HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Did you hear Ari just say...

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:05 PM

Did you hear Ari just say on Rachel that Rosenstein can't oversee the Mueller investigation?

At the very end - last MINUTE - Rachel was interviewing Ari (he's one of the MSNBC legal guys) about T being investigated for obstruction- and he said that since Rosenstein was involved in the Comey firing, he will have to recuse himself from that investigation... Rachel basically said wait, what? and then they went to Lawrence. She told Lawrence she wished she had a lot more time with Ari and that this was completely new to her.

32 replies, 4143 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply Did you hear Ari just say on Rachel that Rosenstein can't oversee the Mueller investigation? (Original post)
Amaryllis Jun 2017 OP
elleng Jun 2017 #1
Amaryllis Jun 2017 #3
elleng Jun 2017 #8
Amaryllis Jun 2017 #7
elleng Jun 2017 #10
Amaryllis Jun 2017 #11
elleng Jun 2017 #13
Amaryllis Jun 2017 #15
GeoWilliam750 Jun 2017 #29
elleng Jun 2017 #30
NightWatcher Jun 2017 #2
a kennedy Jun 2017 #5
Amaryllis Jun 2017 #6
SHRED Jun 2017 #4
dixiegrrrrl Jun 2017 #32
oasis Jun 2017 #9
BigmanPigman Jun 2017 #20
moonscape Jun 2017 #12
Amaryllis Jun 2017 #14
moonscape Jun 2017 #16
FreepFryer Jun 2017 #17
Amaryllis Jun 2017 #18
FreepFryer Jun 2017 #19
Amaryllis Jun 2017 #21
Generic Brad Jun 2017 #26
AntiFascist Jun 2017 #22
marylandblue Jun 2017 #24
FreepFryer Jun 2017 #25
MedusaX Jun 2017 #27
FreepFryer Jun 2017 #28
Patterson Jun 2017 #31
marylandblue Jun 2017 #23

Response to Amaryllis (Original post)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:08 PM

1. Yes, Rosenstein will have to recuse,

giving the 'supervising' job at DOJ to Rachel Brand.

Former Bush official Rachel Brand takes over No. 3 position at Justice Dept.

'In some ways, Rachel Lee Brand followed a traditional path toward a high-ranking position in the Justice Department: an internship with her senator, an Ivy League law school, a Supreme Court clerkship, a legal job in the White House.

But Brand’s journey to becoming the first woman to serve as associate attorney general, the Justice Department’s third-highest-ranking official, had some unconventional features. The daughter and granddaughter of Dutch dairy farmers, she and her three siblings grew up in small-town Iowa. Seven years ago, when she went home to visit her family during the tulip festival in Pella, Brand donned her wooden shoes and joined 2,604 others in the town as it set the Guinness world record for the largest Dutch “klompen” dance.

Brand, 44, who was confirmed this month, now has to navigate a much more difficult dance as she takes the reins of what is considered by many the most politically challenging job in the Justice Department. As associate attorney general, Brand manages the lawyers who litigate civil rights, environmental and antitrust issues.'>>>

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/former-bush-official-rachel-brand-takes-over-no-3-position-at-justice-dept/2017/05/25/75e3aa80-40bb-11e7-8c25-44d09ff5a4a8_story.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:10 PM

3. Rachel acted like this was completely new to her...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Reply #3)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:13 PM

8. Yes, Ari mentioned it a few minutes before end of the show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:13 PM

7. How is it you knew this before Rachel! Or that she didn't know. She is so often first on this stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Reply #7)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:14 PM

10. I sure as heck didn't know it, Amaryllis,

just 'reporting' what I just heard!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #10)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:16 PM

11. Oh, okay...I was like, how could Elleng know this before RACHEL? The top Russiagate

expert! I misinterpreted your post...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:18 PM

13. HAD I kept up with things as Ari does,

it's REMOTELY possible I could have figured it out, but I didn't; I'm just a RETIRED attorney!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #13)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:23 PM

15. Well...it is logical that he would have to recuse himself...I still wonder why Rachel seemed

so surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:55 AM

29. Not sure that this is good news

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

"Brand is the chairman of the Federalist Society's Litigation Practice Group and co-chair of the American Bar Association Administrative Law Section's Government Information and Right to Privacy Committee."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GeoWilliam750 (Reply #29)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 12:57 AM

30. I think she'll do her job properly,

regardless of her assumed politics. That's usually what we bureaucrats do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Original post)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:10 PM

2. She could've done a whole segment on that little tidbit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:11 PM

5. Got that tidbit 10 minutes before her show was over. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NightWatcher (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:12 PM

6. That's what she and Lawrence both indicated...like Ari just had to get that out before Rachel

handed it off to Lawrence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Original post)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:10 PM

4. I thought recusal was a choice?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Reply #4)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 10:03 PM

32. It's a choice until it becomes a forced recusal.

But he wrote and signed Comey's firing letter, so no way could he avoid recusal.

I am surprised that Rachel did not know this, it has been in the MSM for a few weeks now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Original post)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:13 PM

9. Haven't heard Alan Dershowitz chime in with his two cents all day.

Trump must really be behind the eight ball.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #9)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:37 PM

20. Good! No wonder I was able to stay on one channel. I did not realize it until now.

Whenever I hear him (like Kellyanne, Jeffrey Lord, etc) my blood pressure skyrockets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Original post)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:16 PM

12. I thought that was already out there. Rosenstein had said that

if Mueller said he should recuse himself, he would - or something like that. Don't remember exactly. It was a week or so ago if memory serves, though I've lost all track of time since 11/8!

It seemed clear then, that it would be related to obstruction because of the memo and whatever related conversations Rosenstein and 45 had. I rather assumed it would get to that point because obstruction seemed like an obvious avenue to go down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moonscape (Reply #12)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:19 PM

14. Well...that makes sense. But Rachel sure seemed surprised. I wonder why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:24 PM

16. Maybe because it hadn't gotten to that point yet? Mueller questioned

Rosenstein already, and my sense was that it depended how what he learned from Rosenstein started fitting in with other parts. We don't know what the two of them discussed, and certainly neither of them would leak. But since Mueller has now expanded the people he's talking to, thus the leaks, it returns to that issue. Ari can't know for certain, but legally Rosenstein can't be both a witness and oversee the investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:25 PM

17. I believe Ari's point was that if Rosenstein is indeed a witness for Mueller...

...(as expected) he will have to recuse himself from overseeing the investigation, as a prosecutor should avoid being the sole interviewer of a witness, being alone with a witness, or otherwise becoming an essential witness to any aspect of that investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreepFryer (Reply #17)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:28 PM

18. THat's what I got too. Still, I thought there must be something new about it given both

Rachel and Lawrence's reaction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Reply #18)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:35 PM

19. I think it's because we have been focusing on Rosenstein being the empowered one to fire Mueller...

...and this would mean he couldn't oversee the investigation. However, we oughtn't assume that Rosenstein would also recuse from managing Mueller, given Sessions' claim that he could still fire Comey despite his own (self-)recusal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreepFryer (Reply #19)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:41 PM

21. Well, we know what Rachel will be discussing tomorrow! And likely will have Ari on again.

I like him. He did a good job when she was out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 11:12 PM

26. She's extremely intelligent, but not omniscient

I don't expect her to know everything!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Original post)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:41 PM

22. From what I've read, Rachel Brand had more Republican support than Democratic..


when she was confirmed. I hope she can remain non-partisan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AntiFascist (Reply #22)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:42 PM

24. She's very conservative, but I don't get the sense she's a Robert Bork

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #24)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:49 PM

25. Boente is the one who makes me nervous. President Obama removed him from the line of succession...

...for a good reason I'm sure (wish I knew)! Trump's EO of March 31, placing the AG from EDNC in the line, is interesting.

(warning, whitehouse web site link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/31/presidential-executive-order-providing-order-succession-within )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreepFryer (Reply #25)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 11:37 PM

27. I have read that It was a ruse...Obama did it to make Boente attractive to *45...betting that *45

Would un-do the EO and put Boente back in the line.

But who knows...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MedusaX (Reply #27)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 11:51 PM

28. If so, wow. Just wow :) (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #24)

Thu Jun 15, 2017, 01:06 AM

31. Not much chance of that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amaryllis (Original post)

Wed Jun 14, 2017, 10:41 PM

23. I think Rachel was surprised because the WaPo article came out late this afternoon

And it was a busy news day. A lot to digest at once.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread