[FreeReign]

Not sure what you are saying.

But Sessions is saying two different things.

Back in January, Sessions said that he is required not to participate in cases where there is a conflict of interest.

But now recently, Sessions is saying that not participating in a case where there is a conflict of interest, is optional and the decision left up to the individual, in this case Rosenstein.

It's apparent to me, when it comes to recusals and draining the swamp, Sessions will always rationalize the easiest route.

[Golden Eagle]

Back in January, Sessions said that he is required not to participate in cases where there is a conflict of interest. But now recently, Sessions is saying that not participating in a case where there is a conflict of interest, is optional and the decision left up to the individual, in this case Rosenstein.

Great point, again. Unequal justice, direct per Sessions.

[RummyChick]

I am saying its not sessions decision because he is recused. Its rosenstein decision that should be based on the law

As in..its a decision someone makes. It cant be sessions making decision

[RummyChick]

There is section on recusals and the procedure for said recusals for DOJ in their rules