Rosenstein - "Don't beleive anonymous sources."

[whell]

Interesting that it takes a representative of the US Justice Dept to remind us that we shouldn't invest in the fake news put out by WaPo.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ces/102907698/

"Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,' particularly when they do not identify the country — let alone the branch or agency of government — with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated," Rosenstein said in a statement that was being circulated on social media.

Rosenstein added that the Department of Justice "has a long-established policy" not to confirm these kinds of allegations.

Although Rosenstein's statement Thursday does not mention any specific story, the warning comes the same day as a Washington Post story citing an anonymous source reported that Mueller was investigating the business dealings of the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

[Chicks]

Yeah, all that fake news from anonymous sources sure didn't work for Nixon, after all! Keep on wishing, whell!

[whell]

Originally Posted by Chicks

Yeah, all that fake news from anonymous sources sure didn't work for Nixon, after all! Keep on wishing, whell!

Clueless comment.

[icenine]

We should believe Trump. He proved Obama was born in the USA.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Interesting that it takes a representative of the US Justice Dept to remind us that we shouldn't invest in the fake news put out by WaPo...

You're apparently not bright enough to understand what's going on here. Rosenstein's innocuous statement is not stating anything that everyone doesn't know already. The question is why he did so. The apparent (and obvious) reasoning goes as follows:

1. Trump's minions (Gingrich, Ruddy) say that Trump is considering firing Mueller out of frustration with the "witch hunt" in an effort to pressure Mueller to tow the line.
2. Leaks come out from allies of Mueller's (and/or people who distrust Trump) saying that Trump is indeed under investigation for obstruction of justice (thereby further inoculating Mueller from Trump (firing him would make Trump's problems worse as Trump is now a target of the investigation)).
3. Trump reacts to the news of the broadening investigation that by insisting that Rosenstein publicly deny that Trump is under investigation (just as he did with Comey).
4. Rather than complying with Trump's request to (dishonestly) deny the investigation, Rosenstein releases his innocuous statement rather than completely defying Trump (which clearly doesn't go as far as Trump wanted him to go).
5. Trump fires off a tweet critical of Rosenstein this morning after seeing that Rosenstein's statement did not exonerate him ("I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director!") .

Too bad you're not clever enough to see through Trump's clumsy efforts to undermine/discredit the investigation. Your Dear Leader is in a hole and he keeps digging. It's highly entertaining to watch for those smart enough to understand what it all means. FWIW, all Trump did after all of this attempted subterfuge is confirm that he is under investigation. Dumb ass.

Meanwhile, "The Trump Show" is really starting to get interesting. It's kinda like watching "The Sopranos."

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by finnbow

You're apparently not bright enough to understand what's going on here. Rosenstein's innocuous statement is not stating anything that everyone doesn't know already. The question is why he did so. The apparent (and obvious) reasoning goes as follows:

1. Trump's minions (Gingrich, Ruddy) say that Trump is considering firing Mueller out of frustration with the "witch hunt."
2. Leaks come out from allies of Mueller's (and/or people who distrust Trump) saying that Trump is indeed under investigation for obstruction of justice (thereby further inoculating Mueller from Trump (firing him would make Trump's problems worse as Trump is now a target of the investigation)).
3. Trump reacts to the news of the broadening investigation that by insisting that Rosenstein publicly deny that Trump is under investigation (just as he did with Comey).
4. Rather than complying with Trump's request to (dishonestly) deny the investigation, Rosenstein releases his innocuous statement rather than completely defying Trump (which clearly doesn't go as far as Trump wanted him to go).
5. Trump fires off a tweet critical of Rosenstein this morning after seeing that Rosenstein's statement did not exonerate him ("I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director!") .

Too bad you're not clever enough to see through Trump's clumsy efforts to undermine/discredit the investigation. Your Dear Leader is in a hole and he keeps digging. It's highly entertaining to watch for those smart enough to understand what it all means. FWIW, all Trump did after all of this attempted subterfuge is confirm that he is under investigation. Dumb ass.

Meanwhile, "The Trump Show" is really starting to get interesting. It's kinda like watching "The Sopranos."

Very well done, Finn, and the Sopranos comparison is the perfect icing on the cake!

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

You're apparently not bright enough to understand what's going on here. Rosenstein's innocuous statement is not stating anything that everyone doesn't know already. The question is why he did so. The apparent (and obvious) reasoning goes as follows:

1. Trump's minions (Gingrich, Ruddy) say that Trump is considering firing Mueller out of frustration with the "witch hunt" in an effort to pressure Mueller to tow the line.
2. Leaks come out from allies of Mueller's (and/or people who distrust Trump) saying that Trump is indeed under investigation for obstruction of justice (thereby further inoculating Mueller from Trump (firing him would make Trump's problems worse as Trump is now a target of the investigation)).
3. Trump reacts to the news of the broadening investigation that by insisting that Rosenstein publicly deny that Trump is under investigation (just as he did with Comey).
4. Rather than complying with Trump's request to (dishonestly) deny the investigation, Rosenstein releases his innocuous statement rather than completely defying Trump (which clearly doesn't go as far as Trump wanted him to go).
5. Trump fires off a tweet critical of Rosenstein this morning after seeing that Rosenstein's statement did not exonerate him ("I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director!") .

Too bad you're not clever enough to see through Trump's clumsy efforts to undermine/discredit the investigation. Your Dear Leader is in a hole and he keeps digging. It's highly entertaining to watch for those smart enough to understand what it all means. FWIW, all Trump did after all of this attempted subterfuge is confirm that he is under investigation. Dumb ass.

Meanwhile, "The Trump Show" is really starting to get interesting. It's kinda like watching "The Sopranos."

Just saw this, and sorry, you couldn't be more wrong. Before calling other questioning other folks intelligence, you might actually want to have a look at the details.

Rosenstein made these comments following this WaPo fake news story which suggested that the FBI was "investigating Jared Kushner’s business dealings". That story was sourced as follows:

"...according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter."

The officials who described the financial focus of the investigation spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

The USA Today article states that the while the Deputy AG didn't single out any particular news story - and he was speaking about a news story and not about Trump or anything Trump may or may not have said:

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein told Americans Thursday to be "skeptical" about stories with anonymous sources.

"Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,' particularly when they do not identify the country — let alone the branch or agency of government — with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated," Rosenstein said in a statement that was being circulated on social media.

Rosenstein added that the Department of Justice "has a long-established policy" not to confirm these kinds of allegations.

So, USA Today's conclusion - and I concur - is that Rosenstein was specifically speaking about a news story - most likely the WaPo story - and cautioning that folks should be careful about what they read.

I can understand why you - with your entrenched and possibly incurable case of Trumpitis - might attribute Rosenstein's comments to something about Trump. Hell, if a star on the other side of the galaxy went supernova, you'd probably suspect Trump had a hand in it. Hate to tell ya, but usually the simplest and most obvious explanation is the right one.

[Pio1980]

Some disinformation background from someone with experience.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b01eab7a2d130a

[Chicks]

Oh, BTW, whell. I before E, except after C. I believe that applies here, lol.

[bobabode]

Funny how Prez* Orange Gasbag threw AAG Rosenstein under bus and backed over him on Twitter today.