Sally Yates – R&R – Reachout and Rebuild

Preet Bharara, Sally Yates & James Comey: “You are Fired!”

David Posnett — Thu, 11 May 2017 14:46:00 +0000

It is “Apprentice” live!

FBI Director Comey is the latest official to fall foul of Trump mid-investigation. Former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and US Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara had previously been dismissed

As reported on CNN

After President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, questions immediately arose about the President’s motivations…

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Comey’s firing was part of a “deeply troubling pattern from the Trump administration,” that appears to be linked to two other high-profile dismissals:

“They fired Sally Yates. They fired Preet Bharara. And they fired James Comey, the very man leading the investigation. This does not seem to be a coincidence,” Schumer said shortly after the announcement, calling for a special independent prosecutor into the Trump campaign’s ties to the Kremlin.

“Any person who he appoints to lead the Russian investigation will be concerned that he or she will meet the same fate as Director Comey,” he said.

CNN’s senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin was not buying the idea that Comey was sacked over the Clinton investigation, saying it was “absurd.”

Toobin branded the move a “grotesque abuse of power by the President of the United States,” comparing the sacking of Comey to President Richard Nixon’s firing of special prosecutor Archibald Cox during the Watergate scandal.

James Comey

Why was he fired?

The Trump administration attributed Comey’s dismissal to his handling of the investigation into Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. In a signed letter released by the White House, Trump informed Comey that he was “hereby terminated and removed from office, effective immediately,” explaining that he reached the conclusion that the erstwhile director was “not able to effectively lead the bureau.”

What was he investigating?

As head of the FBI, he was overseeing the investigation into the Trump campaign’s alleged ties to the Kremlin. Democrats have ridiculed the notion that the Clinton issue is what truly prompted Comey’s dismissal, drawing parallels to Watergate-era firings and suggesting Comey was getting too close to the White House with the Russia probe.

Where is the investigation now?

At a hearing last week, Comey confirmed that the FBI’s investigation into accusations of coordination between Trump’s presidential campaign and Russian officials was continuing. It’s not clear if the incoming FBI director will pick up where Comey left off.

Opinion: In firing Comey, Trump is playing with fire

Sally Yates

Why was she fired?

Ostensibly for her refusal to implement the first iteration of Trump’s ban on travelers from a number of Muslim-majority countries.

“The acting Attorney General, Sally Yates, has betrayed the Department of Justice by refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer said in a statement at the time, explaining the President’s actions.

What was she investigating?

As part of the probe into possible collusion between Russia and the Trump administration, then-acting Attorney General Yates met with White House counsel to inform them that then-National Security Advisor Michael Flynn wasn’t telling the truth about his interactions with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak and, as a result, represented a blackmail risk.

“We believed that General Flynn was compromised with respect to the Russians,” Yates said in a Senate subcommittee hearing aimed at gathering details of the Russian hacking of the 2016 election on Monday in Washington.

“Logic would tell you that you don’t want the national security adviser to be in a position where the Russians have leverage over him,” she added.

Where is the investigation now?

Yates said last Monday that she warned the White House earlier this year that former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn could be “essentially blackmailed by the Russians.”

What to know about Sally Yates

Preet Bharara

Preet Bharara, former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, was known as one of Wall Street’s fiercest watchdogs and a widely respected prosecutor.

Why was he fired?

Bharara first refused to resign along with 46 US attorneys across the country. Although it is common for incoming administrations to replace US attorneys when transitioning to power, Trump had previously assured Bharara that he’d keep his job.

Sources told CNN that Bharara had been told after a meeting with Trump in November that he could stay on, and that he felt blindsided by the request. He was fired after refusing to comply.

At the time, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren posted a series of tweets suggesting Bharara was removed in part because he “had authority over Trump Tower.”

Bharara suggested that this was indeed the case. “I wanted it to be on record that there was a deliberate decision to change (his) mind and fire me, particularly given what my office’s jurisdiction is,” he said.

What was he investigating?

Bharara’s office had many investigations ongoing at the time of his firing, including one involving Trump favorite Fox News. And then there’s the President’s claim that he was wiretapped in Trump Tower on orders of then-President Obama, whose investigation led back to the Southern District of New York. “Trump has undoubtedly decided that he wants his own pick rather than the choice of Senate adversary (and minority leader) Chuck Schumer in place as the top federal prosecutor in New York,” CNN legal analyst Paul Callan wrote in March.

Where is the investigation now?

Members of both parties have said they have seen no evidence to back up Trump’s allegations about Obama, and, addressing a hearing before the House Intelligence Committee, Comey said that he had “no information” to support claims by the President that he was wiretapped on the orders of his predecessor.

CNN’s Laura Jarrett, Jake Tapper, Stephen Collinson, Jeff Zeleny and Jeremy Diamond contributed to this report.

Constitutional Crisis: Trump tries to Cover up Russia Collusion

David Posnett — Wed, 10 May 2017 13:39:39 +0000

The firing of FBI Director Comey is unprecedented and highly suspicious in light of recent developments in the Russia-Trump campaign collusion investigations. First, there was the testimony of former National Intelligence Director James Clapper and former acting Attorney General Sally Yates. Watch it on Rachel Maddow! Both testified about former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s connections to Russia and that the White House knew about this, and kept him on for 18 days knowing that he was a paid Russian agent and had not disclosed his Russian ties even though he was told to do so in writing. The White house did nothing. Sen. Chris Murphy from CT thinks, there is more and more evidence for collusion in Russia-Trump campaign story.

Sen. Chris Murphy from CT thinks, there is more and more evidence for collusion in Russia-Trump campaign story. Indictments of Trump campaign people, probably Paul Manifort, General Flynn, Roger Stone and Carter Page are likely to come in the near future. This puts Donald Trump in direct danger. Was he part of the Russia collusion too? And is this treason?

Just yesterday a Grand jury apparently issued subpoenas as reported by CNN. One gets the impression that Donald Trump is getting increasingly nervous. He is calling these investigations a “hoax”, a “charade”, and “fake news”. Since the FBI investigation was the most threatening investigation (they have the power to bring a criminal indictment in contrast to the House and Senate investigations), it is quite obvious what Trump’s motivation was, in firing Comey. This makes Trump look even more guilty.

The White House, AG Sessions (who is supposed to have recused himself) and Deputee AG Rod Rosenstein, have offered an excuse for the firing of Comey. It is laughable. They say (along with Fox talking heads) that it is about Comey’s handling of the Clinton emails! Utter nonsense that anyone can see through, given that this all occurred in July – Nov. 2016 and we are now May 2017!

Nixon fired Archibald Cox to avoid handing over his tapes. Ultimately it did not save him. Republicans joined Dems to declare their intent to vote for impeachment. Today, we will see which Republican senators will put the country in front of politics and vote to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Donald Trump and his campaign.

Sally Yates Mops The Floor With GOP’s Ted Cruz While Schooling Him On Constitutional Law

David Posnett — Tue, 09 May 2017 14:57:29 +0000

Posted on DailyKos.com

By Leslie Salzillo

Monday May 08, 2017 · 5:30 PM EDT

During the Russian probe hearings on Monday, former acting DOJ Attorney General Sally Yates batted off Trump-supporting Republicans like flies during their attempts to discredit, shame and trick her. They failed, and once again, the GOP embarrassed the country in efforts to defend Donald Trump.

During one particular pompous and unrelated inquisition, Texas Senator Ted Cruz pompously decides to question Yates on the Trump’s Muslim ban rather than Mike Flynn or the Trump-Russia investigation — the reasons for the hearing. Cruz found himself messing with the wrong person, as he tried to edify Yates on Trump’s authority using a section of the INA/Immigration and Nationality Act. Here is the transcript of the exchange.

Ted Cruz: Earlier when Chairman Graham asked you that, I thought you declined to answer so perhaps I misunderstood that.

Sally Yates: And I may have misunderstood the question. I thought the question I declined to answer was a different one than that, so I’m glad I got a chance to clear it up.

Ted Cruz: Okay, so you have no information of any interceptions of the Bernie Sanders campaign, the Hillary Clinton campaign or other candidates in the 2016 campaigns.

Sally Yates: No

Cruz then goes off the hearing’s topic to Trump’s Muslim ban. This is where his true snide and smug self was revealed for all to see.

Ted Cruz: Okay. Let’s revisit the topic, Miss Yates, that you and Senator Cornyn were talking about.

Sally Yates: Okay.

Ted Cruz: Um. Is it correct that the Constitution vests the authority in the President?

Sally Yates: Yes.

Ted Cruz: And if an attorney general disagrees with the policy decision of the President — a policy decision that is lawful, does the attorney general have the authority to direct the Department of Justice to defy the President’s order?

Sally Yates: I don’t know whether the attorney general has the authority to do that or not but I don’t think it would be a good idea, and that’s not what I did in this case.

Ted Cruz: Well, are you familiar with 8 U.S. Code § 1182?

Sally Yates: Not off the top of my head, no.

Ted Cruz: Well, It, it is the binding statutory authority for the president’s executive order your refused to implement that led to your termination, so it certainly is a relevant and not obscure statute.

Cruz goes on to quote one part of the statute.

Ted Cruz: By the expressed text of the statue it says, quote: ‘Whenever the President finds that the entry of any alien or class of aliens into the United States, would be detrimental to the interest of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for any period he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or class of aliens as immigrants or non immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens, any restrictions he may deem appropriate.” Would you agree that, that is broad statutory authorization?

Without hesitation, Yates replies with the additional provision that “trumps” (yes, she uses that word) Cruz’s statute section — basically out-lawyering him and putting him in his place for all the world to see.

Sally Yates: I would, and I am familiar with that and I’m also familiar with an additional provision of the INA that says: “No person shall receive preference or be discriminated against in issuance of a visa because of race, nationality, or place of birth.” That, I believe was promulgated after the statute that you just quoted. And, that’s been part of the discussion with the courts in respect to the INA, is whether this more specific statute trumps the first one that you just described. But my concern was not an INA concern, here; it rather, was a constitutional concern.

It seems Ted Cruz is still desperately trying to ‘find himself’ after the election — but then, it’s really dark up in Trump’s world.

How refreshing to witness the kind of nonpartisan integrity we saw today from two former government officials who sadly both lost their jobs, directly/indirectly, because of it. But many feel we’ll be hearing more from them again and think today we witnessed what two possible presidential candidates look like. Cheers to Sally Yates and James Clapper for making America proud.