they can present for getting rid of Comey? --Rosenstein accepted a position under an intensely corrupt AG serving an intensely corrupt president yet the reasons given are rational legally and ethically. Just 180 degrees from what Rump's always claimed.
From The Atlantic just now:
Yet Rosenstein’s rational for firing Comey was precisely the opposite: He concluded that the FBI director had badly overstepped his bounds in his handling of the Clinton case.
“I cannot defend the Director’s handling of the conclusion of the investigation of Secretary Clinton’s emails, and I do not understand his refusal to accept the nearly universal judgment that he was mistaken,” Rosenstein wrote in a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
Rosenstein identified several errors. First, he said Comey “usurp[ed]” the authority of Attorney General Loretta Lynch by announcing that he did not recommend charges against Clinton. Comey made that choice in part because he believed Lynch was compromised by a meeting with Bill Clinton shortly before the decision.
“Compounding the error, the Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal prosecution,” Rosenstein wrote. In that press conference, Comey accused Clinton and her aides of being “extremely careless” with classified information.
Finally, Rosenstein said that Comey’s October 28, 2016, letter to Congress in which he announced the discovery of new emails related to the Clinton case was an error, and that his defense that not to write Congress would have been “concealing” something was wrong. On November 6, two days before the election, Comey followed up and informed Congress that the FBI had found no new evidence to change its recommendation.
= new reply since forum marked as read