Sort of like the buyer or purchasing agent for a company. That person enters into contracts, but it isn't a personal bond, it's institutional, representing the company's entering into a contract.
Under federal court Rule 11, that kind of excuse is disallowed and Rosenstein is in jeopardy for signing the FISA application as an attorney without investigating and establishing its veracity as he is required to do.
Sort of like the buyer or purchasing agent for a company. That person enters into contracts, but it isn’t a personal bond, it’s institutional, representing the company’s entering into a contract.
Either he knows it is correct, or he believes it to be correct based on others who he trusts. If the others lied to him, they are liable.
I’m not sure you’re right. Maybe. Maybe not. If a judge signs a warrant, then they’re telling the world that they read it, agreed with the probable cause outlined in it, and approve it.
I’m thinking that when Rosenstein, Certified It, that might mean that he read, made sure it met the criteria to be presented to the FISC and gave approval to whatever, US Attorney went before the court. If his signature is on it, then it’s as if he wrote it. Only way out of it for him, maybe, is falling back on the Collective Knowledge Rule, where he can state that he has the ability to take the affiants word for it, that all is legit and legal. He is not under any obligation to critique or research the underlying supporting documentation. But, I think he may be in too deep for that, at this point.
However, his boss don’t care, so he know’s it isn’t a big deal.