Posted on 07/19/2017 6:14:34 PM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Most likely because Junior is in legal jeopardy now and Trump has to blame someone.
Now the #NeverTrumper child reveals themselves
I wouldn’t trust him either. But if you want to turn the DOJ into a circus, he’d be the perfect ringmaster.
The President said Comey was a nut or something like that.
Sounds to me like Comey was trying some Obama-administration intimidation.
Glad this swamp creature is gone.
it wasn’t that long ago you were assuring us that Trump had some master plan that we couldn’t see and he would spring it on the left
Amen.
See my #143. I think I was recalling the constant calls for Sessions to recuse during several weeks before he actually did recuse on March 2. I’d remembered some of it incorrectly as having taken place before the confirmation hearing when most of it was actually after that.
Still, there were several weeks when it was in the news before Sessions announced his recusal. Trump and everyone else had plenty of time to discuss Sessions’ eventual decision with him before it was announced.
He is toast kabar.
If Sessions is still around by the end of the day tomorrow, you can probably take it tongue bank that something is going on behind the scenes and this is all just a well-orchestrated distraction.
I believe that's part of odawg's question to you. What is the evidence?
But why would we want to do that? We are returning the rule of law and order to America. With Christie involved we would be back to the Wild Wild West and all legitimacy stripped from MAGA, just another bully boy.
I am biding my time. Trump is wily not petulant. These comments are out of character and I will wait to see an explanation or admit I misjudged the man.
Same here. I wasn’t advocating for Christie. I was just presenting a hypothetical scenario where he’d be a perfect fit.
Well after all there was no prosecutor that would take the Hillary email case. </s>
There are none. Christie is baggage.
Don't know if that will happen and doubt it would be that sudden. But I do know this, if he does resign he will instantly become a hero of the left.
Yes, obviously there is NO evidence.
There is nothing more than a Democrat Coup disguised as an “investigation”.
Even as the narratives fall apart. Especially the “Russia!” one. Ask CNN.
Oh wait, we already found out from CNN.......
The evidence is Cyrillic metadata in the leaked DNC emails.
*I hope I’m talking to people who know the difference between ‘evidence’ and ‘proof’.*
: )
I'm confused here. Are you saying that they screwed him out of committee assignments and that is an indication of what a fighter he is?
I just kind of skimmed the rest of your post. Having made a long career in the government and being naive aren't mutually exclusive. That he accepted the advice from a bunch of democrats (no doubt supported by never-Trump Republicans) on whether he should recuse himself tells me more about his decision-making than a whole bunch of paragraphs lauding a long history of government service and being a strong conservative.
Instead of looking for reasons that he should recuse himself, he should have found some people to lay out all the reasons that it wasn't necessary. But I guess he thought that maintaining his own self-image as a man of unquestionable integrity was more important to him than helping the President. One thing I've really noticed since the election is that the media and the Democrats are waging a full-scale war with the aim of destroying Trump's presidency. IMO, only a damned fool voluntarily lays down his arms when the enemy is attacking, just to avoid any appearance of unfairness.
Right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.