Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein took matters into his own hands Thursday night, issuing what can only be described as an utterly bizarre statement. Let's just admit up front that we might never be able to decipher exactly what prompted such an unusual action, but here's one ironclad takeaway: It's indicative of an administration that’s in full meltdown amid a pressure cooker of scandal and legal inquiry.
Here's the statement in full:
"Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous "officials," particularly when they do not identify the country—let alone the branch or agency of government—with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated. Americans should be skeptical about anonymous allegations. The Department of Justice has a long-established policy to neither confirm nor deny such allegations."
The first thing to note here is that, generally speaking, it's always a bad sign when a public official issues a statement in his or her own name that raises more questions than it answers (actually, that goes for all public statements). The point of a communications strategy in times of crisis is to put questions to rest, or to at least stem the flow of them. Standard protocol for an administration under fire is that an agency spokesperson (from the communications department, just to be clear) issues a statement that either definitively answers a line of inquiry or indicates that the agency will not be commenting on such inquiries.
Rosenstein’s statement is nothing, if not cryptic. It simultaneously launched a thousand searches for which article he was targeting and left the public wondering what exactly the administration is so freaked out about. It's hard to imagine that any public relations professional really thought this was a good idea, but it's likely a sign of mental duress and poor judgment one way or the other.
However, since Rosenstein has given us the green light on wild speculation, let's speculate!
1) The White House directed him to issue the statement
To me, this is the least interesting of all the possibilities. It could be true, but given the tensions that have arisen of late between Trump and Rosenstein—particularly for his appointment of a special counsel—it doesn't seem like Rosenstein would be inclined to take direction from the very entity that's now trashing him. But then again, it's certainly possible that Rosenstein acquiesced to the demands of a tyrannical and delusional commander in chief.
2) The statement's targeted at a particular outlet, reporter or anonymous source who has repeatedly misrepresented the facts
Rosenstein’s salvo was essentially a threat wrapped in the garb of a public service announcement. He was supposedly telling the public to be discerning and wary of anonymous sourcing. But his very targeted use of "officials" that he identified as not being associated with a specific "country" suggests that he has someone in particular in mind. In that sense, it's a threat—in essence, I know who you are and your unwelcome contribution has not gone unnoticed.
Remember, it's a prosecutable offense to leak certain classified or sensitive material and Rosenstein's at the tippy-top of the agency that would investigate just such a leak. So in some ways, the threat aspect feels quite plausible because even though the statement was cryptic, whoever was on the receiving end of such a threat would know who they were. It would also mean that such a statement, seen in any other light as a complete PR blunder, might have had and/or accomplished a specific purpose.
The less tantalizing read is that it was a blanket warning to all anonymous sources and the journalists using them. Rosenstein has been the subject of innuendo ever since he began overseeing the Russia investigation. From reports that he threatened to resign after the White House initially pinned Comey's firing on him to the charge that he turned down one of Comey's requests for more resources for the Russia investigation, it's possible that Rosenstein is simply fed up.
But that explanation seems a little odd since, unlike Trump, Rosenstein doesn't have a reputation for taking excessively ill-advised actions for some fleeting sense of immediate gratification. In other words, he isn’t preternaturally plagued with the judgment and impulse control of a two year old.
3) Rosenstein is laying the groundwork to cover his own butt
Though it's difficult to imagine exactly how such a statement fits into this hypothetical, it's still worthy of consideration. Rosenstein could in all likelihood become a material witness to the FBI's investigation of obstruction. In that sense, it's a fair bet that nearly everything Rosenstein does can be viewed through the lens of him trying to preserve his own reputation and insulate himself from legal jeopardy.
Viewed in that light, it seems plausible that at some point Rosenstein wants the ability to point back to this statement and say, "See, that's why I sent this out." Again, it's hard to imagine which exact element of obstruction such a statement might guard against, but I would hazard to guess that Rosenstein's entire being is focused on making sure that he doesn't go down with Trump's ship.
That was clearly one of his main motivations for appointing Robert Mueller and now remains a possible explanation for everything he does—from where he decides to buy his coffee in the morning to any public statement he makes and more. In other words, it's a 24/7 all-consuming proposition.