Alert: Prof Turley Reviews The Rod Rosenstein Senate Judiciary Hearing

Professor Jonathan Turley, a trustworthy analyst, one of the few, just posted his summary of former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s testimony today before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Despicably, Democrats had attacked the hearings as if there was no reason to be troubled about the way the investigation of “Russian collusion” was handled despite a mountain of evidence indicating that it was biased, motivated by partisanship, and quite probably illegal. Rosenstein’s testimony, as Turley points out, demonstrated how disingenuous that partisan complaint was. He writes, “Rosenstein said that there is a legitimate question of ‘why it happened?’ That would seem to support the hearing that Democrats are denouncing. ”

Why yes, that seems to be a fair assessment.

I recommend reading Turley’s spin-free account because it is unlikely that the mainstream news media will adequately cover the hearing, since that would interfere with cheerleading  and rationalizing the riots.

Is that overly harsh? I don’t think so. Even the sometimes infuriatingly diplomatic professor is showing signs of losing patience at the constant, shameless efforts to bury the truth. I passed the stage he is reaching now a few years ago.

Some highlights and lowlights:

  • Two Democratic Senators, Booker and Hirono, asked Rosenstein about the death of  George Floyd.

That’s beneath contempt, almost “Have you no decency?” level politics.

  • Hirono, arguably the least competent of all the Senators on either side of the aisle, “….seems to be making a case for the Administration,” Turley observed:

She just prompted Rosenstein to say that he agreed with the view that there was no evidence of obstruction of justice. She then dug deeper and Rosenstein just said that “he agrees that there was no evidence of a crime” by Trump. Hirono continued to dig deeper. She pressed Rosenstein on how a 1000 prosecutors disagreed with him. Rosenstein just said “we have a lot more than 1000 former prosecutors.” He said that while they did not know the full record, he did. Hirono cut him off again. Rosenstein said it was unfair. “Nobody was in favor of prosecution.”

Turley concludes, “The most damaging testimony against the Justice Department came from the questioning by Sen. Hirono who is proof of the long-standing rule in litigation to avoid questions that you do not know the answer to.”

  • Sen. Crapo  got Rosenstein to agree that the Inspector General did in fact find bias but that he could not prove that bias was the reason for decisions., noting that the IG could only ask the people if their bias impacted their decision and there is obviously no documentary evidence to prove how the bias impacted decisions. Crapo noted that the IG said it was unlikely that all of these errors could occur without bias.

    Rosenstein “deflected the question on his view. He agreed that bias was found. Rosenstein said that he felt Attorney General needs to still address the issue.”

  • “Rosenstein agreed that the conduct of the FBI in the case was “certainly a threat” to the system of justice and court process with regard to FISA.”

This, I will continue to note until I rot, was the “Kool-Aid” I was accused of drinking by enabling partisans on Ethics Alarms, now happily zoning out on MSNBC.

  • Turley notes that Sen. Cruz said that he believed Rosenstein “was grossly negligent in his handling of the investigation.” Rosenstein said that he did not know about the discrediting of the Steele dossier or the fraudulent filings of an agent or the fact that the Steele dossier was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign.

Yes, I’d agree that shows negligent handling by Rosenstein.

Do read the the whole thing. Turley is an underappreciated objective and ethical contributor to public understanding in the midst of news media disinformation.

He also has a lot of typos, which makes me feel better.

8 thoughts on “Alert: Prof Turley Reviews The Rod Rosenstein Senate Judiciary Hearing

  1. Take it away, Peter, Paul and Mary:

    Where have all the typos gone,
    Long time standing,
    Where have all the typos gone,
    A long, long time ago.

  2. What a spineless miscreant Jeff Sessions was to recuse himself and let Rod (Fox in the Henhouse) Rosenstein take over control of the whole coup attempt and let its principals proceed unimpaired along their merry way for three years.

      • I’m not at all fond of calling the careerists working in D.C. “swamp creatures” and the like, but boy, if the shoe fits…. These bureaucrats really do run the country and control the levers of power.

      • I think the recusal argument is wrong. I think recusal was a trap Sessions jumped into. Why couldn’t he have said, “This sounds preposterous. Show me what you’ve got. What do you have on me? I spoke to a Russian ambassador? That’s crime?” The plotters wanted Sessions out of the way and they succeeded in doing so and getting him replaced with a guy who was either complicit in the plot or was easily manipulable. Why didn’t anyone call these guys’ bluff early on? Remember the Senator from Wall Street and his warning “Don’t piss the CIA off. They can get you six ways to Sunday?” Everyone but the plotters were playing by the rules and the plotters played them like a fiddle.

        • It’s not a trap. He was doing what recusal is supposed to do, removing an individual from a place of power in an investigation who has a perceived stake in the outcome. It is what Eric Holder, a nakedly political hack who described himself as Obama’s “wing man,” should have done with the IRS scandal, with an independent counsel used in that case as well. An AG should never be recruited from a campaign; never. Unfortunately, it is usually closer to “always,” which is how we’ve ended up with politicized AGs like RFK, Mitchell, Ed Meese, and Holder.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.