Posted on 12/05/2017 3:00:43 PM PST by mandaladon
In the article you linked to there’s exactly one Congressman threatening trouble for Trump if he fired Sessions, a Mike Simpson of Idaho.
Maybe he has superhero powers.
Pelham doesn't care to look.
It's also worth noting that now, almost a half year later, very few here would defend Sessions against Trump.
You and a few others.
Besides what “Senators”?
If you know the names of Senators and Representatives who threatened Trump to keep him from sacking Sessions then produce them.
So far the lone member of that group appears to be Mike Simpson of Idaho.
Can’t you find Hatch and Flake, McCain and Graham and any of the other usual suspects mouthing off on the subject?
What exactly do you think that they threatened to do? Not build the wall? Not scrap Obamacare? Not fight ISIS? Surely you remember their threats from all of the news articles you read.
“It’s also worth noting that now, almost a half year later, very few here would defend Sessions against Trump.”
Yeah, you have a point. The only ally Sessions seems to have is Trump. The one man who can fire Sessions at any time, but doesn’t. A tough choice, Trump or the herd. Trump or the herd. Give me a minute.
So Jeff Sessions recuses himself and then brings in this skunk Rosenstein who then brings in Mueller to prosecute. This is sabotage. Plus Rosenstein gave Mueller a very wide area to prosecute.
And Sessions recused hiself from anything about Russia, in great part due to pressure and harassment from sleazeball groper POS Al Franken. AFTER Jeff Sessions was approved as Trump’s AG by the US Senate.
Sure we could. And you know we could. But nothing is going to dissuade you in your quest to be the number one cheerleader on this site for Mueller, so why bother? We already scored three touchdowns and two field goals on you in this thread already, so see you around the bend.
“So why does Trump keep him as AG?”
Good question.
Either
1) Sessions is the loser many FReepers constantly say he is, and Trump is a moron for keeping him, or...
2) Trump is not a moron and the anti Sessions FReepers are wrong.
I think 2.
“So why does Trump keep him as AG?”
Good question.
Either
1) Sessions is the loser many FReepers constantly say he is, and Trump is a moron for keeping him, or...
2) Trump is not a moron and the anti Sessions FReepers are wrong.
I think 2.
3) Grassley warned that no new confirmation hears could be scheduled until 2018.
Fair point, but it will be 2018 in a few weeks. If you’re right, then Trump will waste no time replacing Sessions in the first days of the year.
I think he’ll leave Sessions where he is - and I bet iin a year or two we find out what Sessions was doing in 2017.
AG isn’t supposed to be one of those transparent roles where they hold press conferences and talk about their investigations, or purposely leak stuff. It’s like a police detective on a big case - they don’t talk about anything until they’ve built an airtight case.
We know what Sessions is doing in 2017 because, before Congress, under oath, and under penalty of perjury, he recused himself on most if not all of the Deep State matters.
“...he recused himself on most if not all of the Deep State matters.”
Sessions recused himself on matters directly relating to the 2016 election campaign, of which he was a part.
As I understand it, “Deep State” is a term referring to the entrenched big government bureaucracy that continues regardless of presidential election results and regardless of party affiliation.
Ideally, bureaucrats and politicians are meant to serve at the pleasure of We The People, but despite Constitutional checks and balances, sunset clauses and elections, they do whatever they can to dig in and and make their positions permanent.
Elected politicuans put regulations, policy and programs in place and do whatever they can to make it permanent to protect their legacy.
It’s human nature. But it’s also thwarting the will of the people, and in many cases a violation of the Constitution - and therefore a matter for the justice department, if the AG is a conservative champion of the Constitition and limited government.
That’s what I hoped for in Sessions, and there’s plenty of Deep State to go after that goes way beyond the 2016 campaign matters that he recused himself from.
What part of Sessions’ recusal language do you see as limiting him from pursuing criminality within the entrenched bureaucracy of the Deep State?
I believe the proper thing for me to do, would be to recuse myself from any questions involving those kind of investigations that involve Secretary Clinton and that were raised during the campaign or to be otherwise connected to it.
GRASSLEY: OK. I think, that's -- let me emphasize then with a follow up question. To be very clear, you intend to recuse yourself from both the Clinton e-mail investigation and any matters involving the Clinton Foundation, if there are any?
SESSIONS: Yes.
Yeah, that’s worse than I thought.
Still, I think if/when the investigations lead to the Clintons, or campaign related matters, Jeff Sessions can recuse himself personally without hobbling the justice department.
Rosenstein would be in charge. He is Deep State. He would continue to keep things covered up. That's what he does.
So far, Trump has been a pleasant surprise, even beyond my very high expectations.
There is indeed a deep state, and for decades, the coverups have been accommodated and even directed from the highest level (POTUS). It remains to be seen how the deep state will fare against this POTUS.
It’s one thing for a SOS, AG, Deputy AG, or FBI Director to engage in rampant corruption and coverups, knowing the POTUS is fully in the loop, on board and has your back, as with the Obama administration.
It’s another thing entirely, knowing the POTUS and most of his team are genuinely determined to hunt you down and drain the swamp. The Deputy AG and many others no doubt have a lot they desperately need to cover up - but the day Hillary failed to win the White House, their coverup began to unravel.
Trump can’t and shouldn’t engage in anything that appears like a political witch hunt, purge, enemies list, etc. or public support for draining the swamp would vanish overnight.
Trump can’t be the one to kill the deep state, it has to die of natural causes, from lack of sustenance. It takes time and patience. Trump won’t get to take credit as some great dragonslayer. Conservatives won’t necessarily get the satisfaction of watching crooked democrats perp walked in orange jump suits. Trump supporters like you and I will not necessarily get our moment of vindication and be able to say “See? I told you so”. But without a POTUS providing cover for the deep state, the swamp will drain - slower than we’d like, and with less fanfare, but it will drain.
Clearly, I am more optimistic than you.
There are still too many questions unanswered to predict how much of the Deep State will be cleaned up.
For example Sessions is having the DOJ IG investigate Leaks and a few other things. The problem with that is the DOJ IG is an Obama appointee.
Another question that's come up today is about Rosenstein. He is the direct boss of Ohr. So there's that.
And since Sessions isn't investigating all the major scandals and since the DOJ IG is only do a few of them, then that leaves Rosenstein in charge. That's a big problem.
It's all TBD.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.