Rosenstein Says He May Need To Recuse Himself In Russia Probe: ABC

Tyler Durden's picture

This morning is becoming very chaotic for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, a man who has historically maintained a very low profile at the Department of Justice.  After issuing a rather uncharacteristic and cryptic statement last night urging Americans not to trust "anonymously-sourced" new stories (a statement that many have speculated is attributable to Wapo's latest anonymously-sourced headline from last night) and being blasted by President Trump this morning, ABC is reporting that Rosenstein has privately acknowledged that he may need to recuse himself in Mueller's Russia probe.

The senior Justice Department official with ultimate authority over the special counsel's probe of Russia's alleged meddling in the 2016 election has privately acknowledged to colleagues that he may have to recuse himself from the matter, which he took charge of only after Attorney General Jeff Sessions' own recusal, sources tell ABC News.


Those private remarks from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein are significant because they reflect the widening nature of the federal probe, which now includes a preliminary inquiry into whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice when he allegedly tried to curtail the probe and then fired James Comey as FBI director.



Of course, the next most logical question becomes who would step in to fill Rosenstein's shoes?  According to ABC, that obligation would fall upon Associate Attorney General Rachel Brand.

Rosenstein, who authored an extensive and publicly-released memorandum recommending Comey's firing, raised the possibility of his recusal during a recent meeting with Associate Attorney General Rachel Brand, the Justice Department's new third-in-command, according to sources.


In the recent meeting with Brand, Rosenstein told her that if he were to recuse himself, she would have to step in and take over those responsibilities. She was sworn-in little more than a month ago.

That is, until Rachel Brand becomes 'conflicted' and also has to be recused. 

In the end, we suspect liberals in Congress will not be satisfied with anyone chosen to oversee Special Counsel Mueller's investigation until that 'someone' becomes Nancy Pelosi or Maxine Waters. 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Ghost of PartysOver's picture

Is ther anyone in DC that is not conflicted?  There are lots of critters in the Swamp.  Let the feeding frenzy begin.

Looney's picture


When all of'em recuse themselves, who’s gonna lead the investigation, the DOJ’s janitor?  ;-)


chunga's picture

The so-called deplorables are going to have to clean this up if there is any chance at all.

BullyBearish's picture

this can ALL go away, if


Dear Donald...please do the following and i will support you to the end:

Hold press conference exposing the deep state and enlist support of the PEOPLE to do the following:


1. Pardon Edward Snowden and Julian Assange as a sign he WELCOMES whistle blowers and putting the PEOPLE'S business in the LIGHT

2. Begin to revoke the fed's charter by putting Ron Paul in charge of a special investigation of fed malfeasance and destruction of the currency

3. Immediately suspend weapon sales to ANY country or organization involved in a current conflict

4. Revoke israel's special exemption from foreign lobbying registration and fully audit AIPAC with an intention to uncover bribery and espionage

5. Immediately indict Bill and Hillary Clinton and others from the Clinton Foundation on charges of corruption, espionage, and theft

6. Rescind all future payments/allotments to the saudi arabia and israel until they are in compliance with international law and human rights standards

7. Cease saber rattling against Iran and Russia and work toward peaceful, complementary accommodations

8. Draw down the 600 plus U.S. military bases around the world and bring the Americans HOME 


9. Initially shift 30% of the current military budget to domestic infrastructure needs with a mandate of further reductions of 10% per year

Dukes's picture

Isn't the next most logical question actually: "was this also sourced from "anonymous sources"?"

froze25's picture

Would it be illegal to have the army core of engineers work on domestic infrastructure? 

Handful of Dust's picture

Working is now considered 'racist' so better be quiet about that as well as "job creation."

Lefties, FSA, necons and Dems don't like those things.

Stick to "moar war" "Russia did it" and "white supremacist" stuff. That's very vogue right now.

TwelveOhOne's picture

From my father's experiences in the Army, I believe the answer is "no" (or at least, was, back in the late 60s).

847328_3527's picture

More and more people realize this entire Russian thingy is a huge necon scam on the American people and no one wants to be a part of it when the entire Russian hacking myth blows up.

No one I know beleives any of this Russian stuff and EVERYONE wants these jerks to get to work creating jobs and rebuilding this country after 16 years of disastrous leadership from Obama and Bush.

StackShinyStuff's picture

It's a Psy-Op!  This whole fucking thing.  Entertaining to watch if you ask me.  

y3maxx's picture

OUtside the box thinking here...

Instead, it could be the recusing is a result of the noose is tightening

around Hillary, Podesta the NDC et al.....not @ Trump.

Could be Rosenstein, a Democrat, wants to be arm's length

when the above Democrat perp walks begin.

Creative_Destruct's picture

The whole fucking government is "recusable" on both sides of the aisle, whether it's for Hitlery's and Loretta's crap, or TONS of other crap as yet unrevealed.

PLEASE would they all just get it over with, everyone recuse themselves, go away, shrink the government, and stop sucking the public's blood, FOREVER!!???!!

AllOfGood's picture

I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do...

swmnguy's picture

"froze25": No, it wouldn't be illegal at all.  The Army Corps maintains a lot of our internal waterways, I believe, like the lock and dam systems of the Mississippi and Missouri and Ohio rivers, etc.  There may need to be Federal interests, like interstate transportation and commerce, or some other legal definitions, but the Army Corps is absolutely heavily, heavily involved in domestic infrastructure.

RightLineBacker's picture

Toward the end of WW2 the Army Corps built the Denison, TX Dam on the Red River, creating Lake Texoma. They also set up a German POW camp and used them as labors. 

nmewn's picture

And following on that, will Ruth Bader Ginsberg now recuse herself from all "matters Trump" due to her past public statements on Trump? 

Bias is very unbecoming in "matters" of law  ;-)

yrad's picture

I'll lead the damn investigation....


--Not Guilty of anything other than loving America! The lefties do see this as a crime tho. 

LoneStarHog's picture

10.  Open an investigation into the MURDER of LaVoy Finicum.

chunga's picture

At the end of this thing Mrs. Hammond says something to the effect "I still love my country but I sure wish somebody could fix it".

This 90 minute film is really something else, embedding it on the WH website, right smack in the middle, would be something I'd do.

idahobandito's picture

WOW..this is the first post of yours that I almost completely agree with. Except #3, I would increase sales to mooselimb countries in conflict (both sides) to generate work here, and help get rid of the scum. Also use the military jointly with russia to secure a safe zone in their own country for their refugees.

veritas semper vinces's picture

My dear,this is not kosher,Donald wil never,ever do this.

Ghost of PartysOver's picture

Investigation used be "Follow the Money".  Unfortunately it is now "Follow the Appointment".  Who Appointed / hired Rosenstein?  Who appointed / hired Brand?  Inquiring minds want ton know.

Endgame Napoleon's picture

The Deplorables and those whose careers are bolstered by the Deplorables have a bigger problem. A recent SCOTUS decision goes beyond reinforcing the impact of "dreamers" issued work permits, as employers continue to advertise for bi-lingual workers.

The "dreamers" are in their prime, childbearing years, when their major household bills are paid by Uncle Sam and U.S Treasury Department via monthly welfare and Child Taxfare Checks of up to $6,269, allowing many "dreamers" (and many citizens) to work for low, low wages.

They undercut the UNDERemployed, middle-aged citizens who actually turned out to vote for Trump and the Republicans in great numbers.

It is not just "the dreamers" who were raised here, with politicians focusing on the emotional appeal of babies, mommies and "working families." These dreamers are up to 34 years old. See Obama's executive order for details. They are, I assume, a limited number, taking a limited number of scarce jobs in a sea of citizen UNDERemployment.

But, if the SCOTUS soldifies birthright citizenship, illegal immigrants will again flood in here, especially since all they have to do to get their rent and grocery bills paid by taxpayers, with a $6,269 tax-time reproduction reward that equals 3 to 4 months of wages in many jobs, is to have sex and reproduce outside of wedlock.

I fully expect the anti-Deplorable, anti-middle-aged-citizen Congress to further bash childless, middle-aged workers in the head by expanding those Child Tax Credits, with dreamers and other working parents spending the tax credits on adult luxuries. Even when they don't, it allows them to work for low wages, undermining citizens who get zero monthly welfare to cover rent and food and tax returns of $300 or less that will not cover a car repair.

And no, most middle-aged workers are NOT part of the opioid epidemic. Many of us have never taken drugs of any kind. A few of us, like myself, have never even been drunk. I am middle-aged, but not UNDERemployed due to trendy topics discussed by the MSM. It is just a way for womb-based, fake feminists to avoid talking about our welfare-addicted population of citizens and immigrants who are paid by Uncle Sam and the U.S. Treasury Department for sex and reproduction, enabling them to accept low wages.

And no, most of the immigrants are not more skilled than the middle-aged workers they often displace. A good example is a very haughty daughter of illegal immigrants that I once worked with who was in-your-face about the free apartment she had due to two toddlers that she had before the age of 21, telling people in this low-wage temp job that SHE had her own apartment for years. People who didn't were dismissed by her as inferior.

Many of these temps were quite skilled and older, but downsized from higher paying jobs in bigger companies, and many were young college grads and some older, single, childless people who could not afford an apartment on the low, unpredictable income steam from this and other temp/churn jobs. Neither could she, but thanks to sex and reproduction out-of-wedlock at a very young age, she had an apartment, financed by Uncle Sam, in addition to other welfare & taxfare.

She was certainly not more skilled, not even close to the fastest one in a super-fast training class with a bunch of different software to learn. She needed a lot of time off -- no different from any other working momma -- with people falling all over themselves to work the bad shift for the young, single momma, not that it reduced her haughtiness.

It is not at all just one race that acts that way. But the downward slide in wages has been facilitated by all of this welfare-buttressed, mass immigration, in addition to other things.

I can see why people brought here illegally who were raised here are a special case, but nothing is being done to curtail the impact on underemployed citizens who have to compete with these often-welfare-buttressed workers for jobs, particularly those who cannot just have sex and get preggo, getting everything from free food, to free groceries, to tax-time reward checks for sex and reproduction that equal 4 months of wages in a full-time job.

Middle-aged citizens do not get ANY of those freebies.

Middle-aged citizens often turn out to vote.

The Deplorables are betrayed by this, especially since politicians do this without issuing welfare restrictions to go along with it. Nor do they issue workforce rules to restrict employers from hiring mostly workers on welfare/taxfare.

What they are going to do is to further screw middle-aged Deplorables, giving even more sex-and-reproduction tax credits to rig the workforce even more against the UNDERemployed, middle-aged VOTERS who cannot reproduce their way into government-financed household bills.

Many of these are the very Trump voters who turned out in droves to vote.

What these cynical, Establishment Uniparty politicians, chasing the identity politics vote and thinking that Deplorables are too stupid to figure it out, are going to find out is the following:

1) these young people (in all racial groups, including "dreamers") are FAR more likely to spend their welfare/taxfare on out-of-town trips or tattoos than to perform the civic chore of voting

2) most of the immigrants favored in the welfare policy, the tax code and in a rigged workforce by the Republican/Democrat Uniparty Establishment, including the welfare-buttressed immigrants, will vote for Democrats.

I wonder how much betrayal Deplorables who must cover a full range of household bills on wages ALONE, especially the Deplorables who have one, earned-ONLY income stream, will take before they start voting 3rd party or write in a name.

Childless people over 40 years of age are 28% of the population; that is close to 1/3rd of the US population. Politicians do nothing but kick us in the head in EVERY way--from the tax code; to the welfare system; to the rigged, family-friendly workplaces. Non-custodial parents over 40 are also a huge group. Even the single mothers fall into this group after their wombs shut down, and their major bills are no longer covered by child support or welfare/taxfare.

More and more voters are not married, the majority of citizens, in fact. Mass immigration and welfare-buttressed workers, in
general, are lowering wages, as employers can pay these people less, like they can pay many people with spousal incomes less. Yet, moms with plenty of spousal income from high-earning husbands still take low-wage jobs in nicer, safer areas of cities. They, too, are granted mandated absenteeism privileges by government due to their womb productivity and voluntary privileges by employers due to their ability to accept low pay.

We need our own party, really, all of us who are not in the few, high-paying professions; not married with a spousal income; nor divorced with a child-support check that covers rent; nor able to churn out multiple kids that we cannot afford to ensure welfare-financed bills, but must compete with workers who can work for lower pay due to their womb-based, unearned income from spouses or taxpayers.

These politicians say they have compassion because of the constant rigging of everything from the tax code to the workforce for "working families," but that compassion stops at the door of the productive womb and applies to noncitizens more than many citizens for the same, womb-centric reason.


This case is not about GENDER, nor about people born abroad to a citizen who have always been citizens, but about solidifying birthright citizenship to bolster mass, tax-subsidized immigration. The SCOTUS wants to extend citizenship to an extreme, basing it all on the front end of life. Two illegals come here. They were both born and raised in a foreign country where they hold citizenship. They are not naturalized citizens. All they need to do is have sex and reproduce, getting everything from free food, to free housing, to a $6,269 check at tax time, to citizenship and EEOC favoritism for their children in jobs, scholarships, etc. When their children grow up and reproduce, they can work low-wage jobs with no worry. Government pays their major bills as long as sex results in reproduction.

11th_Harmonic's picture

We'd have more of a chance of seeing even the slightest shred of truth from the janitor than the rest of these vermin. He's seen all the trash.

TwelveOhOne's picture

He is the eyes and ears of that there institution.

OverTheHedge's picture

Umm, this is from a "private source". Are we allowed to believe private sources? Is that different to an "unidentified person who has knowledge of the matter"?

Does anyone, anywhere, ever stand up and say "I said this! It's on the record, and I will accept responsibility for.It!"?

Dancing Disraeli's picture

Trump does, pretty much every day.

otschelnik's picture

Roger that OTH.  Tyler, no reference or credit on this story.  So who leaked this to you?  Be fair be square buddy.  Where did you pick this up? 


otschelnik's picture

When people bump into each other in the halls of the DOJ, they now say "Recuse me!" 

therover's picture

Looney...if that's the case, that person may be more qualified and have more knowlege than the current band of merry men and women.

veritas semper vinces's picture

At this p[oint,what difference does it make? I say,lets completely get rid of DOJ .WE have Twitter

Shitonya Serfs's picture

Could they get Hillary or Holder to oversee Special Counsel?

chunga's picture

If there is no push-back on this somebody like Schiff will appoint himself. Time is running out.

ebworthen's picture

I say we get the actor who played Biff in Back to the Future part II to oversee the Special Counsel.

Winston Churchill's picture

Jump you fucker or resign.

This is a total setup to avoid responsibility for appointing your croney Mueller, mr. deep state himself.

LasVegasDave's picture

Trump needs to meet with the Seals and Rangers and explain to them who they work for.


Then, under cover of darkness, they need to get to work draining the swamp.


Helicopter rides to the Outer Shelf for journalists, soros funded NGOs and congresscritters in office more than two terms (McStain, Pelosi) would be a good start.





Squid Viscous's picture

and kikes like you need to be terminated with extreme prejudice,

otherwise you'll get this clown to start another war

LasVegasDave's picture



you would be full of holes, bleeding out into the dirt, talking to your momma

Squid Viscous's picture

wow a tough talking well armed kike, rare bird,

something specific you're scared of?

or the usual, we always have to fight to survive, blah blah

and I didn't say I was coming for you, but would be fun to kick your ass,

mano a mano

HRClinton's picture

DJT could always

1. instruct the AG to open a Grand Jury loaded with GOP types, or

2. do a Staff Reset and fire all Obama holdovers. No exceptions.

The point is, he DOES something, rather than tweet, bitch, moan and complain.  Otherwise his inaction itself will start to get suspicious.

Peter K's picture

Can we just have everyone recuse themselves from everything and reboot?

And let this Presidency do what it is that they were elected to do?

And Build the Wall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


onewayticket2's picture

Paul Ryan is quiet and sitting on his hands....waiting......for trump and pence (who just hired a lawyer) to be taken out by the Animal Farm.

swmnguy's picture

Yep, since about November 9 I've been saying, "Watch Paul Ryan like a hawk.  Both what he does do and maybe more importantly, what he doesn't do."

Mike Pence's religious kookery scares off at least 60% of America.  But Paul Ryan has always been built up by the media to be some sort of thinking man's Conservative, or some such bullshit.  He's just a corporate hack; a vicious one at that.  But he plays the media game well so he can get away with outrages less-accomodating types can't.  

Ryan's ridiculous budget proposal and his possibly even worse health insurance hodge-podge should have been enough to put an end to any notion that he's more intelligent than just vicious and cynical, but the media love his dreamy eyes.

SloMoe's picture

DC is not a swamp: It's a cesspool.

Drimble Wedge's picture

Well, it's run by the people who supposedly made the bricks for Ramuses, so, it seems like they feel right at home with swamp life.


I'm not sure how many bathroom breaks they were allowed, so, you just might be right.

RightLineBacker's picture

And a cesspool deeper than the Mariana Trench, which means it sets a new World record

onewayticket2's picture

...there are good people who are part of it and dont have any idea they're part of it.....

jamesmmu's picture
Mueller Is No Straight Shooter – Trump Wise To See This – Lines Up Excellent Defense Team!