Connect with us

Nation

Rosenstein/McCabe Square Off, Accuse One Another Of Lying In Russia Hoax

Published

on

rosenstein and mccabe

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe squared off with former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on Wednesday, during Rosenstein’s anticipated testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee blaming one another for lying about what they were aware of during the bureau’s debunked investigation into the Trump campaign and Russia.

During Rosenstein’s testimony, McCabe issued a statement saying the former DAG was giving “false” testimony about his recollection regarding former FBI Director James Comey’s memos about his interactions with President Donald Trump.

Interestingly, both men accuse each other of lying, pointing the finger at one another, in one of the biggest hoaxes in modern political history. They lied to each other, all the while creating a hoax to fool the American people and the world. McCabe and Rosenstein, along with their colleagues in the bureau, DOJ and the intelligence community know that eventually they will get caught up in the lies and explanations. This is when the finger-pointing will start.

Now the investigators are being investigated. Former FBI Director Comey, FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok, FBI Special Agent Joe Pientka, FBI Special Agent Kevin Clinesmith, as well as a slew of other FBI agents, lawyers and intelligence officials are going to have to find a way to explain their malfeasance as Connecticut prosecutor John Durham continues to put the pieces together and connect the dots.

During the hearing, Rosenstein said during his testimony that McCabe did not share details about Comey’s memos or his conversations with Trump prior to opening the special counsel investigation. Rosenstein claimed that he didn’t know about the memos until they were leaked by Comey’s friend Columbia Law School Professor Daniel Richman to the media. Comey admitted to Congress during testimony in June 2017 that he purposefully leaked several memos to Richman in an effort to ensure a special counsel investigation.

“Lying is when you ask someone a direct question and get a false answer. Candor is when you’re forthcoming with information someone needs to know,” said Rosenstein. “I believe McCabe should have recognized that when I became acting AG (overseeing the Russia probe), I needed to know about Comey’s memos and he didn’t tell me until a couple of hours before they showed up in the New York Times.”

It didn’t take long for McCabe to fire back at Rosenstein, saying “Mr. Rosenstein’s claims to have been misled by me, or anyone from the FBI, regarding our concerns about President Trump and the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russia are completely false.”

“Mr. Rosenstein approved of, and suggested ways to enhance, our investigation of the President,” McCabe added. “Further, I personally briefed Mr. Rosenstein on Jim Comey’s memos describing his interactions with the President mere days after Mr. Rosenstein wrote the memo firing Jim Comey.”

“Mr. Rosenstein’s testimony is completely at odds with the factual record. It looks to be yet another sad attempt by the President and his men to rewrite the history of their actions in 2017. They have found in Mr. Rosenstein – then and now – a willing accessory in that effort,” he said.

In the end, however, it won’t just be one man’s word against another. It will be interesting to see what Durham’s investigation uncovers and in the end how the web of lies that led to the Russia hoax will unravel.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Nation

Minnesota farmer’s lawsuit prompts removal of race and sex-based grant program

Published

on

GettyImages 2059551148 scaled

Five months after Minnesota farmer Lance Nistler filed a federal lawsuit with the help of the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), the state has removed race- and sex-based preferences from its Down Payment Assistance Grant Program. This significant policy change followed Nistler’s legal challenge, which highlighted the discriminatory nature of the program’s selection process.

Pacific Legal Foundation writes involvement in Nistler’s case drew attention and criticism from Minnesota progressives. Writing in the Minnesota Reformer, Sigrid Jewett accused PLF of using Nistler “as a pawn in a larger culture war game.” She questioned why a California-based legal firm with numerous Supreme Court victories would be interested in representing a small Minnesota farmer pro bono.

PLF opposes all race- and sex-based preferences in the law, and that’s the real reason the firm chose to represent Nistler. The foundation stands against discrimination in various domains, including government board selections, school admissions, government contracts, and grant distributions, such as in Nistler’s case.

Here are the facts: Minnesota’s Down Payment Assistance Grant Program offers up to $15,000 toward the purchase of farmland. Recipients are chosen through a lottery system. However, before the policy change, even if a recipient was among the first picked through the lottery—as Nistler was, being selected ninth—they could be bumped to the back of the line if they were not a racial minority, female, LGBTQIA+, or otherwise designated as an “emerging” farmer by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture.

Despite being chosen ninth in the lottery, which awarded grants to 68 applicants, Nistler did not receive a grant. He was moved from ninth to 102nd on the waitlist because he is a white male.

Nistler grew up on his family farm, milking cows. “They would lose money every year,” he says of the family operation. After he left for school, his family sold the cows and switched to farming soybeans, oats, and wheat. Lance’s father and uncle now run the farm, but they’re getting older. Lance, who has a degree in electronic engineering and worked in HVAC, is interested in buying a 40-acre chunk of the family farm, becoming the fourth-generation farmer in his family.

The land isn’t just going to be given to Lance. This is a working farm, and the Nistlers aren’t a wealthy family that can transfer land from one generation to the next without consideration. “My dad and uncle, they don’t have 401(k)s or anything,” Lance says. “I mean, the land and the equipment, that’s their retirement. This stuff isn’t given away. I’m not just going to get it handed down to me and inherited. It has to be purchased, and it is not cheap.”

Despite being from a farming family, Lance considers himself a new farmer—he has never owned farmland before, and he has an electronics background. Buying these 40 acres would be a huge step for Lance, planting him firmly in the farming world, which is what Minnesota’s grant program aimed to do. The idea that he would have qualified as an emerging farmer if only his skin were a different color struck Lance as wrong.

“The country we live in, the idea is it’s equal opportunity for everyone,” he says. “And if that’s what it is, then well, why shouldn’t I have the same chances?”

When Lance filed his lawsuit in January, the complaint argued that the discriminatory process violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. The complaint stated:

“Nistler brings this lawsuit to vindicate his constitutional right to equal protection of the law. He brings it to give all Minnesotans a fair chance at a difference-making grant program. He brings it in the hope that he will be able to own that small farm in the near future. He brings it because he is not giving up on his dream.”

In May, after Lance called attention to the unconstitutional policy, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz signed legislation removing the race and sex prioritization from the program. Now, Minnesota will treat farmers equally—as the Constitution promises.

Continue Reading

Trending