the case of mr. rosenstein, they don t like him. they wanted to see him removed from office. they are angry at him, and, you know, it looks like maybe mr. rosenstein, based on this report in the new york times, appointed mueller because he was ticked about being brought into the comey firing issue and the mueller investigation is a result of his personal anger as opposed to any lawful reason for an appointment. you know, the one thing that does seem odd about it is as a man who as sophisticated about the law as rod rosenstein, and i don t think there s any argument that there is, would look at the 25th amendment as a reasonable path on moving of a president of the united states. it s almost impossible to make something like that happen. what s more astonishing is that there was a discussion between him, as reported. right. and top officials at the fbi about it. it could happen, right? now, look, we have to see the mccabe memo, right, because it does seem to be suggested in
and top officials at the fbi about it. it could happen, right? now, look, we have to see the mccabe memo, right, because it does seem to be suggested in some of the reporting that they got some of this from the memo. we don t know if that stuff about the 25th amendment or about maybe recording and whether or not it s a joke we don t know. but there are some different layers. mr. rosenstein s first statement didn t deny it happened. he said he didn t pursue it, or the language was that i don t think he should be removed under the 25th amendment. it didn t say that it wasn t discussed, and even this latest statement doesn t suggest that maybe it hadn t come up. it clearly came up and, you know, i think to take a step back, looking at who leaked this potentially, it looks to me like the fbi is concerned that it s going to come out that people like andrew mccabe wanted to get the president. so they re trying to put the focus on mr. rosenstein because this material is going to come
rosenstein for a second. when i read the article, not the exact same thought as you but i did think who benefits from this leak right now? who benefits from the notion that andrew mccabe wrote a memo saying rod rosenstein might be conflicted here? explain what that conflict is. if the mccabe memo is accurate, then rosenstein knew that russia was on the mind of the president when he fired james comey. why wouldn t rosenstein have to testify about that? what does it say about rosenstein when he appointed the special counsel to look into matters of russia? obviously we know that mueller is taking a look at obstruction. the president s justification regarding why he fired comey is obviously going to be important and the fact that rosenstein changed the hid what the president s true motive was, at least that s the allegation in the mccabe memo suggests that he knew that the president had a potentially improper motive and
firing and the intent. it is talking about a memo written by director andrew mccabe. they mentioned rosenstein for a reason for firing comey. you can connect the dots. if the mccabe memo was accurate, rosenstein had firsthand knowledge of the president s mindset. when rosenstein decided, after the comey firing, to name a special counsel to take over the russian investigation. meaning, the president says fire him because of russia. rosenstein writes a memo on other grounds. comey is gone. rosenstein thinks, wait a minute. now the pressure is going to be on me to end the russia investigation. i m going to name a special counsel. that s a fair connecting of the dots, isn t it? yeah. and andrew mccabe talked to the special counsel. the special counsel knows what andrew mccabe knows, assuming he