the way.

More important, in Gonzales’ telling, Ashcroft never even mentioned Comey, let alone pointed him out to Gonzales as being physically present in the room.

“I was told this morning that I’m no longer attorney general,” Gonzales wrote was Ashcroft’s response to a request to re-authorize the Stellar Wind program, a far cry from the forceful declaration Comey attributed to Ashcroft.

“Certainly, had the vice president, Andy, or I known about the matter, we would have informed the president, and he could have simply summoned the deputy attorney general,” Gonzales wrote. “But none of us knew until John Ashcroft announced the news to us in his hospital room.”

President George W. Bush himself, in his book “Decision Points,” expressed his feeling of shock when he found out that Comey had seized the attorney general’s authority in March of 2004.

It’s unclear why Comey did not feel compelled to inform the president of the United States, his superior, that he had assumed for himself the powers of the office of attorney general.

“I was stunned,” Bush wrote. “Nobody had told me that Comey, John Ashcroft’s deputy, had taken over Ashcroft’s responsibilities when he went in for surgery. If I had known that, I never would have sent Andy and Al to John’s hospital room.”

To date, it’s unclear why Comey did not feel compelled to inform the president of the United States, his superior, that he had assumed for himself the powers of the office of attorney general. Gonzales minced no words in his characterization of the hero narrative Comey wove before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2007.

“The details later presented by Jim Comey, and facilitated by Senator Schumer’s staffer, Preet Bharara, describing flashing lights, sirens, and dashing up the hospital staircases may or may not be technically true, but they certainly do not depict what happened later in that hospital room,” Gonzales wrote. “Contrary to Hollywood-style myth, there simply was no confrontation.”

Gonzales even pointedly questioned the Comey narrative that Ashcroft’s health status had made it impossible for him to continue his duties.

“[Card and I] both agreed that Ashcroft had been competent and understood the intricacies of the disputed surveillance matter. He seemed to have been well briefed by [Comey], Goldsmith, and Philbin,” Gonzales wrote. “In an ironic twist, it is possible some or all of those briefings occurred while the attorney general was hospitalized and in a weakened condition, thus raising the question of whether his subordinates had taken advantage of him.”

This cynicism is not unwarranted, given that according to Comey’s own testimony, Ashcroft allegedly addressed Card and Gonzales in the hospital room with language that was “rich in both substance and fact…drawn from the hour-long meeting we’d had a week earlier.” If Ashcroft had such detailed command of facts he had only briefly discussed the previous week, then what exactly was the rationale for Comey continuing to assert the powers of Ashcroft’s position? Comey’s recollection of that conversation reveals an attempt to have it both ways: there was no choice but to designate Comey as acting attorney given Ashcroft’s medical state, and yet Ashcroft was competent enough to slap down Card and Gonzales in exquisite and detailed fashion. Which was it?

Gonzales’s belief, expressed in the book, that Comey and Bharara colluded in secret with Schumer in an attempt to take down a top Bush administration official is no unsupported conspiracy theory, as Bharara himself confirmed Gonzales’s suspicions about Comey’s scheme in a 2016 interview with The New Yorker‘s Jeffrey Toobin:

The investigation goes well beyond a possible American connection, to include how Russian intelligence services carried out the campaign of fake news and leaking hacked emails that intelligence officials say was meant to hurt Hillary Clinton and benefit Trump.

This will undoubtedly include WHO hacked the emails and might include the contents of hacked emails.  Since Hillary was the democrat candidate, and the hacking may have been state sponsored, the investigation may lead to a re-examination of the private server investigation that Comey mishandled.

Comey Admitted Under Oath That Obstruction To FBI Probe ‘Never Happened’

Do you remember the girl who cried “wolf”?

You do? Okay, good. Now, imagine there are hundreds, thousands of those girls in Washington D.C… and around the country.

These girls are constantly warning of danger that does not exist.

You can often find these pigtails in the establishment media and Democratic politics (oh wait, I guess I’m being a bit redundant there. My apologies).

Remember when so many were concerned with the “scandalous” firing of FBI Director James Comey?

News reporters immediately screamed “scandal!” and told readers that Donald Trump fired Comey in an attempt “to squash an FBI probe into former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn.”

According to The Daily Wire:

Trump held Comey by the ankles — upside down — out the window of the White House’s Lincoln Bedroom as he quoted lines from Scarface, reports said.

No, that didn’t happen. Here’s what Trump is said to have said to Comey, according to a memo Comey did not provide to anyone: “I hope you can let this go.” Smoke alarm! Run away! We’re all going to die!…

…The New York Times published the memo story on Tuesday, citing “two people who read the memo.”

Two people read the memo that Comey never gave them.

And, for as credible as those random memos that surface from thin air are, the Senate Judiciary Committee decided to go directly to the source and ask Comey if he’s ever “been pressured to close an investigation for political purposes.”

Was Comey ever pressured to close an investigation?
According to Comey, no.

“Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something like that — without an appropriate purpose.”

“I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that ‘We don’t see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it.’ But I’m talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason.”

“That would be a very big deal. It’s not happened in my experience,” Comey told the senators.

Yes, indeed. That would be a very big deal.

And his testimony certainly suggests the bogus nature of the memo.

Dan Bongino just said that basically, the allegation may be 'collusion' with Russia, but there is no statute prohibiting it.





Please view our mission, policy, and legal disclaimer to learn about us by visiting the main menu.  Thank you.




Let your voice be counted!








national debt

Founders' Corner

Latest Activity

Barbara Leypoldt posted a discussion
4 hours ago
Barbara Leypoldt replied to Rahthrae (Admin.)'s discussion Simple Creation of a Personal Portable Microgrid
"I will be looking into this information! Thank you!"
4 hours ago
Barbara Leypoldt liked Rahthrae (Admin.)'s discussion Simple Creation of a Personal Portable Microgrid
4 hours ago
Barbara Leypoldt replied to Robin's discussion DOJ Dusts Off '68 'H. Rap Brown Law' to Prosecute Antifa
"Trump needs to designate Antifa a Terrorist Organization. It's about time."
4 hours ago
Barbara Leypoldt liked Robin's discussion DOJ Dusts Off '68 'H. Rap Brown Law' to Prosecute Antifa
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor posted discussions
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor replied to Robin's discussion CEO Of Overstock Says Comey Ordered Him To Help Spy On Trump, Clinton.... Former disgraced FBI director James Comey has been accused of reaching out to high powered CEO’s in an attempt Spy
"Can't wait for this man to testify and for it all to come out. We've been waiting for far…"
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor liked Robin's discussion CEO Of Overstock Says Comey Ordered Him To Help Spy On Trump, Clinton.... Former disgraced FBI director James Comey has been accused of reaching out to high powered CEO’s in an attempt Spy
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor liked Robin's discussion Executive Order: President Trump Cancels Student Loan Debt for Disabled Veterans
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor replied to Susan Taylor's discussion BIG NEWS! President Trump Reaches Historic Trade Deal with Japan (Video)
"VIDEO OF TRUMP The White House President @realDonaldTrump "Thus far, this has been really a…"
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor replied to Doug Fox's discussion Traitor's Justice
"Great thread! Thank you for posting it and The Epoch Times is very good!"
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor liked Doug Fox's discussion Traitor's Justice
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor replied to Jerseygal's discussion Jeffrey Epstein found dead in Manhattan jail cell; multiple reports claim death by suicide
"It will be a glorious day for this country when these people are held accountable! Keep praying…"
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor liked Jerseygal's discussion Jeffrey Epstein found dead in Manhattan jail cell; multiple reports claim death by suicide
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor replied to Rahthrae (Admin.)'s discussion Ask Yourself These Questions to Reveal Your Level of Preparedness. #PrepperTalk #Survival
"Thank you for reminding everyone about this very important issue. I will be going over my supplies!"
4 hours ago
Susan Taylor liked Rahthrae (Admin.)'s discussion Ask Yourself These Questions to Reveal Your Level of Preparedness. #PrepperTalk #Survival
4 hours ago

© 2019   Fundamental Refounding.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service