Trump acknowledges he is under investigation in Russia probe

[rooster59]

Trump acknowledges he is under investigation in Russia probe

By Susan Heavey and Patricia Zengerle

 

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks about the shootings in Alexandria, Virginia, from the White House in Washington, U.S., June 14, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump acknowledged on Friday he is under investigation in a probe of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential race and possible collusion by his campaign - and seemed to assail the Justice Department official overseeing the inquiry.

 

Robert Mueller, the special counsel named by the department to investigate the Russia matter, is now examining whether Trump or others sought to obstruct the probe, a person familiar with the inquiry said on Thursday.

 

"I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt," Trump wrote on Twitter, referring to his May 9 dismissal of James Comey.

 

Trump did not identify "the man" but appeared to be questioning the integrity of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, the Justice Department's No. 2 official who appointed Mueller on May 17, supervises the probe and wrote a memo to Trump critical of Comey that preceded Comey's firing.

 

Hours later, a source close to Trump's outside legal team said Trump did not intend his tweet to be confirmation of the investigation but rather was reacting to a Washington Post story on Wednesday about the probe. The source spoke on condition of anonymity.

 

Rosenstein has said privately he may need to recuse himself from matters relating to the Russia probe because he could become a witness in the investigation, ABC News reported on Friday. ABC said Rosenstein told Associate Attorney General Rachel Brand she would have authority over the probe if he were to step aside.

 

The Democratic National Committee called on Rosenstein to recuse himself from the Russia matter, but it said authority over the investigation should be given to Mueller and not another Trump appointee.

 

While the Republican Trump administration initially said Rosenstein's letter was the reason the president fired Comey on May 9, Trump later said he did so because of the "Russia thing."

 

Comey told a Senate panel last week he believed Trump fired him to undermine the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Russia probe. Comey testified that Trump directed him in February to drop an FBI investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn relating to the Russia matter.

 

Comey testified it would be up to Mueller to decide whether Trump's action amounted to obstruction of justice, an act that could be cited in any effort in the Republican-led Congress to impeach him and remove him from office.

 

TRUMP'S LAWYER HIRES A LAWYER

 

The Russia issue has cast a shadow over Trump's five months in office.

 

In another indication of the seriousness of the probe, Michael Cohen, a personal attorney to Trump, said he has retained attorney Stephen Ryan, a former assistant U.S. attorney, to represent him in the ongoing probes. Cohen has received a subpoena from one of the congressional committees looking into the Russia issue.

 

Rosenstein has authority over the inquiry because Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself on March 2 after revelations of previously undisclosed meetings with Russia's ambassador to Washington while he was a Trump campaign adviser.

 

Brand was confirmed as the No. 3 Justice Department official on a 52-46 vote in the Senate on May 18, with Democrats lining up against her.

 

From 2011 until her confirmation, she was a lawyer for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce business lobbying group's legal arm, which played a major role in marshalling legal opposition to environmental and labour regulations championed by Democratic former President Barack Obama.

 

Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Senate Intelligence Committee member, said she was "increasingly concerned" Trump would try to fire not only Mueller, but also Rosenstein.

 

"The message the president is sending through his tweets is that he believes the rule of law doesn't apply to him and that anyone who thinks otherwise will be fired," Feinstein said.

 

A Trump confidant said this week the president had considered firing Mueller. Rosenstein, who would be responsible for actually dismissing Mueller, told U.S. lawmakers he would fire him only with good cause.

 

U.S. intelligence agencies concluded in January that Russia interfered in the presidential race to try to help Trump win, in part by hacking and releasing emails damaging to his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.

 

Moscow has denied any interference. The White House denies any collusion.

 

Trump kept up his criticism of the investigations, writing on Twitter, "After 7 months of investigations & committee hearings about my 'collusion with the Russians,' nobody has been able to show any proof. Sad!"

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-06-17

[darksidedog]

25 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

Trump kept up his criticism of the investigations, writing on Twitter, "After 7 months of investigations & committee hearings about my 'collusion with the Russians,' nobody has been able to show any proof. Sad!"

I wonder how many people he will have to fire, to keep it that way.

[lvr181]

Government does not need to kow tow to his whims. About time he realised he is the President of the U.S.A. NOT the CEO of a private company! 

[TGIR]

All of this with still no proof there was any collusion and not a single piece of evidence to even begin an investigation.  

 

Witch Hunt doesn't begin to cover the asinine goings on in our government......soon to be the laughing stock of the world if the bozos we elected to run our country don't soon remember what they are being paid to do.

[ilostmypassword]

I'm surprised that so far no Trump supporters have posted to accuse Trump of being an agent of the MSM and spreading unsubstantitated rumors about being under investigation.

[Traveler19491]

4 hours ago, rooster59 said:

"I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt," Trump wrote on Twitter, referring to his May 9 dismissal of James Comey.

“I was going to fire Comey,” Trump told NBC News in an interview taped May 11. “Regardless of the recommendation, I was going to fire Comey.” - See more at: http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/trump-contradicts-his-own-account-of-comey-firing#sthash.xfymhQvP.dpuf 

 

And he just keeps digging the hole deeper. 

[Srikcir]

4 hours ago, rooster59 said:

TRUMP'S LAWYER HIRES A LAWYER

For someone who campaigned on clearing the "swamp," Trump has made the nation's capital the hub of criminal lawyers.

[Rob13]

2 minutes ago, Traveler19491 said:

“I was going to fire Comey,” Trump told NBC News in an interview taped May 11. “Regardless of the recommendation, I was going to fire Comey.” - See more at:

 

It's become absurd. Absolutely nothing on any matter he says can be taken with any credibility.

Edited June 17, 2017 by Rob13

[Traveler19491]

53 minutes ago, TGIR said:

... and not a single piece of evidence to even begin an investigation.  

[ilostmypassword]

56 minutes ago, TGIR said:

All of this with still no proof there was any collusion and not a single piece of evidence to even begin an investigation.  

 

Witch Hunt doesn't begin to cover the asinine goings on in our government......soon to be the laughing stock of the world if the bozos we elected to run our country don't soon remember what they are being paid to do.

Could you please share with us all the confidential data accumulated by the FBI investigation so we can see for ourselves? They seem so strangely reluctant to share that information with the rest of us.

[Thakkar]

4 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Trump kept up his criticism of the investigations, writing on Twitter, "After 7 months of investigations & committee hearings about my 'collusion with the Russians,' nobody has been able to show any proof. Sad!"

This 7-month old tweet from Trump's current Deputy press sec referencing Hillary hasn't aged well:

 

Sarah Huckabee (‪@SarahHuckabee‬)

4/11/16, 06:12

When you're attacking FBI agents because you're under criminal investigation, you're losing twitter.com/politicalwire/…

 

 

T

[Thakkar]

9 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

For someone who campaigned on clearing the "swamp," Trump has made the nation's capital the hub of criminal lawyers.

Just wait till his lawyer's lawyer hires a lawyer—that's when we've reached Peak Lawyer!

 

T

[iReason]

1 hour ago, TGIR said:

All of this with still no proof there was any collusion and not a single piece of evidence to even begin an investigation.

 

A completely baseless statement.

 

You are just making stuff up.

[Rob13]

1 hour ago, TGIR said:

All of this with still no proof there was any collusion and not a single piece of evidence to even begin an investigation.  

and yet here we are.

[Traveler19491]

That will be the epitome.

 

8 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

Just wait till his lawyer's lawyer hires a lawyer—that's when we've reached Peak Lawyer!

 

Edited June 17, 2017 by Traveler19491

[KarenBravo]

Must be Rosenstein's turn to be thrown under the bus.

Seems "loyalty" for Trump only goes one way.

[sweatalot]

1 hour ago, TGIR said:

All of this with still no proof there was any collusion and not a single piece of evidence to even begin an investigation.  

 

Witch Hunt doesn't begin to cover the asinine goings on in our government......soon to be the laughing stock of the world if the bozos we elected to run our country don't soon remember what they are being paid to do.

 

All of this with still no proof there was any collusion and not a single piece of evidence to even begin an investigation.  

 

If this is not a witch hunt fabricated for political (or financial) reasons from sore losers then I don't know what a witch hunt is.

 

I am not saying Trump is a good president nor the opposite. I am only  watching, knowing very well that the mass media which are responsible for the news (avoiding to say reports) cannot be trusted - same as the parties in this case.

[KarenBravo]

How do you know there is no evidence?

Do you expect the investigation to just make it public knowledge?

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, sweatalot said:

 

All of this with still no proof there was any collusion and not a single piece of evidence to even begin an investigation.  

 

If this is not a witch hunt fabricated for political (or financial) reasons from sore losers then I don't know what a witch hunt is.

 

I am not saying Trump is a good president nor the opposite. I am only  watching, knowing very well that the mass media which are responsible for the news (avoiding to say reports) cannot be trusted - same as the parties in this case.

I know what you mean. Remember when the lying MSM was saying that Trump was now a target of the investigation and his supporters all rushed to his defense and claimed it was just unsubstantiated rumors.

I'm just grateful for people like you who have access to the contents of the FBI's investigation files and know for a fact that there is no evidence. I just wish you would share that content with the rest of us. What's stopping you?

[sweatalot]

22 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

How do you know there is no evidence?

Do you expect the investigation to just make it public knowledge?

I guess if there was evidence it would have been made public.  

And making an investigation public before there is any reliable result is not correct. As always innocent until proven guilty.

Smells like witch hunt. I believe there are people who want to get rid of Trump not because what the public criticizes, not because of his politics but for other reasons

[Rob13]

32 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

Do you expect the investigation to just make it public knowledge?

 

Wouldn't matter if they did. It would be reported by the MSM proving to the trumpies that it's not true. 

[iReason]

36 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

If this is not a witch hunt fabricated for political (or financial) reasons from sore losers then I don't know what a witch hunt is.

 

I tend to agree with your latter assessment...

[Traveler19491]

Just now, sweatalot said:

I guess if there was evidence it would have been made public.  

And making an investigation public before there is any reliable result is not correct. As always innocent until proven guilty.

Smells like witch hunt. I believe there are people who want to get rid of Trump not because what the public criticizes, not because of his politics but for other reasons

One of the primary tactics that prosecutors love to employ is not revealing what evidence they have until they either show it to a grand jury or reveal it to a jury in a courtroom. This denies the defendant the ability to prepare a defense against such evidence, and that is why we have the legal requirement called "disclosure", where both sides must show what they have. However, disclosure only occurs after the defendant has been charged and is on his/her way to trial. No prosecutor or law enforcement individual is going to help the accused by revealing what they have until the appropriate moment. Which is makes it entirely possible as to why, contrary to the protestations of Trump's supporters, we haven't seen anything yet. It is completely possible that there is a wealth of damning evidence. It is equally possible that they have nothing...yet. But given Trump's arrogance, his earnest belief that he is entitled to do whatever he pleases, his willingness to deal with US and Russian criminal types, and his mistaken impression that he can avoid accountability forever, I'm putting my money on an abundance of dirt being uncovered. Should that turn out to be the case, a book will definitely be forthcoming, and that's a book I will joyfully buy.

[iReason]

10 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

I guess if there was evidence it would have been made public.

 

Right.

 

Prosecutors and investigators always make public their sources and evidence during ongoing investigations...

[jb61]

a clear and concise 3 minute explanation tsk tsk of the governments investigations:

 

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube.com%2fTheGovernment+investigates&view=detail&mid=F4AA42E57BB00C9FEF64F4AA42E57BB00C9FEF64&FORM=VIRE

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, jb61 said:

a clear and concise 3 minute explanation tsk tsk of the governments investigations:

 

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube.com%2fTheGovernment+investigates&view=detail&mid=F4AA42E57BB00C9FEF64F4AA42E57BB00C9FEF64&FORM=VIRE

Amusing. But it's good to keep in mind this:

In July 2008, he [Klaven] likened criticism of George W. Bush to the vilification of Batman in The Dark Knight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Klavan

[KarenBravo]

20 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

I guess if there was evidence it would have been made public.  

And making an investigation public before there is any reliable result is not correct. As always innocent until proven guilty.

Smells like witch hunt. I believe there are people who want to get rid of Trump not because what the public criticizes, not because of his politics but for other reasons

Not a witch hunt. It would be if people were saying that anyone colluded. As far as I know, nobody has said that.

He is personally under investigation for obstruction of justice and there definitely is evidence. Mostly his own words and tweets, though, that will have to depend on interpretation of the law.

 

The two things that stand out like sore thumbs are, why doesn't he seem concerned that a foreign power interfered and tried to affect the 2016 election? Surely, the Republicans have been more hawkish dealing with Russia than the Democrats, but, all they can talk about is leaks? This should concern every US citizen, regardless of political beliefs.

Why won't Trump criticize Putin?

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, KarenBravo said:

Not a witch hunt. It would be if people were saying that anyone colluded. As far as I know, nobody has said that.

He is personally under investigation for obstruction of justice and there definitely is evidence. Mostly his own words and tweets, though, that will have to depend on interpretation of the law.

 

The two things that stand out like sore thumbs are, why doesn't he seem concerned that a foreign power interfered and tried to affect the 2016 election? Surely, the Republicans have been more hawkish dealing with Russia than the Democrats, but, all they can talk about is leaks? This should concern every US citizen, regardless of political beliefs.

Why won't Trump criticize Putin?

I think the big thing that stands out like a sore thumb is why was he so concerned about this investigation in the first place. The FBI wasn't interfering in the functioning of his administration. It was a very low key thing. Why the angst and the anger?

[jb61]

it's a spoof for God's sakes. Ya no hehe

[KarenBravo]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

I think the big thing that stands out like a sore thumb is why was he so concerned about this investigation in the first place. The FBI wasn't interfering in the functioning of his administration. It was a very low key thing. Why the angst and the anger?

Yup, if he's got nothing to hide, why is he acting like he has?

If he has nothing to hide, why doesn't he just give full cooperation and get on with his legislative agenda?