Tag Archives: James Comey

Subpoenas for Obama Officials Coming

 
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber

On Wednesday the Republican-led Senate Homeland Security Committee voted for authorization to issue subpoenas as part of its review of the origin of the Russia investigation and there are some names we all know.

Subpoenas, which were voted on eight to six by the committee in favor of them, for former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former FBI Director James Comey and other Obama administration officials are now authorized.

The subpoenas will be issued as part of the review into the origins of the Russia investigation.

The committee authorized its Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., to issue notices for taking depositions, subpoenas, for records, and subpoenas for testimony to individuals. The subpoenas are connected to the panel’s “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation and the Justice Department inspector general’s review of that investigation.

“Crossfire Hurricane” is the bureau’s internal code name for the Russia probe, which began in July 2016.

It also encompasses the “unmasking” of U.S. persons affiliated with the 2016 Trump campaign, transition team and the Trump administration.

Johnson got the authority from the committee in June to send subpoenas as part of the panel’s investigation into the origins of the Russia probe and the process of “unmasking.”

Other subpoenas that were authorized are for:

Sidney Blumenthal

Former Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough

Former FBI counsel Lisa Page

Former FBI agent Joe Pientka

Former ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power

Former FBI director of counterintelligence Bill Priestap

Former White House national security adviser Susan Rice

Former FBI agent Peter Strzok

Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith

Clinesmith has pleaded guilty to making a false statement in the first criminal case arising from U.S. Attorney John Durham’s review of the investigation into links between Russia and the 2016 Trump campaign.

As well, the committee authorized subpoenas for “the production of all records” related to the FBI’s original Russia investigation and the Department of Justice Inspector General’s probe and the unmasking situation.

Unmasking occurs after U.S. citizens’ conversations are incidentally picked up in conversations with foreign officials who are being monitored by the intelligence community. The identities of U.S. citizens are legally supposed to be protected if their participation is incidental and no wrongdoing is suspected.

Those who have been authorized for this are:

James Baker

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe

DOJ official Bruce Ohr

FBI case agent Steven Somma

Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia John Teftt

Former deputy assistant attorney general Tashina Gauhar

Stefan Halper

Halper is a Cambridge University professor who has reportedly been deeply connected with British and American intelligence agencies. He has been notably reported as a confidential source for the FBI during its original investigation concerning Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz was reviewing Halper’s work during the Russia probe last year. His work with the FBI prior to the start of that investigation will also be looked at.

Halper had contacted several members of the Trump campaign in 2016. Former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos and former aide Carter Page were two of the people contacted.

Halper’s role as an FBI informant was leaked to the media in May 2018, it led to accusations from President Trump and Republicans that the Obama administration had used Halper as part of an illegal effort to spy on the Trump campaign, which are now being called “Spygate” and “Obamagate” by Trump allies.

Denials of Russian collusion made by Page and Papadopoulos were recorded but were never passed to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Page was the subject of several Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants during the Trump campaign.

During the 2016 campaign, Halper contacted several members of the Trump campaign, including former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos and former aide Carter Page. Page also was the subject of several Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants during the campaign

The director of the Office of Net Assessment at the Defense Department, James Baker, was at the helm of the department when they awarded government contracts to Halper. That included one in September 2015.

Authorization was given by the committee to subpoena Baker.

Johnson’s first subpoena was issued last month demanding that the FBI produce all records related to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

The subpoena states that it includes, but is not limited to, all records provided or made available to the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Justice for its review. This is in reference to Horowitz’s review of abuses related to the FISA warrants.

In addition the subpoena demands that all records related to requests to the General Services Administration or the Office of the Inspector General for the GSA for records of the presidential transition from November 2016 through December 2017.

Democrats have consistently opposed the committee’s inquiry, arguing it is being conducted for political reasons.

It appears that a whole slew of people will be subpoenaed to testify. When? That’s a good question.

It appears that a lot of these people are banking on COVID-19 to be around until after the election.

Keep tabs on those who use the virus as a means to avoid testifying too quickly and are stalling. They’re hoping for a Biden-Harris win.

That won’t help if Trump wins re-election and if we win the House and hang on to the Senate.

The wheels of justice, especially when it concerns politics, move slowly and we’re still waiting for Durham to indict someone other than giving Clinesmith a slap on the hand.

Biden and Comey Among Officials Unmasked:

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

During the presidential transition period a list of names of top Obama administration officials allegedly requested to “unmask” the identity of General Michael Flynn.

Declassification of the list of the notorious development was made by Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell.

The list was then sent to Attorney General Bill Barr and GOP Senators Chuck Grassley, R-IA., and Ron Johnson, R-WI., who then made the documents public.

The list is long and includes former Vice President Joe Biden.

Biden isn’t the only interesting name on the list. In fact there are quite a few. Here are a couple:

Former FBI Director James Comey

Former CIA Director John Brennan

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper

Former President Barrack Obama’s chief of staff Denis McDonough

The entire list can be seen here:

The declassified list shows officials who may have received Lt. General Flynn’s identity in response to a request processed between  November 8, 2016 and January 31, 2017 to unmask any identity that had been generically referred to in an NSA foreign intelligence report.

The document said, “Each individual was an authorized recipient of the original report and the unmasking was approved through NSA’s standard process, which includes a review of the justification for the request. Only certain personnel are authorized to submit unmasking requests into the NSA system. In this case, 16 authorized individuals requested unmasking for [REDACTED] different NSA intelligence reports for select identified principals.”

The document also said, “While the principals are identified below, we cannot confirm they saw the unmasked information. This response does not include any requests outside of the specified time-frame.”

Grenell wrote to GOP senators and included the list. He wrote, “I declassified the enclosed document, which I am providing to you for your situational awareness.”

The decision had already been made by Grenell to declassify information that he had uncovered about the Obama administration officials who were involved in the “unmasking” of former national security adviser Flynn.

Not only do Trump supporters, myself included, feel that Flynn was dishonestly targeted and that the Obama administration had top level officials involved to bring Flynn down because of his loyalty to President Trump and to the United States.

I would assume that Biden was unaware of what was actually uncovered when he told ABC News’ “Good Morning America” that he knew “nothing about those moves to investigate Michael Flynn.”

Biden called the topic a “diversion” from the coronavirus pandemic.

Biden had a little more information and made his statement clearer by saying, “I thought you asked me whether or not I had anything to do with him being prosecuted. I’m sorry. … I was aware that there was . . . that they asked for an investigation, but that’s all I know about it, and I don’t think anything else.”

He doesn’t think there was anything else? Actually, I believe has a thinking problem and that fact is coming closer and closer into light.

If the investigation goes into place as I feel it will, Biden may have to testify to Congress.

Will he claim forgetfulness?

Get your popcorn ready. This show is about to get rather interesting.

Comey Gets a No Thanks for Endorsing Biden

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

Former Vice President Joe Biden has been getting endorsed by former running mates, as some drop out of the race for the top spot as the Democrat front-runner but he got an unexpected endorsement from the former FBI Director James Comey.

Comey left the Republican Party in 2018 because of a bad case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. He voted in his first Democratic primary and gave his endorsement through Twitter. He tweeted this:

Biden was eager to accept the former presidential candidates’ endorsements. Senator Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg both suspended their presidential campaigns and joined Biden on the campaign trail and endorsed him.

The former Vice President got a much needed boost entering Super Tuesday.

Biden’s campaign rapid response director Andrew Bates was quick to spot the endorsement from Comey and answered in his own tweet:

It appears that the Democrats are still holding a grudge for Comey over his announcement in 2016, just days before the 2016 presidential election, that the FBI was reopening its investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information and her use of a private email server while she worked for the government.

So as much as Comey would like to stay relevant, both parties seem to not want any part of him.

I wonder if Comey was surprised to get the no thanks on his endorsement? Too bad it didn’t get sent snail mail to the Biden campaign. They could have just written Return to Sender on the envelope.

I’d say Comey was shocked otherwise he wouldn’t have bothered to do it in the first place.

No Criminal Charges for McCabe

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

On Friday the Justice Department has indicated that it will not indict former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe on criminal charges.

An investigation into accusations from the agency’s independent watchdog that lasted almost two years found that McCabe lacked sincerity when he was questioned about leaking information to the media.

McCabe’s attorneys Michael Bromwich and David Schertler, received a letter from Justice Department attorney J.P. Cooney and Assistant U.S. Attorney Molly Gaston which said that the criminal investigation into McCabe is now closed.

Cooney and Gaston wrote, “We write to inform you that, after careful consideration, the government has decided not to pursue criminal charges against your client, Andrew G. McCabe. Based on the totality of the circumstances and all of the information known to the government at this time, we consider the matter closed.”

In statements given to media, Bromwich and Schertler confirmed that they received a phone call from the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington, D.C.

The call in question was followed by the letter notifying them that “the criminal investigation of Andrew McCabe has been closed.”

Bromwich and Schertler  added that “This means that no charges will be brought against him based on the facts underlying the Office of the Inspector General’s April 2018 report. At long last, justice has been done in this matter.”

The two went on to say, “We said at the outset of the criminal investigation, almost two years ago, that if the facts and the law determined the result, no charges would be brought. We are pleased that Andrew McCabe and his family can go on with their lives without this cloud hanging over them.”

McCabe served at the FBI for 21 years. He became the acting director in May 2017 after President Trump fired former FBI Director James Comey.

The Attorney General at the time, Jeff Sessions fired McCabe in March 2018. That came after the inspector general found he had repeatedly misstated his involvement in a leak to The Journal regarding an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a report in 2018 that showed McCabe lacked candor with FBI Director James Comey, FBI investigators, and inspector general investigators about his authorization to leak some allegedly sensitive information to the Wall Street Journal that revealed the existence of an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

Comey said he did not permit McCabe to tell the media. Horowitz wrote that McCabe’s actions were “designed to advance his personal interests at the expense of Department leadership” and “violated the FBI’s and the Department’s media policy and constituted misconduct.”

McCabe’s legal team, on the other hand, said McCabe’s story changed because he was surprised by and unprepared for the question during his May 2017 interview. The attorneys also said that he was preoccupied with other major events. They went on to say that once Comey was fired later that day, he didn’t think about his answers again as he dealt with leading the bureau for a time.

Horowitz concluded that McCabe misled his team too.

Horowitz said, “It seems highly implausible that McCabe forgot in May what he recalled in detail during his November inspector general testimony. In our view, the evidence is substantial that it was done knowingly and intentionally.”

McCabe has maintained his innocence and said the inspector general’s conclusions relied on mis-characterizations and omissions, which included information that was said to be favorable to McCabe.

McCabe also known as Andy was allegedly the “Andy” who former FBI agent Peter Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page texted about in the famous texts between the two lovers, at the time.

Honestly, I have believed that McCabe was going to be indicted. I have alleged that Strzok, Page and McCabe were in a big part of backing the “insurance policy” that turned out to be the Russian Witch-hunt that came from the Dossier written by Christopher Steele.

Can I say that I am deeply disappointed that the people who I see as potentially guilty are all going free so far?

Why is it that most people who were investigated for being on the side of President Trump are usually indicted and some have been found guilty of crimes that are similar to the allegations against people on the left?

It appears to me that there is a distinct two tier judicial system in play here.

I can always be reached on Twitter to discuss political views.

@DavedaGruber

Did FBI Lawyer Falsify FISA Document?

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

Reports are flying around about Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz finding evidence that a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) lawyer changed verbiage on a document that was used to obtain the FISA warrant from the court.

The word usage that was changed lead to manipulating a rather important document.

There is now alleged evidence that is said to come out on December 9th that contains information that a document relating to Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant abuse against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page was altered by a lawyer.

The alleged lawyer in question has not been name, as yet but it is alleged that he worked beneath former deputy assistant director Peter Strzok. Now that report is being disputed.

The story unfolds that the lawyer was allegedly a low level employee of the FBI but was involved enough in the FISA process to falsely state that he had documentation to back up a claim he had made in discussions with the Justice Department about the factual basis for the FISA warrant application.

The alleged employee allegedly altered an email to substantiate his inaccurate version of events.

On January 15, 2019 the Washington Examiner published an article that noted that former FBI general counsel James A. Baker was under criminal investigation for unauthorized leaks to the media.

The development was made public in a letter  that was sent to the office of U.S. Attorney John Durham for the District of Connecticut by Republican Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Mark Meadows of North Carolina.

Former FBI Director James B. Comey selected Baker as the FBI’s general counsel. Baker was an associate general counsel for Bridgewater Associates, LP.

After clerking for the Honorable Bernard A. Friedman in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Baker joined the Department of Justice (DOJ) with the Criminal Division through the Attorney General’s Honors Program in 1990 and worked as a federal prosecutor with the division’s Fraud Section.

In December, 2017 Baker was replaced as general counsel and reassigned to a different position within the FBI. It was revealed on April 19, 2018 that he was a recipient of at least one memo from Comey.

On May 4, 2018, Baker resigned the FBI and joined the Brookings Institution.

In January 2019, Baker left Brookings to become the director of national security and cybersecurity at the R Street Institute.

Is Baker going to be thrown under the bus? I believe and it is my opinion that he is the person going down for the FISA warrant discrepancy.

Did I just uncover something? I just may have done that.

Is “Andy” McCabe Going Down?

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

The Justice department has allegedly rejected a desperate appeal from former deputy and acting director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe.

Allegedly, it has been recommended by U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu that McCabe appealed the decision of the U.S. attorney for Washington all the way up to Jeffrey Rosen who is the deputy attorney general.

Potential charges of the former top FBI official relate to DOJ inspector general findings against him regarding misleading statements concerning a Hillary Clinton-related investigation.

McCabe’s legal team has said that they received an email from the Department of Justice which said, “The Department rejected your appeal of the United States Attorney’s Office’s decision in this matter. Any further inquiries should be directed to the United States Attorney’s Office.”

McCabe was recently hired by CNN as a commentator and paid for his service. He had previously spent twenty-one years working for the FBI.

McCabe became the acting FBI director in May 2017 after President Trump fired former FBI director James Comey.

Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired McCabe in March 2018. The IG had found McCabe had repeatedly misstated his involvement in a leak to The Wall Street Journal. This was in regard to an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

McCabe sued the FBI and the Justice Department over being fired. He argued it was part of Trump’s plan to rid the bureau of leaders he perceived as disloyal to him.

McCabe argued in his complaint that FBI Director Chris Wray and Sessions, the two officials responsible for demoting and then firing him, created an excuse to force him out, which was in agreement with the president’s wishes.

The reason given for McCabe’s being fired was that he had misled investigators over his involvement in a news media leak.

McCabe has denied any wrongdoing and says that the real reason for his firing was “his refusal to pledge allegiance to a single man.”

I’ve told people on Twitter, who have asked me, who I thought would be indicted. I’ve always answered, “Andy.”

Come on folks, someone big had to go down, right? McCabe is a big fish to fry but others may get a free pass.

DOJ Will Not Prosecute Comey for Leaking Classified Information

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

The Conservative watchdog group, Judicial Watch, announced that it had obtained an FBI log about special agents arriving at former FBI Director James Comey’s home in June 2017 to retrieve his memos.

Comey handed over four of them and said that two of them, to the best of his recollection, were missing.

Still, it is now allegedly been decided that Comey will not face prosecution on this matter. The Department of Justice has declined to prosecute in this case.

During congressional testimony, Comey admitted that he had hand written notes of his meetings with President Trump in the days before he was fired. He took those notes and shared them with a friend who passed them to The New York Times.

That, folks, is called leaking information.

Two of the memos were classified by the FBI as “confidential,” but after the fact.

Comey became a critic of the president ever since he was fired from his position at the FBI.

Look what Comey tweeted:

Comey’s feelings towards Trump are not hidden. He holds hate for the president.

And Comey is not out of hot water just yet. He is a possible target of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s separate investigation into alleged Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse.
The former FBI director also signed three out of the four FISA applications targeting former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Comey’s actions as an FBI Director will now probably be scrutinized in the “investigate the investigators,” which is a review of the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation that is being led by Attorney General William Barr and the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, John Durham.

It has been said that the bigger you are, the harder you fall. Comey is a tall man who stands 6 feet 8 inches tall. I predict that he falls hard.

Schiff Alleges Trump’s Policy Threatens National Security

  ,
Leave a comment

by DavedaGruber:

On Friday the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, D-Calif., adamantly criticized the Trump administration for dangerously politicizing the Intelligence Community.

Schiff is requesting that the IC agencies provide more information about the president’s order which would allow them to declassify information related to the Russian probe.

Schiff has alleged that Trump’s policy threatened national security and he now wants the IC to provide all documents made available to Attorney General William Barr.

Schiff wants his committee, before any declassification, to provide an assessment on declassification’s harms to national security.  He also wants an in-person briefing on what the administration had requested to that point.

According to Schiff, Trump endangered national security by granting Barr the authority to declassify information without consulting with the IC.

Schiff wrote, in a letter to Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats, “President Trump’s May 23, 2019 directive to you and other heads of agencies to assist and produce information to Attorney General William P. Barr … represents a disturbing effort by the President and the Attorney General to politicize the Intelligence Community (“IC”) and law enforcement, and raises grave concerns about inappropriate and misleading disclosures of classified information and IC sources and methods for political ends.”

Schiff sent his letters to the directors of National Intelligence, Dan Coats; the FBI Director, Christopher Wray; CIA and National Security Agency, Director Gen. Paul Nakasone.
President Trump had imposed an order in an push to accelerate his Justice Department’s investigation into the Russia investigation’s origins.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller was unable to conclude the president’s 2016 campaign engaged in a conspiracy with Russia. This has brought up questions as to how the whole Russian probe began.

Schiff has suggested that the administration’s argument behind that investigation was a “conspiracy theory” and that it incorrectly mistrusted the validity of Mueller’s probe.

Schiff said, “The Special Counsel’s report definitively establishes that the counterintelligence investigation was properly initiated based on credible information from an intelligence partner. Yet the Attorney General has called into question, without evidence, the validity of the predication of what became the Special Counsel’s investigation.”

Schiff also said, “This approach threatens national security by subverting longstanding rules and practices that obligate you and other heads of IC agencies to safeguard sources and methods and prevent the politicization of intelligence and law enforcement.”

Former FBI Director James Comey, who led the Russia investigation during the 2016 presidential election, had basically expressed similar views when he said, “The FBI wasn’t out to get Donald Trump. It also wasn’t out to get Hillary Clinton. It was out to do its best to investigate serious matters while walking through a vicious political minefield.”

In an interview on Friday with CBS, Barr, he has vowed to get to the bottom of the investigation’s origins. He admitted that he faced difficulty in obtaining the answers he needed and said, “I assumed I’d get answers when I went in, and I have not gotten answers that are at all satisfactory.”

Republicans see the situation differently. They have demanded accountability after the release of Mueller’s report. The main concern here is the controversial Steele dossier’s role in initiating the investigation.

One key witness who is expected to refuse to cooperate with the review is former British spy Christopher Steele who is the author of the controversial “dossier” about alleged Trump interactions with Russia.

Congressional Democrats are continuing to press the administration for more answers surrounding Mueller’s investigation.

The roadblocks are in place as the president invoked executive privilege to avoid complying with subpoenas.

Now, some Democrats have taken their party’s efforts further and are calling for impeachment proceedings against the president. They don’t have enough support from their own party to impeach and Republicans, except for Justin Amash, R-Mich., don’t want impeachment.

In my humble opinion, the Steele dossier is the key factor here. The FISA warrant was issued because the dossier’s allegations helped justify the FISA warrant to wiretap former Trump adviser Carter Page.

The dossier now serves as an exhibit for the defense rather than the prosecution.

The show is about to begin. Stay tuned; the trailers are running in my head and I’m excited to see what happens next.

Who’s Picking Up the Barr Bill?

  ,
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

Friday night brought with it great displeasure for President Trump’s actions from two Democrats. Even though the reality that many Democrats are displeased with Trump at any given point, former CIA Director John Brennan and former DNI James Clapper showed special disdain for Trump leading to the weekend.

Brennan and Clapper came down on Trump for directing Attorney General William Barr to declassify documents related to the surveillance of his campaign during the 2016 election.

Brennan said to MSNBC host Chris Hayes, “I see it as a very, very serious and outrageous move on the part of Mr. Trump, once again, trampling on the statutory authorities of the Director of National Intelligence and the heads of the independent intelligence agencies. And it’s unclear to me what Mr. Barr is actually going to do. Is he investigating a crime? Well, what’s the predication of that crime? Or he is just going to be looking for information… that Mr. Trump can just give to his defenders on the right and cherry-pick information that could be taken out of context?”

Brennan, along with his concerns for exposing “sources and methods” as well as the intelligence of “partners abroad” said, “This is very serious and I know that my former colleagues in the intelligence agencies are looking upon this with great concern and worry.”

Along with his allegations of Trump’s decision being not to their liking, Brennan said he hopes that DNI Dan Coats and CIA Director Gina Haspel will “stand up” to President Trump’s “unprecedented act.”

A tweet by Trump may have brought on the extra anger. Trump had tweeted a political cartoon depicting the former CIA Director, former DNI Clapper, and former FBI Director James Comey. Brennan replied to the president’s tweet.

Here is the tweet and response:

Brennan was not alone in his negative verbiage. Clapper was spewing the same verbal garbage. Clapper told Anderson Cooper on CNN that the “bigger issue” is “what exactly is the scope” of the declassification, whether it involves all of Russia’s interference in the election or just the counter-intelligence probe.

Clapper expressed similar concerns as Brennan regarding sources and methods being exposed and putting “people’s lives at risk.”

Clapper is now a CNN analyst. He’s just what CNN needed; more ‘fake reporting’. He still insists that the infamous Steele dossier was not used as sourcing for the intelligence community assessment in January 2017.

I can only give my humble opinion here. Both Clapper and Brennan have never been fans of Trump. Their claims don’t sound kosher to me.

The elephant in the room is that James Comey is in the cartoon, as well. Comey is tweeting about the 2020 election and, of course, “spying” and “treason” were thrown into the mix.

Comey has this to say:

Consider the sources. Honestly, do you trust Brennan, Clapper or Comey? I’ll add; who would? I guess the Democrats love to hear the trash that they drum out.

Most Congressional Democrats have flipped sides on Barr. They used to like him before Trump appointed him. Now, all kinds of investing is happening on both sides of the aisle. The cost will be high but then the Mueller report has cost the American people over $25M so far.

To bring the actual criminals to justice, I’m certain that many would want to pick up this (bar bill) Barr Bill.

My popcorn is bought and ready for me to dig in. The show is about to begin and I’ll be watching closely.

What AG Rod Rosenstein Says is Bizarre

 
Leave a comment

by Daveda Gruber:

Attorney General William Barr had an ally in Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein when Rosenstein told the Wall Street Journal that he believed it was strange to say the attorney general was misleading the public.

Rosenstein’s comment came as he defended Barr’s handling of the Robert Mueller report. Barr testified before a House appropriations subcommittee.

The highly anticipated Mueller report has caused a rather big stir in Washington D.C. among lawmakers since it was wrapped up.

Rosenstein appointed Mueller to serve as special counsel for the United States Department of Justice.

Rosenstein who is 54 years old, told the Wall Street Journal that he believed it was strange to say the attorney general was misleading the public.

Rosenstein said, “He’s being as forthcoming as he can, and so this notion that he’s trying to mislead people, I think is just completely bizarre.”

Rosenstein also said, “It would be one thing if you put out a letter and said, ‘I’m not going to give you the report. What he said is, ‘Look, it’s going to take a while to process the report. In the meantime, people really want to know what’s in it. I’m going to give you the top-line conclusions.’ That’s all he was trying to do.”

Rosenstein was not about to give up too much information but he did call on the public to have “tremendous confidence” in Barr.

Barr has defended his decision to send a letter to Congress detailing Mueller’s principal conclusions. This was done because the public would not have tolerated waiting weeks for information that took Mueller and his team nearly two years to put together.

Mueller’s investigation concluded in late March and since then Barr has received the nearly 400-page confidential report. Barr, in turn, sent his four-page summary letter to Congress two days later.

In that letter, Barr wrote that Mueller found no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion despite efforts by “Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

Also noted was that Mueller had not exonerated President Trump on the issue of obstruction of justice.

The Mueller report will be made public in a week but that version will be redacted.

Rosenstein stayed in his position at the Department of Justice “at Barr’s request” saying, “For me, it’s a real privilege.” He hopes to begin a new job toward the end of the summer.

In Capital Hill testimony, Barr said that “spying did occur” against the 2016 Trump campaign.

It’s very clear that Democrats on the Hill were notably disturbed by that claim. In fact, even former FBI Director James Comey made a claim that he had no idea what Barr was talking about when he said that “spying did occur” against the 2016 Trump campaign.

Comey said, “I have no idea what he’s talking about so it’s hard for me to comment. When I hear that kind of language used, it’s concerning because the FBI and the Department of Justice conduct court-ordered electronic surveillance. I have never thought of that as spying.”

So, if spying does not include electronic devices, why have people who were being spied on always thought that their phone was tapped? What are listening devices? When someone goes to a meeting with a wire to record the events or to have agents listening in real time, is it surveillance or spying? Or are the two, if not similar, the same thing?

The covering up has just begun. Not only do I want to see the Mueller report but I want to find out what or who Barr is investigating next.