Citing Recusal, Trump Says He Wouldn’t Have Hired Sessions

The New York Times ^ | 19 Jul 17 | PETER BAKER, MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT and MAGGIE HABERMAN

[SkyPilot]

President Trump said on Wednesday that he never would have appointed Attorney General Jeff Sessions had he known Mr. Sessions would recuse himself from overseeing the Russia investigation that has dogged his presidency, calling the decision “very unfair to the president.”

In a remarkable public break with one of his earliest political supporters, Mr. Trump complained that Mr. Sessions’s decision ultimately led to the appointment of a special counsel that should not have happened. “Sessions should have never recused himself, and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job and I would have picked somebody else,” Mr. Trump said.

In a wide-ranging interview with The New York Times, the president also accused James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director he fired in May, of trying to leverage a dossier of compromising material to keep his job. Mr. Trump criticized both the acting F.B.I. director who has been filling in since Mr. Comey’s dismissal and the deputy attorney general who recommended it. And he took on Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel now leading the investigation into Russian meddling in last year’s election.

Mr. Trump said Mr. Mueller was running an office rife with conflicts of interest and warned investigators against delving into matters too far afield from Russia. Mr. Trump never said he would order the Justice Department to fire Mr. Mueller, nor would he outline circumstances under which he might do so. But he left open the possibility as he expressed deep grievance over an investigation that has taken a political toll in the six months since he took office.

[SkyPilot]

In my opinion, Sessions is fine and will execute the plan fine...

No. That is chocolate rainbows and unicorn fantasy at this point. Sessions is neutered. He has no power. No gonads. He will NEVER prosecute Evil. He will be a pretend Attorney General while our President twists in the wind.

[SkyPilot]

And I, and countless others, will feel a lot of anger and extreme dissatisfaction if no "big names" are called out for their hosts of crimes. if big names are too big to be called to justice, that means our Republic is really down the drain. Economy, illegals, moslem influence in gov, political correctness in military, government corruption and much more are of course absolutely vital. But without the foundation of Blind Justice, the rule of Law and not rule of Man - the crumbling will continue. Good economy is not enough. Justice must be served or there is no bright future; it means wrongdoers know that "If I get big enough I can do whatever the hell I want and no one will ever go after me." And the little guys still get will get prosecuted like the guy that took a couple of photos of a submarine he shouldn't have. What was his crime compared to Cankles? If Big Names get to go scott free, if government officials if they are big and important and famous and connected enough, can commit treason, use fake names, very likely order hits on enemies, and all the rest - because it's too difficult or time consuming or uses too many resources or there are still too many corrupt sonsabitches in government to bring them to justice - then we are finished as a Republic. In a practical way I can see your point, but the wounds our citizens have endured because of the lack of justice for extremely serious felonies committed by those in government positions - is going to fester and cause rot. This will not go away. Too many people are bitter, angry, hurt, and cynical to just put all the wrongdoing aside and go on with life. The trickle down effect of injustice will and does taint all levels, all over the country.

I referenced your entire post, because it speaks the truth. Sessions will never seek justice. He is a do nothing, while the President is hung out to dry.

[SkyPilot]

If Big Names get to go scott free, if government officials if they are big and important and famous and connected enough, can commit treason, use fake names, very likely order hits on enemies, and all the rest - because it's too difficult or time consuming or uses too many resources or there are still too many corrupt sonsabitches in government to bring them to justice - then we are finished as a Republic. In a practical way I can see your point, but the wounds our citizens have endured because of the lack of justice for extremely serious felonies committed by those in government positions - is going to fester and cause rot. This will not go away. Too many people are bitter, angry, hurt, and cynical to just put all the wrongdoing aside and go on with life. The trickle down effect of injustice will and does taint all levels, all over the country.

Kabar, you know Sessions. Send him that paragraph in an email.

[SkyPilot]

Spoken like a true Never Trumper.

[SkyPilot]

So if we hold Sessions accountable, it is the Saturday Night Massacre of Watergate? Are you sure you are not a Liberal Democrat Hillary plant?

[SkyPilot]

I am as strong a Trump supporter as there is at FR, but I don’t believe that Trump is infallible or incapable of making a mistake. In this case, he made a mistake by venting to the NYT.

The President can talk to whom ever he wants. That isn't the issue. Sessions is the issue. Do you realize how transparent your posts are? Kabar - the Marine fighting knife. Are you former military? I am. And I know BS when I see it.

[gov_bean_ counter]

Spoken like a moron, moron.

[gov_bean_ counter]

If you know BS you should be able to smell yours.

[SkyPilot]

Spoken like a moron, moron.

I look forward to more intellectual and deep comments from the Never Trumpers.

[gov_bean_ counter]

I’m still waiting for one from you.

[SkyPilot]

Sorry, I don’t understand.

[SkyPilot]

You

[doug from upland]

Not at the moment but I have seen several stories about the arrests.

[Ambrosia]

I see Asset Forfeiture as a temptation to Police/Sheriff/Law Enforcement Agencies to go after material objects for personal gain, and not as deterrent to crime. Those items not used by departments are auctioned off, and that is low cost to buyer....who wouldn’t want a new car, or house at auction prices.

Particularly dangerous is the hard working person, who is caught in a situation where they look like someone, or have a car like a criminal, but aren’t that person. So if they can take the property without a crime being charged, then they are stealing from a citizen who has done nothing wrong! Charges and convictions before being able to take and keep personal/real property, imho.

[JayGalt]

I agree that was my first response and it has been used that way. Sessions apparently is going to use it as a targeted tool against folks like Soros, drug trade etc. My understanding is that more protections for the people affected have been included.
I think it should have ongoing review to avoid unjust or greedy motivations.

[DBeers]

No. That is chocolate rainbows and unicorn fantasy at this point. Sessions is neutered. He has no power. No gonads. He will NEVER prosecute Evil. He will be a pretend Attorney General while our President twists in the wind.

My opinion is one of an optimistic unworried Trump supporter on the outside looking in. IF Sessions turns out to be a dud, then I will remain unworried because I know Trump can and will rectify the situation.

[enumerated]

When it comes to indicting political foes, there is a 4th consideration beyond 1) are they guilty? (they are), 2) can a solid case be made? (it can with enough resources) 3) are they “too big to jail”? (no one should be above the law); namely:

4) is the case too politicized to assure the public that justice as been served free of political retribution? I think it is a frustrating reality that these cases are in fact too politicized.

The mere fact that it is almost exclusively Republicans and no Democrats who advocate putting Clinton, Podesta, etc. in jail - that should be answer enough.

Putting aside all doubts as to the seriousness of the crimes they committed, and the mountains of evidence of their guilt, it is almost certain their indictments or incarcerations would be seen as political retribution.

The ability to criminalize political rivalries, even when the crimes are real, could add an unhealthy coercive element to politics.

I wouldn’t want the democrats getting back control of the Executive Branch and Justice Department in say 2024 to be able to start indicting the Trumps. It’s a stupid precedent to set.

[little jeremiah]

Be seen as political retribution by whom?

No one who matters. Most would not see it that way, only the hardcore leftistpukes and the media. And they are NOT the majority of Americans or voters.

If good numbers Repubs had committed heinous felonies at the level committed by Dems, do you think Dems would not go after them due to fear of it looking like political retribution?

Don’t make me laugh.

Justice needs to be served or our Republic has officially become rotten.

[little jeremiah]

I’ve read articles for many weeks about this.

[little jeremiah]

Plcaemark.