That was you at post 945 in this thread. Based on that post, I put you on my "do not correspond" list. My prerogative, it cause you no harm, and saves me time.
You are of course free to post to me or pretend I don't exist. I'm indifferent.
I'm replying this one time because you addressed an obvious thoughtful remark to me personally.
-- Not exactly what people like me are saying. ... he allowed himself to be taken out of the equation entirely and let a DS Deputy create a firestorm that the President has to deal with every day from a phony allegation ... --
Either Sessions follows the rules governing conflict (28 CFR 45.2) or not.
Rosenstein and the people managing Sessions' Chinese wall are sandbagging him, sequestering hims from all sorts of stuff that he (Sessions) is not recused from. This makes a hot mess.
At the risk of communicating even though I have apparently made it to your blacklist, I will address your claim that Sessions was required under 28 CFR 45.2 to recuse himself. As noted by Andrew McCarthy (former fed prosecutor) and others, the memo that Sessions was given was incorrect as to the requirements of the situation, and Sessions was snookered by career DOJ folks into the recusal. I read the articles at the time, looked at the rules, and by jove! he was indeed snookered. He should have stayed at his post. Instead he deserted.
If you don't mind, could you expand on the above? How do you know that they are sandbagging him, and I'm not sure what a Chinese wall is... And I looked up sandbagging, and there are two distinct meanings. I assume you mean attacking, not underperforming?
I was just thinking, since Sessions recused himself from the Russia probe ONLY and there is no collusion, but the SC is now expanding UNDER the umbrella of the collusion, they are probably not giving him anything because of the umbrella? Hiding. I tend to ramble when my sugar is low.