Replies

That makes more sense. But there is a significant difference between merely informing the FISA court that he has un-recused himself and is now back in complete charge of the JOJ and the Q-Bot claim that Sessions sought permission to un-recuse himself from two justices of the SCOTUS and the justices approved the request. Your theory is plausible; the Q-Bot claim is a hoax.

> “difference between merely informing ***the FISA court*** that he has un-recused himself and is now back in complete charge of the JOJ and the Q-Bot claim that Sessions sought permission to un-recuse himself from two justices of the SCOTUS and the justices approved the request. “

You meant ***the FISA court*** as two justices of SCOTUS.

Q did not convey that Sessions is “is now back in complete charge of the JOJ ...”. No one knows the extent of Sessions’s un-recusal because the letter is mentioned to be classified.

The nuggets we are given are that the letter to two justices concerns recusal-unrecusal. Because un-recusal has no requirement for approval from SCOTUS, we can best infer the classified letter announces that Sessions has rescinded his recusal as a notification for why he’s appearing, whether the un-recusal is in part or in total is classified.

For Sessions to seek clarity can only point to a pending petition and NOT for any advisory opinion which is a forbidden zone since the 18th century.

There is no restriction whatsoever for a US AG to seek clarity on matters involving Art. 3, Sec. 2.