The McCabe Memo<\/p>\n
Last Friday, the New York Times\u00a0<\/em>ran a story. The Times<\/em>,quoting memos written by then Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, claimed that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein spoke about wearing a \u201cwire\u201d when talking to the President, and mentioned using the 25th<\/sup>Amendment process for removing Mr. Trump from office.<\/p>\n The Times\u00a0<\/em>article stated that McCabe wrote the memos to \u201cmemorialize\u201d events at the time, which was immediately after the firing of Director James Comey and before the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.\u00a0 Rosenstein at first denied the article, then claimed that the \u201cwire\u201d comment was sarcasm.<\/p>\n The facts of the article raise the questions:\u00a0 was the Deputy Attorney General of the United States looking to remove the President of the United States?\u00a0 Was he also trying to get evidence from the President to use in some kind of legal proceeding against him?\u00a0 If that was the case, was he acting to protect the country, or was he acting as part of a \u201cdeepstate\u201d conspiracy to stop the Trump Presidency?<\/p>\n At the time, a Rosenstein \u201cjoke\u201d about a wire might have made sense. Right after the firing of Comey, Trump blamed Rosenstein\u2019s memo for the firing.\u00a0 Rosenstein was \u201cbetrayed\u201d by the claim, and supposedly considered resigning at the time.\u00a0In that context, a joke about \u201cwearing a wire\u201d might have been ironic, if not funny.<\/p>\n And Rosenstein, a career attorney with the Justice Department, was well aware that the 25th\u00a0<\/sup>Amendment is a burdensome and technical process, and also one in which Deputy\u2019s had no place.\u00a0 The 25th\u00a0<\/sup>requires the Vice President and half of the Cabinet members, something that Rosenstein had no control or say about.\u00a0In addition, he certainly knew that \u201cwearing a wire\u201d would make him a witness against the President, and force him to recuse himself from the investigation.\u00a0 It seems unlikely that he would even bring it up.<\/p>\n So what were the reasons for the New York Times <\/em>getting the story?\u00a0 Who were the anonymous sources that gave them the McCabe memos?<\/p>\n The memos were controlled by three entities.\u00a0 The FBI and the Department of Justice of course had possession of the memos, as did McCabe himself.\u00a0 The Mueller investigation team also was given copies of the memos when McCabe was fired from the FBI.\u00a0 Other than that, the memos were held \u201cin secret.\u201d<\/p>\n The memos were part of the information subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee Republicans, led by the Freedom Caucus members.\u00a0 This has been a \u201cbone of contention\u201d between the Committee members and Rosenstein, who has withheld the memos and other information as part of an ongoing investigation.\u00a0 Supposedly then, the House members didn\u2019t have access to the memos, yet.<\/p>\n That leads back to the three entities that did have access.\u00a0\u00a0There have been NO leaks from the Mueller Team, and it is unlikely they would have broken precedent in this case.\u00a0Rosenstein has been the \u201cair cover\u201d for the Mueller investigation; taking the heat from Congress and the President.\u00a0 There is no value for the Mueller team to put Rosenstein in jeopardy.<\/p>\n McCabe himself has the memos, and knows what \u201che knows.\u201d\u00a0McCabe may also be bitter about what happened to him at the FBI; fired just twenty-four hours before earning a full retirement.\u00a0 Rosenstein as Deputy Attorney General was ultimately in charge of the Department and therefore the firing.\u00a0 The problem with this scenario, is that McCabe himself was a fierce advocate for the Russian investigation of the Trump campaign.\u00a0 Attacking Rosenstein is likely to result in compromise in the investigation, presumably a result McCabe wouldn\u2019t want.<\/p>\n This leaves us with the FBI and the Justice Department itself.\u00a0If the memos were leaked by them, who would they have given them to, forces for or against?<\/p>\n Forces in the Department against the President, might have used the memos to further the narrative that the President was erratic and out of control.\u00a0 This was in the Times <\/em>anonymous letter from inside the White House, and the \u00a0Bob Woodward book, Fear.\u00a0 <\/em>The memos might add to the pressure to \u201cinvoke the 25th.<\/sup>\u201d<\/p>\n The problem with that theory is that the removal of Rosenstein, a foreseeable result of the memos publication, removes protection from the Special Counsel and puts the entire investigation in jeopardy.<\/p>\n The President\u2019s allies, particularly his advisors on Fox News, <\/em>have urged him NOT to fire Rosenstein.\u00a0 They believe that removal will precipitate a crisis in Congress, ultimately resulting in a more protected Special Counsel investigation.\u00a0 They argue that the memos must have been leaked by those opposed to the President.<\/p>\n On the other hand, the Freedom Caucus has made it clear that they want to see Rosenstein removed; in fact, they have filed a motion of impeachment in the House of Representatives. \u00a0The memos further their conspiracy theory that the “deep state” Department of Justice was working to remove the President. \u00a0 The Freedom Caucus also act as if \u201c\u2026blowing everything up\u201d is to their advantage, and starting this crisis might be there way to light the fuse.\u00a0So if they got their hands on the memos, it might make sense for them to leak it to the press.<\/p>\n It is likely that someone in the Department of Justice accessed and leaked the memos to one side or the other.\u00a0 Either side might have fed them to the Times,\u00a0<\/em>(though I’d bet on the Freedom Caucus.)<\/p>\n What happens next?\u00a0 Trump now has some cover to fire Rosenstein; those Republicans who called for Rosenstein\u2019s protection will be placed in the \u201cdeepstate\u201d conspiracy.\u00a0But if Trump fires Rosenstein, the Federal Vacancies Act will not apply.\u00a0 That Act allows the President to temporarily (ten months) fill a vacant position with any executive branch member who was approved by the Senate (see Mick Mulvaney\u2019s appointment to the Consumer Protection Board after Rich Cordray resigned.)\u00a0 Trump could pick someone who would restrict or even end the Mueller investigation.\u00a0But to do that, Rosenstein needs to resign, not be fired.<\/p>\n On Thursday the President and Rosenstein will meet (in part a distraction from the Kavanaugh hearings.)\u00a0 The result of that meeting will determine what happens next.\u00a0 In all likelihood, Rosenstein won\u2019t resign even if asked, and Trump won\u2019t add to obstruction of justice by firing him.<\/p>\n And the games go on.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"