When he accepted the role of deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein had no way of knowing he would end up right smack in the middle of the biggest crisis to rock Donald Trump’s presidency so far. 
 
 The Jewish lawyer from Maryland rode a low-key reputation as a fair-minded federal prosecutor to overwhelming congressional confirmation — and it won him praise from both sides of the aisle. 
 
 But just a couple of weeks later, Rosenstein is facing a firestorm of criticism over the probe into Russian meddling in American politics — and over his controversial role in the firing of FBI Director James Comey. 
 
 Trump cited a memo written by Rosenstein as his rationale for dumping Comey. Rosenstein and his boss, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, reportedly journeyed to the White House Monday to make the case for firing the FBI chief. 
 
 The memo focused on Comey’s handling of the probe into Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails and on Comey’s misstatements before Congress about how some of those emails wound up being sent from Clinton aide Huma Abedin to her disgraced husband, Anthony Weiner. 
 
 But Democrats and some Republicans quickly pounced on Rosenstein’s memo as a cover for what they call Trump’s real motivation: to shut down the investigation into Russia’s election meddling. 
 
 Rosenstein was so shaken by the reaction to Comey’s dismissal that he threatened to resign after his memo was portrayed as the main impetus behind the firing, The Washington Post reported.. The memo did not explicitly call for Comey’s ouster, although it suggested that the FBI needed better leadership. 
 
 Two former senior Justice Department officials told Reuters that it made little sense to fire Comey while the Justice Department was still doing a review of the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email investigation. 
 
 “I take Rod (Rosenstein) at his word that be believed everything in that memo, but he must know that it’s going to be used as a fig leaf to fire Comey,” one former official said. 
 
 All these questions were only magnified by revelations that Rosenstein also may have been the first to understand how deeply Comey planned to dig into the Russian connection. The FBI director reportedly approached Rosenstein several days ago and asked for more resources needed for the Russian investigation. This request tipped off Rosenstein that Comey’s investigation was expanding. 
 
 Critics slammed Rosenstein who, instead of responding to Comey’s request, penned the memo calling for his ouster. They suggested that the decision raises questions about his independence from Trump — questions that few had raised before about Rosenstein. 
 
 “I have lost any confidence I might have had” in Rosenstein, Sen. Mark Warner said. The Virginia Democrat lambasted Rosenstein for “putting his name on that letter basically making what appeared to be bogus reasons for firing the FBI director.” 
 
 Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz tweeted: “We need A.G. Sessions and DAG Rosenstein to come to the Hill to explain what happened and in what order. Lots of mind-bending explanations.” 
 
 Benjamin Wittes, editor of the respected Lawfare blog, added in a tweet: “I’ve known Rod Rosenstein a long time. I’ve always thought well of him. I was cheered by his nomination. I misjudged him completely.” 
 
 It seems ages ago that Rosenstein was lauded by Democrats and Republicans alike as a perfect choice to be the No. 2 man at the Justice Department. 
 
 Rosenstein, 52, is not widely known in the Jewish community. 
 
 Born and raised in Philadelphia, he earned a merit scholarship to the University of Pennsylvania’s prestigious Wharton School of Business — also Trump’s alma mater. He later attended Harvard Law School, joining the conservative Federalist Society, which gave him a Distinguished Alumni Award in 2006. 
 
 He was a member of Washington’s Reform Temple Sinai from 2008 to 2014, and of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum from 2001 to 2011. 
 
 According to a questionnaire he filled out ahead of his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this year, Rosenstein also was a member of a “Jewish Community Center Sports League” from 1993 to 2012. 
 
 Rosenstein climbed the ranks of the government justice system, starting off as a counsel to the Clinton White House. He was the longest-serving U.S. attorney and one of only three who were asked to stay on as the administrations shifted. His partisan affiliation remains unknown, and his record as a prosecutor shows no clear political tilt. 
 
 “He’s a solid guy,” Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin, a staunch progressive, said before Rosenstein’s confirmation hearings. California Sen. Dianne Feinstein praised Rosenstein’s “impressive credentials.” 
 
 He was approved in a bipartisan 94-6 vote. 
 
 Shortly after Rosenstein’s nomination, it was revealed that Sessions did not disclose meetings with the Russian ambassador, forcing Sessions to recuse himself from dealing with the Russian investigation. 
 
 That catapulted Rosenstein into the hot-button role overseeing the inquiry into Russia’s involvement in the 2016 elections and any possible collusion between the Russians and Trump’s presidential campaign. 
 
 Overseeing the Russia probe alone would be a hugely sensitive position and likely would have eventually yput him in the crosshairs of sniping from Democrats and Trump loyalists alike. But the Comey memo has laid to rest any chance of Rosenstein staying above the partisan fray. 
 
 Despite the firestorm of criticism, some colleagues stood by Rosenstein. 
 
 Former Department of Justice attorney Jason Weinstein, a colleague of Rosenstein from the George W. Bush administration, predicted that his reputation will survive intact. 
 
 “He makes decisions the same way he did during his decades as a career prosecutor,” Weinstein told Fox News. “This is a partisan minefield no matter what he decides, but partisanship won’t be part of the equation for him.” 
 
 With JTA 
 
 Contact Nathan Guttman at guttman@forward.com or on Twitter, @nathanguttman ||||| Dear Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein: 
 
 
 
 It’s rare that any single person has to bear as much responsibility for safeguarding American democracy as you find yourself carrying now. Even before President Trump’s shocking decision on Tuesday to fire the F.B.I. director, James Comey, a dark cloud of suspicion surrounded this president, and the very integrity of the electoral process that put him in office. At this fraught moment you find yourself, improbably, to be the person with the most authority to dispel that cloud and restore Americans’ confidence in their government. We sympathize; that’s a lot of pressure. 
 
 Given the sterling reputation you brought into this post — including a 27-year career in the Justice Department under five administrations, and the distinction of being the longest-serving United States attorney in history — you no doubt feel a particular anguish, and obligation to act. As the author of the memo that the president cited in firing Mr. Comey, you are now deeply implicated in that decision. 
 
 It was a solid brief; Mr. Comey’s misjudgments in his handling of the F.B.I. investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server were indeed serious. Yet you must know that these fair criticisms were mere pretext for Mr. Trump, who dumped Mr. Comey just as he was seeking more resources to investigate ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. 
 
 You must also know that in ordering you to write the memo, Mr. Trump exploited the integrity you have earned over nearly three decades in public service, spending down your credibility as selfishly as he has spent other people’s money throughout his business career. We can only hope that your lack of an explicit recommendation to fire Mr. Comey reflects your own refusal to go as far as the president wanted you to. ||||| Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images, Molly Riley-Pool/Getty Images, Alex Wong/Getty Images. 
 
 Why did President Trump fire FBI Director James Comey? There is plenty of informed speculation, but we don’t know yet, and the answer will require further investigation. We do know two things: The explanations given by the White House are false, and the evidence points toward friction over the FBI’s Russia investigation. 
 
 William Saletan Will Saletan writes about politics, science, technology, and other stuff for Slate. He’s the author of Bearing Right. 
 
 
 
 The White House is pinning the decision to fire Comey on Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. In interviews Tuesday night, White House spokespersons Sean Spicer, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and Kellyanne Conway claimed that Trump had “no choice” but to act on Rosenstein’s memo, issued earlier in the day, which criticized Comey’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. They emphasized that Rosenstein had been confirmed on a 94-6 Senate vote, that Democrats had praised him in the past, and that he had also served under President Obama. In Conway’s words, a respected “nonpartisan figure” made the decision, and Trump simply administered it. Spicer said of Rosenstein: “It was all him.” 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 But that story is falling apart. Here’s why you should be suspicious of what the White House is saying. 
 
 1. The White House’s story has changed. On Tuesday night and Wednesday morning, Conway and Sanders said Rosenstein’s memo was so powerful and well-substantiated that it moved Trump to action. But in her press briefing on Wednesday afternoon, Sanders revised her account, acknowledging that Trump had requested the memo after receiving an oral briefing from Justice Department officials on Monday. To downplay the appearance of orchestration, Sanders implied that Comey only came up serendipitously. She said Sessions and Rosenstein had gone to the White House for “other business, not specifically to meet with the president on that. The topic came up, and they asked to speak with the president, and that’s how it moved forward.” 
 
 2. The story doesn’t fit the time frame the White House is presenting. Rosenstein’s memo says Comey is unfit because Comey persecuted Hillary Clinton by publicly disparaging her and publicly reopening her email investigation, in both cases exceeding the FBI director’s legal role. On its face, the argument is plausible. But the White House’s use of this argument to rationalize Comey’s firing is fraudulent. The memo focuses on Comey’s behavior from July 2016, when he announced the results of the Clinton probe, to October and November 2016, when he reopened it. That doesn’t square with Conway’s statement to CNN Tuesday night that the firing “has nothing to do with the campaign from six months ago. This has everything to do with the performance of the FBI director since the president has been in the White House.” Nor does it square with Sanders’ statement, from the White House podium on Wednesday, that Trump lost confidence in Comey “over the last several months.” 
 
 3. The story doesn’t fit the timeline of the past week. The New York Times reports that “according to people close to the president, he had been openly talking about firing Mr. Comey for at least a week” before he did it. Another Times story, citing “administration aides,” says “senior officials at the White House and the Justice Department had been charged with building a case to justify Mr. Comey’s firing since at least last week,” and Attorney General Jeff Sessions “had been tasked with coming up with reasons to fire him.” A Politico report posted Tuesday night concurs: “People familiar with the events said Trump had talked about the firing for over a week, and the letters were written to give him rationale to fire Comey.” 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 These reports don’t just expose the Rosenstein memo as a front. They also present a timeline that defies White House accounts. Sanders, in a Fox News interview, attributed Comey’s firing in part to his May 3 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, in which Comey made some errors. (The Times account agrees that Comey’s testimony upset Trump, but for a different reason: because Comey testified that he was “slightly nauseous” at the thought that the FBI might have helped to elect Trump.) But if Trump’s push for the ouster began more than a week before Tuesday night, then it preceded Comey’s testimony. Conway and Sanders also cited, as a basis for the decision, the FBI’s formal correction of Comey’s errors. But the correction wasn’t reported until after 5:00 p.m. Tuesday, which, according to Spicer, is when Trump notified Comey and Congress of his decision. The asserted sequence—errors, correction, memo, decision—can’t be squeezed into the time frame. And if the Times is correct that Trump made his final decision “early Tuesday,” then the sequence is a lie. 
 
 4. The story doesn’t fit Trump’s prior statements. After Comey reopened the Clinton probe in October, Trump said the decision showed “guts,” restored Comey’s “reputation,” and earned Trump’s “respect.” In January, Trump asked Comey to stay on as FBI director. In a tweet posted on May 2, Trump said Comey gave Clinton “a free pass” and was “the best thing that ever happened” to her. Now the White House claims that a briefing or a memo reversed Trump’s opinion. And the spin presented by Sanders on Wednesday—that Trump had been thinking for a long time about firing Comey—doesn’t fit either account. Trump’s original complaints about Comey were about leniency toward Clinton. Rosenstein’s memo is about undue harshness toward Clinton. 
 
 5. The story doesn’t fit the speed of the firing. All of these things happened within hours on the same day: the FBI’s correction, Rosenstein’s memo, a follow-up memo from Attorney General Sessions to Trump, and Trump’s termination letter to Comey. Between these events, there was little time to consider the evidence or arguments just presented. Even if everything in Rosenstein’s memo had been presented to Trump on Monday—which would be odd, if, as Sanders says, Sessions and Rosenstein were at the White House for other business, and Comey came up as a side issue—that’s still just 24 hours from the initial briefing to the termination letter. Trump didn’t even wait until Comey, who was out of town on a recruiting trip, returned to Washington. Clearly the sequence was driven by haste, not deliberation. 
 
 To recap: The White House is lying. 
 
 The White House’s story, that the briefing and the memo immediately and fully reversed Trump’s judgment of Comey, isn’t credible. Sanders’ explanation on Tuesday night for the haste—“When you make a decision like that, frankly, Tucker, why sit on it?”—is absurd on its face. It also doesn’t square with the story Sanders told Wednesday, about Trump stewing for months over Comey’s fate. And on MSNBC Wednesday morning, she was unable to explain why Trump waited 18 days to fire then–National Security Adviser Michael Flynn—who had been caught lying about his contacts with Russia—but moved in just hours to fire Comey. 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 6. All the things Comey did during the period when Trump ostensibly turned against him were related to Russia. If Conway and Sanders are telling the truth about an extended time frame—that Trump soured on Comey during the period between his inauguration and May 3—then the next logical question is what caused this shift. Here are the chief events connecting Trump to Comey during that period: 
 
 Feb. 24: Comey rejects requests from the administration to publicly rebut reports about Trump associates’ contacts with Russians. Shortly afterward, in a tweet, Trump blasts the FBI for failing to find people in its ranks who are leaking information about Trump associates’ contacts with Russians. “FIND NOW,” the president demands. 
 
 March 4-5: Trump claims President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower. Comey asks the Justice Department to deny this. The department refuses, and Comey’s request is leaked to the press. 
 
 March 20: Comey reveals that the FBI is “investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government,” including “whether any crimes were committed.” He also testifies that he has checked with the FBI and found no evidence for Trump’s persistent claims that Obama wiretapped him. 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 March-April-May: According to CNN, associates of Flynn receive grand jury subpoenas, “the first sign of a significant escalation of activity in the FBI's broader investigation.” In a May 9 report, CNN says the subpoenas were issued “in recent weeks.” In her Wednesday briefing, Sanders claimed that the White House was unaware of the subpoenas. 
 
 7. Administration sources have connected the Russia-related events to Trump’s decision. At Wednesday’s briefing, Sanders acknowledged that Comey’s failure to stop the FBI from leaking was probably one reason why Trump lost confidence in him. But press accounts based on inside sources are more extensive. The Times reports that Trump, in the days leading up to the Comey decision, was privately “denouncing Mr. Comey’s conduct in both the Clinton and Russia investigations.” The Washington Post adds: 
 
 Several current and former officials said the relationship between the White House and the FBI had been strained for months, in part because administration officials were pressuring Comey to more aggressively pursue leak investigations over disclosures that embarrassed the White House and raised questions about ties with Russia. That pressure was described as conversational challenges to FBI leadership to pursue the source of leaks seen as damaging to the administration, the officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Although the FBI is investigating disclosures of classified information, the bureau has resisted calls to prioritize leak investigations over the Russia matter, or probe matters that did not involve leaks of classified or otherwise sensitive information, the officials said. “The administration has been putting pressure on the FBI to focus more on the leaks and weren’t satisfied with the results,’’ said a former senior U.S. official familiar with the matter. A current official said administration figures have been “very aggressive’’ in pressuring the FBI. 
 
 And Politico reports: 
 
 Trump weighed firing his FBI director for more than a week. … He had grown enraged by the Russia investigation, two advisers said, frustrated by his inability to control the mushrooming narrative around Russia. He repeatedly asked aides why the Russia investigation wouldn’t disappear and demanded they speak out for him. He would sometimes scream at television clips about the probe, one adviser said. … Trump had grown angry with the Russia investigation — particularly Comey admitting in front of the Senate that the FBI was investigating his campaign — and that the FBI director wouldn’t support his claims that President Barack Obama had tapped his phones in Trump Tower. 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 8. Trump’s decision followed direct lobbying by Roger Stone. Stone is one of the Trump associates under investigation. According to Politico, “Several Stone allies and friends said Stone, who has been frequently mentioned in the investigation, encouraged the president to fire Comey in conversations in recent weeks.” The Times concurs that Stone “was among those who urged the president to fire Mr. Comey, people briefed on the discussions said.” Trump tweeted on Wednesday that he had “not spoken to Roger in a long time.” But the Times reports that “two longtime Trump associates with knowledge of the matter said the two had recently discussed their mutual dissatisfaction with Mr. Comey and his investigation.” 
 
 9. Rosenstein’s memo allegedly followed a request to him from Comey for more resources to investigate Russia. According to the Times, four congressional officials, including Sen. Richard Durbin, said Comey told them that in a meeting in recent days, he had asked Rosenstein for “a significant increase in resources for the bureau’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the presidential election.” Rosenstein’s memo, dated May 9, doesn’t mention this request. 
 
 10. Having fired Comey, the White House is substituting its own account of what his investigation has found. In a letter released to the press, Trump said Comey had told him “on three separate occasions that I am not under investigation.” Neither Comey nor the White House has provided evidence that Comey said this. Conway, when asked about it on Wednesday, replied: “I’m not going to reveal to you conversations between the president of the United States and the director of the FBI.” 
 
 On Tuesday night, Conway sowed doubt over whether the FBI has been investigating links between Trump associates and Russia. Her ambiguous comments led Anderson Cooper to ask her: “So you’re saying there is no investigation by the FBI that’s ongoing right now into the people around the president of the United States?” Conway replied: “Well, I don’t know that. But I’m saying that to the extent that any of that is true, the president himself is not the subject of investigation.” On Wednesday morning, she went further, asserting, “The investigation has gone nowhere.” Sanders, speaking to Fox News, said of the investigation: “There’s nothing there. … It’s time to move on.” And Vice President Pence, misrepresenting statements by former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, repeated: “There is no evidence of collusion between our campaign and any Russian officials.” ||||| Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, speaking before lawmakers Friday, defended his controversial memo criticizing former FBI director James B. Comey — a document the White House initially used to justify the firing of Comey. 
 
 “Former Department of Justice officials from both political parties have criticized Director Comey’s decisions,” Rosenstein said in an opening statement before the House of Representatives, remarks devoted largely to repeating his charge that Comey mishandled the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server when she was secretary of state. 
 
 “It was not just an isolated mistake; the series of public statements about the email investigation, in my opinion, departed from the proper role of the FBI director and damaged public confidence in the bureau and the department,” Rosenstein said. 
 
 “My memorandum is not a legal brief; these are not issues of law,” said Rosenstein, a longtime federal prosecutor. “It is a candid internal memorandum about the FBI director’s public statements concerning a high-profile criminal investigation.” 
 
 The House briefing capped a chaotic week on Capitol Hill, as lawmakers continued to grapple with Comey’s firing and a wave of new reports about President Trump’s behavior and the federal probe of possible collusion between his associates and the Russian government. 
 
 (Amber Ferguson/The Washington Post) 
 
 In the days after Comey’s firing, some lawmakers, former Justice officials and people who knew Rosenstein wondered if he had been forced to write the politically charged memo for Trump. But Rosenstein, who was only recently confirmed as the Justice Department’s second-highest ranking official, left no doubt that it was voluntary. 
 
 “I wrote it,” Rosenstein said. “I believe it. I stand by it.” 
 
 “Notwithstanding my personal affection for Director Comey, I thought it was appropriate to seek a new leader,” Rosenstein said. “I wrote a brief memorandum to the attorney general summarizing my long-standing concerns about Director Comey’s public statements concerning the Secretary Clinton email investigation. I chose the issues to include in my memorandum.” 
 
 Rosenstein said he learned on May 8 that Trump was going to fire Comey and the president “sought my advice and input.” 
 
 President Trump told Russian diplomats during a May 10 meeting in the Oval Office that the firing of Comey had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to the New York Times. 
 
 “I just fired the head of the FBI,” Trump said, according to the Times account. “He was crazy, a real nut job. I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” 
 
 Trump also told the Russians, as he has said publicly, “I’m not under investigation.” 
 
 After Rosenstein was nominated by Trump to be deputy attorney general, a friend of Comey’s told the FBI director that he was encouraged by Rosenstein’s nomination and likely Senate confirmation, according to an account of the conversation in the New York Times. 
 
 But Comey did not completely agree with his friend, Ben Wittes, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the editor in chief of the Lawfare blog. 
 
 “[Comey] said, ‘I don’t know. I have some concerns. He’s good, he’s solid but he’s also a survivor and you don’t survive that long without making some compromises and I’m concerned about that,” according to the Times account. 
 
 Comey has agreed to publicly testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee sometime after Memorial Day, committee chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) announced Friday. 
 
 [Who is Rod Rosenstein? With Sessions’s recusal, official poised to oversee probe into Russian interference in 2016 race] 
 
 Rosenstein had briefed the full Senate on Thursday at an event that left several key questions unanswered, including what exactly Trump said to Rosenstein when he told him Comey would be fired, and to what degree congressional investigators will maintain access to witnesses and documents given Rosenstein’s appointment of Robert S. Mueller III, a former FBI director, as special counsel. Those issues were not resolved with Rosenstein’s speech to members of the House on Friday. 
 
 He told House members only that he appointed a special counsel to restore Americans’ faith in the Russia investigation, saying that interference in U.S. elections should not be a partisan issue. 
 
 The moment brought applause from most lawmakers present, according to several House members. But Democrats, in particular, left the meeting frustrated that Rosenstein was not more forthcoming with information about Trump’s decision to fire Comey. Several said they learned nothing new from speaking with him. 
 
 Rep. Charlie Crist (D-Fla.) described the meeting as a “brief presentation followed by a Q and A. And not a whole lot of A.” 
 
 Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) recalled the “dissonant moment” when Rosenstein refused to say “who had asked him, if anyone had asked him, to write his memorandum.” 
 
 “He said, ‘That is Bob Mueller’s purview,’ and that was puzzling to a lot of us,” said Himes, a member of the House Intelligence Committee. 
 
 Several lawmakers have expressed concerns that the new special counsel investigation may impede the congressional investigations. 
 
 Rosenstein assured House members that the Justice Department would work with members of Congress “to coordinate our parallel efforts” and establish a point of contact for Mueller. 
 
 “You can never get guidance from the executive branch about how Congress is to do something because there’s inherently always going to be tension,” said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.). “Congress is going to want to look over the shoulder of this investigation . . . the executive branch will always try to limit that for fear that it would contaminate a potential criminal investigation for leaks, all the while sometimes leaks occur in the executive branch. So I don’t expect this to be any different.” 
 
 Rosenstein also told the lawmakers that he is “not aware” of any request by the FBI for additional resources for the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. 
 
 “Moreover,” he said, “I consulted my staff and acting FBI director Andrew McCabe, and none of them recalls such a request.” ||||| Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein knew FBI Director James Comey was going to be fired before he wrote a memo recommending Comey’s dismissal, a pair of Democratic senators said Thursday. 
 
 “He did acknowledge that he learned that Comey would be removed prior to him writing his memo,” Sen. Claire McCaskill Claire Conner McCaskillLegislature finds credible allegations of forced sex by Missouri governor The 10 Senate seats most likely to flip in 2018 Tariff fight could hit GOP in key Senate states MORE (D-Mo.) told reporters after leaving a closed-door briefing with Rosenstein. 
 
 Sen. Claire McCaskill says deputy AG Rod Rosenstein knew Comey was going to be removed prior to writing his memo https://t.co/5Zj9QwwPd5 — CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) May 18, 2017 
 
 Sen. Dick Durbin Richard (Dick) Joseph DurbinCongress has a 'second chance' for bipartisan criminal justice reform Live coverage: Facebook's Zuckerberg faces grilling in Congress Lawmakers congratulate Duckworth on birth of daughter MORE (D-Ill.) said Rosenstein knew of Comey’s dismissal one day before Trump announced Comey’s termination. 
 
 “He knew it the day before,” Durbin, the Senate minority whip, told reporters, adding that Rosenstein didn't indicate he was pressured to write the recommendation. 
 
 Rosenstein on Wednesday evening appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller to serve as the special counsel for the investigation into Russian election interference and potential links between President Trump’s team and the Kremlin. 
 
 ADVERTISEMENT 
 
 The New York Times reported this week that Trump had asked Comey to let "go" of his investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn during a meeting in February. 
 
 Trump fired Comey last week, initially citing recommendations from Rosenstein and Attorney General Jeff Sessions Jefferson (Jeff) Beauregard SessionsSenators call for DOJ to stop blocking medical marijuana research Hatch: Those advising Trump to fire Mueller going against 'nation's best interest' Gingrich compares FBI raid of Trump lawyer to Nazi secret police MORE. In an interview later, Trump said that "this Russia thing" played into his decision to fire Comey. 
 
 Comey reportedly kept a paper trail to document what he saw as the president’s improper attempts to influence his investigation. 
 
 McCaskill told reporters that Rosenstein is “anxious” to give Mueller the space to determine “where this investigation should go and what it should include.” 
 
 "As a former prosecutor, I respect that decision,” she added. 
 
 Updated: 4:01 p.m. ||||| (CNN) Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein emerged this week as perhaps the most unlikely character in the politically charged drama over the firing of FBI Director James Comey. 
 
 Publicly at least, Rosenstein played the role of President Donald Trump's main hatchet man, with the White House pointing repeatedly to his recommendation to terminate Comey as a deciding factor in the president's thinking. It was Rosenstein, Vice President Mike Pence told reporters, who "brought the recommendation to the president." 
 
 In more than a quarter-century in government, the Harvard-trained Rosenstein has cultivated an image as a low-key and down-the-middle prosecutor, a political survivor appointed to top jobs by both Democrats and Republicans. "Straight shooter" was the innocuous phrase often used to describe him. 
 
 First nominated as a United States attorney in Maryland by President George W. Bush, he was so uncontroversial that President Barack Obama kept him on the job. He lasted all eight years of the Obama administration before Trump nominated him for the Justice Department's second-highest post to serve, in effect, as its chief executive officer, and the Senate confirmed him on a 94-6 vote last month in a rare display of near-bipartisanship. 
 
 Many senators saw Rosenstein as a sober-minded and independent lawyer who would help steady the Justice Department after the bruising confirmation battle of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, whose history on race and civil rights became attack points for Democrats. After Sessions' undisclosed contacts with the Russian ambassador forced him to remove himself from any investigation into the Trump campaign's Russia ties, Rosenstein took over the probe. 
 
 Rosenstein and Comey had worked together for years, and at his Senate confirmation hearing in March, Rosenstein showed no sign of reservations about Comey's role at the FBI. He mentioned Comey by name twice in saying he would work with him on sensitive political issues. 
 
 But barely two weeks into his new job, all that appears to have changed. 
 
 There were conflicting accounts about whether Rosenstein acted on his own or at the direction of the White House. But in the end, he sent over a memo to Trump lambasting Comey's judgment in his public handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. 
 
 The Justice Department said Rosenstein was not available for comment. 
 
 Trump fired Comey late Tuesday just hours after receiving Rosenstein's formal recommendation, which attempted to give the firing a somewhat less raw and political veneer. 
 
 Rosenstein's key role in the drama surprised a number of his current and former colleagues at the Justice Department, leaving some to wonder whether he acted on his own or felt obliged to carry out Trump's wishes. 
 
 "It's not consistent that he walked in here with a hit list and James Comey's name was on the top of it. That's inconsistent with who he is and what everyone says," one law enforcement official said. "This doesn't pass the smell test of Rod Rosenstein." 
 
 His prominence in the firing also threatened to undermine the integrity of the ongoing Russia probe and to further damage relations between the Justice Department and the FBI, where Comey maintains some support. 
 
 "The relationship between FBI and Justice before yesterday was already bad, but after this, it's really toxic," said a former federal prosecutor who worked with both Rosenstein and Comey. 
 
 Rosenstein's part in the firing drew even more scrutiny Tuesday after reports that Comey had gone to him just last week to seek more resources for the FBI's Russia investigation. 
 
 "It just seemed really odd that he would be let go right after that," said a former senior FBI agent. 
 
 Trump administration officials, however, denied that Comey had asked Rosenstein for more resources for the Russia investigation, and they dismissed any suggestion that Rosenstein's recommendation had anything to do with Russia. 
 
 "Everybody across the board has unequivocally said this guy is a man of upstanding character," said White House Spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders, "and essentially the gold standard at the Department of Justice." 
 
 Correction: This story has been updated to remove tweets from an unverified account falsely claiming to belong to Rosenstein. ||||| Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the second-ranking Senate Republican, who has in recent weeks become a more outward defender of President Trump, and acting FBI director Andrew McCabe, who on Thursday contradicted the Trump White House on a range of topics, will interview Saturday to serve as the FBI’s permanent director, according to people familiar with the matter. 
 
 The men are two of at least four people who will interview to replace James B. Comey, whom Trump suddenly fired this week, the people said. 
 
 The others are Alice Fisher, a white-collar defense lawyer who previously led the Justice Department’s criminal division, and Michael J. Garcia, a judge on the New York State Court of Appeals who previously served as the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. 
 
 [Acting FBI director contradicts Trump White House on Comey, Russia probe] 
 
 All four will be interviewed by Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, the two top officials in the Justice Department. 
 
 The list is not a comprehensive accounting of finalists for the FBI director position. It is possible other candidates could be considered, officials said, and the ultimate decision falls to Trump. Justice Department officials also have interviewed four other candidates to serve as interim FBI director, although it is possible that McCabe could stay on in that role if he were not selected for the permanent job at the top. 
 
 The job also requires Senate confirmation. Whoever is selected is appointed to a 10-year term, although the person can be removed by the president. 
 
 Trump’s sudden removal of Comey from the position set off a political firestorm in Washington, fueling fears that the president was trying to stifle the bureau’s probe into possible coordination between his campaign and Russia to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. 
 
 Trump acknowledged in an interview with NBC News published Thursday that he was thinking of the Russia controversy when he decided to fire Comey. Previously, White House officials said he was acting on the recommendation of the top two Justice Department officials, particularly a memo from Rosenstein that had criticized Comey for his handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state. 
 
 Trump said, though, that he would have removed Comey no matter the advice from Rosenstein or Sessions. 
 
 Cornyn, 65, is a former Texas attorney general and state supreme court justice and is serving his third term in the Senate. He is the Senate majority whip, making him the second-ranking Republican in the chamber. But GOP senators set term limits for leadership posts, and his ends at the start of 2019. 
 
 Cornyn is not expected to challenge Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who is not term-limited and is widely respected among Republican senators. That means Cornyn is on the verge of hitting a professional ceiling, so the 10-year term of FBI director might be a logical next move. 
 
 If Cornyn were selected, there likely would be Democratic concern about handing over the nation’s premier law enforcement agency to a Republican who — despite being considered an affable senator — has served as a prominent partisan attack dog. 
 
 Cornyn has in recent weeks become more of an outward defender of Trump. This week, he dismissed the idea that Trump fired Comey to impede the FBI’s Russia probe, terming the idea a “phony narrative.” 
 
 “If you assume that, this strikes me as a lousy way to do it,” he said. “All it does is heighten the attention given to the issue.” 
 
 If he were nominated, his confirmation would be assured because of Democratic rules changes in 2013 that require only a simple majority. But Democratic strategists have already put their party’s senators on notice that they will hold their feet to the fire to ensure they vote against a Cornyn confirmation. 
 
 Spokesmen for Cornyn did not immediately respond to emails Friday night. Asked previously whether he would be willing to be FBI director, Cornyn said with a smile, “I’m happy serving my state and my country in my present position.” 
 
 One person familiar with Cornyn’s thinking told The Washington Post that his meeting with Sessions on Saturday was not billed as an interview and instead was about the “next steps” for the FBI. 
 
 Cornyn was to have delivered the commencement address Saturday at Texas Southern University in Houston, but university officials on Friday canceled his visit to the historically black college after a petition signed by hundreds of students protested his appearance. 
 
 The university said it asked Cornyn to visit at a later date. The senator’s office said Friday that he respected the decision and looked forward to visiting in the future. 
 
 McCabe, who had been the FBI deputy director before Comey was fired, might be a more palatable choice for Democrats. At a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Thursday, he heaped praise on his former boss and did not hesitate to rebut narratives advanced by the White House, including its attempt to minimize the importance of the Russia probe. He is a longtime FBI agent who led the Washington Field Office before he was elevated to the bureau’s No. 2 post in 2016. 
 
 Through an FBI spokesman, he declined to comment. 
 
 Fisher and Garcia are both alumni of the George W. Bush administration. Garcia served as assistant secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and as the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, where he led the investigation into a prostitution ring that ultimately forced New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer to resign. 
 
 Fisher served as an assistant U.S. attorney general, and, if selected, would be the first woman to run the FBI. 
 
 Efforts to reach both of them Friday night were unsuccessful. 
 
 Paul Kane contributed to this report.
– An unfamiliar name has suddenly become much more familiar this week in the wake of the James Comey firing. It's that of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who has emerged as a leading, if reluctant, figure in the controversy. Rosenstein wrote a memo to President Trump that criticizes Comey at length, though he reportedly feels he was unfairly set up to be the villain in the firing. Related coverage: Threat to quit: The Washington Post reports that Rosenstein threatened to resign over the chain of events. As the story lays it out, Trump had already decided he wanted to fire Comey when he asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Rosenstein to write memos justifying the decision. But the White House has been suggesting that Trump made his decision in response to the memos, particularly Rosenstein's. (Update: Trump himself said Thursday that he planned to fire Comey anyway.) The memo: Read the actual Rosenstein memo on Comey at the Baltimore Sun. The focus is on Comey's handling of Hillary Clinton's email mess. What it doesn't say: Though it comes close, the memo does not explicitly recommend that Comey be fired, observes the Los Angeles Times. Who is Rosenstein? He's been deputy attorney general for only about two weeks, but prior to that the 52-year-old was a Justice Department attorney with an unusual resume: He served under George W. Bush and Barack Obama. In a profile, the Atlantic notes that his "integrity has been compared to that of Jimmy Stewart, the actor who portrayed egoless small-town heroes driven by bygone ideals: of right and wrong, and black and white in a world gone increasing gray." Another profile at CNN echoes the point and calls him the "unlikely hatchet man" in the Comey story. Now a target: A Forward piece notes that Rosenstein was confirmed to the Justice Department's No. 2 post by a vote of 94-6 in the Senate, a feat of rare bipartisanship. But he's now being publicly criticized over Comey, and the story raises the question of whether he'll be able to survive the "growing firestorm." A plea to Rosenstein: The New York Times editorial board has written an open letter to Rosenstein, asserting that Trump has exploited his integrity and urging him to name a special counsel for the Russia investigation, even if it costs him his job.