Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ransomnote
Timeline leading up to Sessions' recusal:

Timeline

He was sworn in on February 9, 2017. He recused himself on March 2, 2017. He wasn't even in the office for a month before he recused himself. According to this timeline:

"In a statement released March 2, Sessions said he had met with 'relevant senior career department officials' in the previous several weeks to discuss whether he should recuse himself and, "having concluded those meetings today, I have decided to recuse myself from any existing or future investigations of any matters related in any way to the campaigns for president of the United States.' "

Well, the conversations he says he had with senior career department officials over a period of "several weeks," makes it sound like he had begun to discuss his recusal as soon as he was sworn in, considering he was in the job for only 22 days when he recused himself.

79 posted on 05/13/2020 11:10:02 PM PDT by mass55th ("Courage is being scared to death, but saddling up anyway." ~~ John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mass55th

Well, the conversations he says he had with senior career department officials over a period of “several weeks,” makes it sound like he had begun to discuss his recusal as soon as he was sworn in, considering he was in the job for only 22 days when he recused himself.
~~~~~~~~~
I’m guessing the Deep State wanted a recused AG so they waited until he was sworn in to tell him what they already knew for weeks prior - he was under investigation and as AG, could not investigate himself. I think it wasn’t an easy decision trying to figure out how to maneuver. I am wondering if it’s actually illegal for them to withold from him information that he is under investigation for the purpose of disabling an AG in his position. Time will tell.


85 posted on 05/13/2020 11:17:46 PM PDT by ransomnote (IN GOD WE TRUST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]

To: mass55th
...makes it sound like

Great standard of proof there, councilor.

Nothing in your post addresses the fact that he was unaware that his own subordinate was officially investigating him and that he then became aware once ensconced in the office. Stop leaving that out of the equation.

Remember the Scout's oath.


114 posted on 05/14/2020 12:24:56 AM PDT by bagster ("Even bad men love their mamas".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson