Spicer's version of events is utterly obliterated by Trump's comments on Thursday. With Sanders and Conway, you could make an argument that Trump was indeed, technically speaking, acting on Rosenstein's recommendation.
But if the decision had already been made, that's a highly misleading talking point to keep repeating. And the decision clearly had nothing to do with Rosenstein, at all.
It's clear that the White House wanted to use Rosenstein's credibility, built up over three decades in law enforcement, to make this decision look apolitical — like it wasn't just the president unilaterally firing the guy who was investigating his 2016 campaign.
Then the truth came out.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...rrative/ar-BBB1kge?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp
But if the decision had already been made, that's a highly misleading talking point to keep repeating. And the decision clearly had nothing to do with Rosenstein, at all.
It's clear that the White House wanted to use Rosenstein's credibility, built up over three decades in law enforcement, to make this decision look apolitical — like it wasn't just the president unilaterally firing the guy who was investigating his 2016 campaign.
Then the truth came out.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...rrative/ar-BBB1kge?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp
