1 Stark Contrasts Between the Mueller Report and Attorney General Barr's
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Document Requests
Annie Donaldson DOCUMENT REQUESTS Please produce the documents set forth in Schedule A, provided, however, that in order to facilitate production of documents on an expedited basis, you may limit your production at this time to documents you furnished at any time after November 8, 2016 to: (a) the Special Counsel’s Office established by Department of Justice Order No. 3915-2017 (May 17, 2017); (b) the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”); (c) any other federal or state regulatory and/or law enforcement agency; (d) any congressional committee; or (e) in civil or other litigation. This includes but is not limited to documents that were voluntarily provided, produced under compulsion, or seized. Instructions for producing documents appear in Schedule B, and definitions appear in Schedule C. SCHEDULE A 1) All documents relating to the following: a) Communications between Donald McGahn and President Donald Trump on or about January 26-27, 2017, relating to Michael Flynn’s statements to the FBI about his contacts with Sergey Kislyak. b) The resignation or termination of Michael Flynn, including but not limited to the discussion of Sean Spicer’s February 14, 2017 public statements about Flynn’s resignation. c) President Trump’s contacts with James Comey on or about January 27, 2017, February 14, 2017, March 30, 2017, and April 11, 2017. d) Communications involving one or more of the following individuals on or about May 8- 9, 2017 relating to the possible termination of James Comey: President Trump, Vice President Pence, Reince Priebus, Stephen Bannon, Don McGahn, Jared Kushner, Stephen Miller, Jeff Sessions, and/or Rod Rosenstein. -
The Impact of the Mueller Report on the Public Opinion of the 45Th President of the US
The Impact of the Mueller Report on the Public Opinion of the 45th President of the US Andrey Reznikov Black Hills State University After 22 months-long investigation, special Counsel Robert Mueller submitted his report to US Attorney General on March 22, 2019. The report consists of two volumes: volume I deals with the Russian interference in 2016 elections; volume II documents obstruction of justice incidents. Mueller’s team filed charges against 37 individuals, obtained 7 guilty pleas, and 1 conviction at trial. One of the most important conclusions, repeated throughout the report, is the following statement: If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that conclusion. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. (Mueller 329-330, vol. II) Such a conclusion alone, even without the knowledge of the facts listed in the report, should have had a substantial impact on the public opinion of the President. However, the public mostly remained quite indifferent. Thus, the question we need to answer is – why? Why the impact of the arguably most important legal document of our time was so miserable? The short answer is simple and obvious: because no one (except pundits) has read the report. That answer begs another question – why the document which was so impatiently anticipated remained mostly unread by the American public? If you ask several people in the street if they will read a 400-page text, they will say they do not have time for that. -
Michael Cohen Testimony Takeaways
Michael Cohen Testimony Takeaways Unplanned and sage-green Rinaldo mispronounces his goldeyes occlude saint confidingly. Zorro whelkinjuring remembers her paladins septennially. unscrupulously, she mays it inconsolably. West Jehu telefax, his distemperatures Turn all for the trump returned to bone spur, michael cohen completed three trumps knew Insurance companies and michael cohen testimony takeaways from rutgers university of fresh air force: those were enough class, objected to congress is out of cpac. Links are not endorsements by NBC News. Can be made him and cable news in afghanistan. Trump of being a racist and a con man. Could not create HTTP request object. Cohen took to lying to do we do so why do we already declared their offices than a letter on trump tower moscow project in a modern browser. Your browser sent an invalid request. Trump directed the Trump Foundation, which is supposed to be a charitable organization, to repay the fake bidder, despite keeping the art for himself. Please click to keep on saturday, michael cohen testimony takeaways from house oversight committee, no longer white tigers during brief statement. He committed in one point, listen to vouch for a michael cohen testimony takeaways from a racist and guns. He discussed well, michael cohen testimony takeaways from california, or someone representing him to. House oversight committee in its substance in conversation with president of russians peddling dirt on latin americans in cohen testimony to hundreds of that. Trump directed the bbc is more people voted to michael cohen testimony takeaways. Takeaways from Cohen's Congress testimony by Young. Cohen hearing house says president personally signed cheque, michael cohen testimony takeaways. -
Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein — a Career Dedicated to Public Service Bonnie S
Fall 2018 PUBLIC TRUST The Newsletter of the Federal Career Service Division of the Federal Bar Association Issue Preview This inaugural issue of PUBLIC TRUST features In furtherance of the DOJ feature, we have prepared an article about Rod J. Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney a brief overview of attorney employment opportunities General of the United States (DAG). DAG Rosenstein at the Department. On the “governance” side, we are has served in a full array of positions within the pleased to interview John Thomas, Jr., the Chair of Department of Justice (DOJ), including the U.S. the newly constituted Public Service Task Force. John Attorney for the District of Maryland, and in both the Tax provides details about the mission and scope of this and Criminal Divisions. We are pleased that he is a long- important group’s work. FBA National President Maria time member and leader of the FBA Maryland Chapter. Vathis and FCSD Chair Bob DeSousa both extend their We are honored that James A. Crowell IV (Director of welcome to Division members. Bruce Moyer, FBA the Executive Office of United States Attorneys) and Government Relations Counsel, provides an insightful Robert K. Hur (U.S. Attorney for Maryland) have taken update on legislative issues of interest to government the time to share their thoughts about the DAG with us. attorneys. Thanks to FCSD Board Member Bonnie S. Greenberg for Your suggestions regarding newsletter content are writing this article. Bonnie is a friend and colleague of always welcome and may be sent to fbapublictrusteditor@ the DAG. She is currently Acting Chief Learning Officer, gmail.com. -
Robert Mueller Testimony
Colborn, Paul P (OLC) From: Colborn, Paul P (OLC) Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 9:54 AM To: Engel, Steven A. (OLC); Gannon, Curtis E. (OLC) Subject: Fwd: Discuss Mueller testimony Won't be back until 12:15 or later. Could join noon meeting late and can do 3:30. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Lasseter, David F. {OLA)" <[email protected]> Date: May 14, 2019 at 9:51:28 AM EDT To: "O'Callaghan, Edward C. (OOAG}" <[email protected]>, "Rabbitt, Brian (OAG)" <[email protected]>, "Weinsheimer, Bradley (ODAG)" <[email protected]>, "Engel, Steven A. (OLC)" ,., (b) (6) per OLC , "Colborn, Paul P (OLC)" ,., (b) (6) per OLC >, "Gannon, Curtis E. (OLC)" > Cc: "Boyd, Stephen E. (OLA)" <[email protected]> Subject: Discuss Mueller testimony Good morning all. Could we gather today to discuss the potential testimony of Mr. Mueller (b) (5) I SCO is discussing the scheduling of the testimony with HJC and HPSCI but needs to be better informed on the process as they seek an agreement. Would noon or 3:30 work? Thanks, David David F. Lasseter Document ID: 0.7.23922.34583 Rabbitt, Brian (OAG) From: Rabbitt, Brian (OAG) Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 10:27 AM To: Engel, Steven A. (O LC); Lasseter, David F. {OLA); O'Callaghan, Edward C. (OOAG); Weinsheimer, Bradley (OOAG); Colborn, Paul P (OLC); Gannon, Curtis E. {O LC) Cc: Boyd, Stephen E. {OLA) Subject: RE: Discuss Mueller testimony 330 would be best for me. -Original Message---- From: Engel, Steven A. (OLC) < (b) (6) per OLC •> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 10:04 AM To: Lasseter, David F. -
Memorandum ISO Plaintiffs' MPSJ
Case 1:19-cv-01278-RBW Document 59 Filed 02/03/20 Page 1 of 30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JASON LEOPOLD and BUZZFEED, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et al. Defendants. Case No: 1:19-cv-01278-RBW CABLE NEWS NETWORK, INC., Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendant. MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Case 1:19-cv-01278-RBW Document 59 Filed 02/03/20 Page 2 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND.....................................................................3 A. Plaintiffs’ FOIA Requests for FBI Interview Memoranda ......................................3 B. DOJ’s Overreliance on Exemption 5 .......................................................................4 ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................................................5 I. FOIA REQUIRES REASONABLY FORESEEABLE HARM TO THE INTERESTS PROTECTED BY EXEMPTION 5 ...............................................................5 II. DOJ IMPROPERLY RELIED ON EXEMPTION 5 TO WITHHOLD AND REDACT RESPONSIVE INFORMATION IN ITS PRODUCTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS .......................................................................................................................7 -
The Case Study of Crossfire Hurricane
TIMELINE: Congressional Oversight in the Face of Executive Branch and Media Suppression: The Case Study of Crossfire Hurricane 2009 FBI opens a counterintelligence investigation of the individual who would become Christopher Steele’s primary sub-source because of his ties to Russian intelligence officers.1 June 2009: FBI New York Field Office (NYFO) interviews Carter Page, who “immediately advised [them] that due to his work and overseas experiences, he has been questioned by and provides information to representatives of [another U.S. government agency] on an ongoing basis.”2 2011 February 2011: CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson begins reporting on “Operation Fast and Furious.” Later in the year, Attkisson notices “anomalies” with several of her work and personal electronic devices that persist into 2012.3 2012 September 11, 2012: Attack on U.S. installations in Benghazi, Libya.4 2013 March 2013: The existence of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server becomes publicly known.5 May 2013: o News reports reveal Obama’s Justice Department investigating leaks of classified information and targeting reporters, including secretly seizing “two months of phone records for reporters and editors of The Associated Press,”6 labeling Fox News reporter James Rosen as a “co-conspirator,” and obtaining a search warrant for Rosen’s personal emails.7 May 10, 2013: Reports reveal that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeted and unfairly scrutinized conservative organizations seeking tax-exempt status.8 -
Counterintelligence Implications of Volume 1
1 RPTR DEAN EDTR SECKMAN LESSONS FROM THE MUELLER REPORT: COUNTERINTELLIGENCE IMPLICATIONS OF VOLUME 1 Wednesday, June 12, 2019 U.S. House of Representatives, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:00 a.m., in Room 210, Cannon House Office Building, the Honorable Adam Schiff (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Schiff, Himes, Sewell, Carson, Speier, Quigley, Castro, Heck, Welch, Maloney, Demings, Krishnamoorthi, Nunes, Conaway, Turner, Wenstrup, Stewart, Crawford, Stefanik, Hurd, and Ratcliffe. 2 The Chairman. The committee will come to order. Without objection, the chair is permitted to declare a recess at any time. In April of 2016, as the U.S. Presidential race was getting underway, an individual with links to the Russian Government reached out to the Trump campaign to telegraph the Kremlin's preference for Mr. Trump. Joseph Mifsud, a London-based Maltese professor, told George Papadopoulos, a member of Trump's foreign policy team, that he recently met with high-level Russian officials who told him that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton, including thousands of emails. Papadopoulos was also informed that the Russian Government could assist the Trump campaign through the anonymous release of stolen material. At the time, Mr. Papadopoulos was given this extraordinary information, the American public was unaware that the DNC and Clinton campaign had even been hacked, let alone that Russia was behind the attack and planned to weaponize the data that it stole. In July of 2016, the Russian Government began dumping the stolen emails in precisely the same fashion it had previewed for Mr. -
Rod Rosenstein W'86
4 Í WHARTON EVENTS Legal Studies and Business Ethics Speaker Series presents: Rod Rosenstein W’86 FEBRUARY 21, 2019 THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21 | 3:15 PM - 4:15 PM EST ROOM G-06, JON M. HUNTSMAN HALL RSVP PENN COMMUNITY RSVP This event is for members of the Penn Community. A Penn ID or proof of alumni status is required for entrance. Event starts promptly at 3:15pm. Doors open at 2:45pm. Please note, an RSVP does not guarantee you a seat. RRodod RRosensteinosenstein WW’86’86 DDeputyeputy AAttorneyttorney GGeneraleneral ooff tthehe UUnitednited SStatestates In conversation with Amanda Shanor, Assistant Professor of Legal Studies & Business Ethics, the Wharton School Opening remarks from Ted Ruger,éDean and Bernard G. Segal Professor of Law, Penn Law Rod J. Rosenstein is the 37th Deputy Attorney General of the United States. As Deputy Attorney General, he advises and assists the Attorney General in formulating and implementing Department of Justice policies and programs and in providing overall supervision to all organizational units of the Department of Justice. Mr. Rosenstein has spent over 27 years in government service. After graduating from the Wharton School of Business and Harvard Law School, Mr. Rosenstein started his legal career as a law clerk to Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Mr. Rosenstein began his career with the Department as an attorney with the Attorney General’s Honors Program and previously served as U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland from 2005 to 2017. + GGOOGLEOOGLE CCALENDARALENDAR Location Room G-06, Jon M. -
Putin, Trump and Democracy's Slippery Slope Toward Oligarchy
Putin, Trump and Democracy’s Slippery Slope Toward Oligarchy Acknowledgments The Common Cause Education Fund is the research and public education affiliate of Common Cause, founded in 1970 by John Gardner. Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process. This report was produced with the support of small dollar contributions from Americans who believe in transparent, open, and accountable govern- ment, as well as generous grants from the WhyNot Initiative and the Philip & Janice Levin Foundation. It was written by Joe Maschman, a Common Cause legal fellow, and edited by Paul Seamus Ryan, vice president for policy and litigation; Scott Swenson, vice president for communications, Susannah Goodman, director of voting integrity; and Dale Eisman, senior writer/editor. The authors and editors wish to express our thanks to Kerstin Diehn for her design and to Common Cause President Karen Hobert Flynn for her guidance and encouragement in the preparation of this report. Introduction Americans are more united than those who benefit from division want us to believe. Republicans, Democrats, and Independents largely agree that registration and voting should be secure, modern, and convenient, and that all eligible people should be encouraged to vote. As voters, we recognize that the more people who participate in our elections, the better it is for our democracy, making it more likely that the representatives who are elected will listen to the people. -
Questioning the National Security Agency's Metadata Program
I/S: A JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLICY FOR THE INFORMATION SOCIETY Secret without Reason and Costly without Accomplishment: Questioning the National Security Agency’s Metadata Program JOHN MUELLER & MARK G. STEWART* I. INTRODUCTION When Edward Snowden’s revelations emerged in June 2013 about the extent to which the National Security Agency was secretly gathering communications data as part of the country’s massive 9/11- induced effort to catch terrorists, the administration of Barack Obama set in motion a program to pursue him to the ends of the earth in order to have him prosecuted to the full extent of the law for illegally exposing state secrets. However, the President also said that the discussions about the programs these revelations triggered have actually been a good thing: “I welcome this debate. And I think it’s healthy for our democracy. I think it’s a sign of maturity because probably five years ago, six years ago, we might not have been having this debate.”1 There may be something a bit patronizing in the implication that the programs have been secret because we were not yet mature enough to debate them when they were put into place. Setting that aside, however, a debate is surely to be welcomed—indeed, much overdue. It should be conducted not only about the National Security Agency’s (NSA) amazingly extensive data-gathering programs to * John Mueller is a professor of political science at Ohio State University and a Senior Fellow at the Cato Insitute. Mark G. Stewart is a professor of engineering at the University of Newcastle, Australia. -
A Timeline of Trump's Deals and Investments in Eastern Europe And
A Timeline of Trump’s Deals and Investments in Eastern Europe and Central Asia Thanks to BuzzFeed’s in-depth reporting, we now know more than ever before about how President Donald Trump, aided by Michael Cohen and Felix Sater, sought to establish Trump Tower Moscow during the 2016 election. But that story only scratches the surface of the Trump Organization’s dealings with individuals who are tied to Eastern Europe and questionable business practices in risk-prone jurisdictions such as Russia, Kazakhstan, and Georgia. These partnerships brought Trump and the Trump Organization in closer proximity to apparent money-laundering and reportedly corrupt operations, ultimately making him vulnerable to greater legal and reputational risk. (To date, neither Trump nor the Trump Organization has been charged with money laundering or violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in relation to real-estate developments). The following timeline, compiled from public reports going back decades, shows how Trump’s approach to cultivating post-Soviet consumers and investors has evolved over the years. From the late 1980s through early 2000s, Russian money made its way into Trump’s properties largely by way of individual unit sales in the United States. However, beginning in the mid- 2000s, Trump took a plunge abroad, pivoting to pursuing foreign licensing deals, notably in Russia and its neighboring states. The Washington Post’s report on Trump’s shift from primarily funding projects using debt to doing so through dramatically increased cash spending on assets, including golf courses, coincides with this palpable shift to foreign business deals. These foreign deals may have served not only as a source of cash resources for Trump and his organization during this time but also as the backbone of his and his campaign’s increasingly apparent collusion with the Kremlin during the 2016 election.