>Image caption
>Deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein penned
>the memo recommending Comey's dismissal
>
>President Donald Trump followed the recommendation
>of his deputy attorney general
>when he fired FBI boss
>James Comey. What did Rod
>Rosenstein say? This is his
>letter in full.
>Memorandum for the Attorney General
>FROM: Rod J Rosenstein
>SUBJECT: Restoring public confidence in the
>FBI
>The Federal Bureau of Investigation has
>long been regarded as our
>nation's premier federal investigative agency.
>Over the past year, however,
>the FBI's reputation and credibility
>have suffered substantial damage, and
>it has affected the entire
>Department of Justice. That is
>deeply troubling to many Department
>employees and veterans, legislators and
>citizens.
>The current FBI Director is an
>articulate and persuasive speaker about
>leadership and the immutable principles
>of the Department of Justice.
>He deserves our appreciation for
>his public service. As you
>and I have discussed, however,
>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. Almost everyone
>agrees that the Director made
>serious mistakes; it is one
>of the few issues that
>unites people of diverse perspectives.
>
>The director was wrong to usurp
>the Attorney General's authority on
>July 5, 2016, and announce
>his conclusion that the case
>should be closed without prosecution.
>It is not the function
>of the Director to make
>such an announcement. At most,
>the Director should have said
>the FBI had completed its
>investigation and presented its findings
>to federal prosecutors. The Director
>now defends his decision by
>asserting that he believed attorney
>General Loretta Lynch had a
>conflict. But the FBI Director
>is never empowered to supplant
>federal prosecutors and assume command
>of the Justice Department. There
>is a well-established process for
>other officials to step in
>when a conflict requires the
>recusal of the Attorney General.
>On July 5, however, the
>Director announced his own conclusions
>about the nation's most sensitive
>criminal investigation, without the authorization
>of duly appointed Justice Department
>leaders.
>What was Clinton FBI probe about?
>
>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
>investigation. Derogatory information sometimes is
>disclosed in the course of
>criminal investigations and prosecutions, but
>we never release it gratuitously.
>The Director laid out his
>version of the facts for
>the news media as if
>it were a closing argument,
>but without a trial. It
>is a textbook example of
>what federal prosecutors and agents
>are taught not to do.
>
>In response to skeptical question at
>a congressional hearing, the Director
>defended his remarks by saying
>that his "goal was to
>say what is true. What
>did we do, what did
>we find, what do we
>think about it." But the
>goal of a federal criminal
>investigation is not to announce
>our thoughts at a press
>conference. The goal is to
>determine whether there is sufficient
>evidence to justify a federal
>criminal prosecution, then allow a
>federal prosecutor who exercises authority
>delegated by the Attorney General
>to make a prosecutorial decision,
>and then - if prosecution
>is warranted - let the
>judge and jury determine the
>facts. We sometimes release information
>about closed investigations in appropriate
>ways, but the FBI does
>not do it sua sponte.
>
>Concerning his letter to the Congress
>on October 28, 2016, the
>Director cast his decision as
>a choice between whether he
>would "speak" about the FBI's
>decision to investigate the newly-discovered
>email messages or "conceal" it.
>"Conceal" is a loaded term
>that misstates the issue. When
>federal agents and prosecutors quietly
>open a criminal investigation, we
>are not concealing anything; we
>are simply following the longstanding
>policy that we refrain from
>publicizing non-public information. In that
>context, silence is not concealment.
>
>My perspective on these issues is
>shared by former Attorneys General
>and Deputy Attorneys General from
>different eras and both political
>parties. Judge Laurence Silberman, who
>served as Deputy Attorneys General
>under President Ford, wrote that
>"it is not the bureau's
>responsibility to opine on whether
>a matter should be prosecuted."
>Silberman believes that the Director's
>"Performance was so inappropriate for
>an FBI director that [he]
>doubt
the bureau will ever
>completely recover." Jamie Gorelick, Deputy
>Attorney General under President George
>W. Bush, to opine that
>the Director had "chosen personally
>to restrike the balance between
>transparency and fairness, department from
>the department's traditions." They concluded
>that the Director violated his
>obligation to "preserve, protect and
>defend" the traditions of the
>Department and the FBI.
>Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who
>served under President George W
>Bush, observed the Director "stepped
>way outside his job in
>disclosing the recommendation in that
>fashion" because the FBI director
>"doesn't make that decision". Alberto
>Gonzales, who also served as
>Attorneys General under President George
>W Bush, called the decision
>"an error in judgement." Eric
>Holder, who served as Deputy
>Attorneys General under President Clinton
>and Attorneys General under President
>Obama, said that the Director's
>decision "was incorrect. It violated
>long-standing Justice Department policies and
>traditions. And it ran counter
>to guidance that I put
>in place four years ago
>laying out the proper way
>to conduct investigations during an
>election season." Holder concluded that
>the Director "broke with these
>fundamental principles" and "negatively affected
>public trust in both the
>Justice Department and the FBI".
>
>Former Deputy Attorneys General Gorelick and
>Thompson described the unusual event
>as "real-time, raw-take transparency taken
>to its illogical limit, a
>kind of reality TV of
>federal criminal investigation," that is
>"antithetical to the interests of
>justice".
>Donald Ayer, who served as Deputy
>Attorneys General under President HW
>Bush, along with former Justice
>Department officials, was "astonished and
>perplexed" by the decision to
>"break[] with longstanding practices followed
>by officials of both parties
>during past elections." Ayer's letter
>noted, "Perhaps most troubling? is
>the precedent set by this
>departure from the Department's widely-respected,
>non-partisan traditions."
>We should reject the departure and
>return to the traditions.
>Although the President has the power
>to remove an FBI director,
>the decision should not be
>taken lightly. I agree with
>the nearly unanimous opinions of
>former Department officials. The way
>the Director handled the conclusion
>of the email investigation was
>wrong. As a result, the
>FBI is unlikely to regain
>public and congressional trust until
>it has a Director who
>understands the gravity of the
>mistakes and pledges never to
>repeat them. Having refused to
>admit his errors, the Director
>cannot be expected to implement
>the necessary corrective actions.
>
GEEZUS SWEET JUDAS!
No F'N Way You Typed all that Homer!
It Ain't Easy being Me!
