Posted on 07/27/2017 10:26:31 AM PDT by Oshkalaboomboom
Mr. President, please cut it out. Tweet to your heart’s content, but stop the wildly inappropriate attacks on the attorney general. An honorable man whom I have known since his days as a U.S. attorney in Alabama, Jeff Sessions has recently become your piñata in one of the most outrageous — and profoundly misguided — courses of presidential conduct I have witnessed in five decades in and around the nation’s capital. What you are doing is harmful to your presidency and inimical to our foundational commitment as a free people to the rule of law.
The attorney general is not — and cannot be — the president’s “hockey goalie,” as new White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci described Sessions’s job. In fact, the president isn’t even his client. To the contrary, the attorney general’s client is ultimately “We the People,” and his fidelity has to be not to the president but to the Constitution and other laws of the United States. Indeed, the attorney general’s job, at times, is to tell the president “no” because of the supervening demands of the law. When it comes to dealing with the nation’s top legal officer, you will do well to check your Twitter weapons at the Oval Office door.
A rich history buttresses my uninvited but from-the-heart advice. In the wake of President Richard Nixon’s resignation, the colorful Sen. Sam Ervin (D-N.C.) — a hero of the long Watergate ordeal — held hearings on a newly minted proposal to create an independent Justice Department, along the lines of other independent agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission. The idea was simple: Especially in the wake of the Nixon-era scandals infecting it, the department should, to the fullest extent possible, be insulated from raw political considerations in the enforcement of the nation’s laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Okay, you’ve had your taste of your projection, now let me have mine.
You have a subordinate who locks himself in a bunker to prevent himself from becoming a target for the enemy instead of his commanding officer.
What’s the punishment for that?
You can’t “lead” someone who refuses to “follow.”
Really? How so?
Dear Ken Starr,
1. It is because of your obsession with revealing the sexcapades that have forever soiled The Oval Office, that you have legally substantiated that “oral sex” is “not sex”.
2. As of this morning, “Twitter” is losing membership. Think of the archival insanity of retrieving any or all of these ‘tweets’ under ‘Presidential communications’, if a commercial communications company goes belly up?!?!?
Ken Starr did a terrible job, and only had a case when he was handed the blue dress on a silver platter. In spite of being a milquetoast, soft GOPe whipped puppy who didn’t really want to find anything, he became the focus of a brutal, malicious and false attack from the Clinton apologists, who now say that Mueller is above reproach. I know this article is about Sessions, but the two issues are related.
LOL.........right!!
UCMJ and in his case it’s called fire him. You don’t take it public. That’s tasteless, it’s tawdry and quite frankly unprofessional. You’d work for someone who conducted themselves in that manner?
My thoughts exactly. Incoming!!!
Ken Starr - you had your chance to put the Clintons away and you didn’t - so shut up and go home !
Seems like this letter should have written a few times during the last administration.
These people should get lost.
It’s a new kind of leader in charge.
He’s telling us what he thinks. Sessions has made the president’s life difficult, so why not let him know it in public.
Did you watch the press conference?
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Hah
My, that headline sure was polite for a change.
I don’t remember Ken Starr’s outrage when Loretta Lynch abused her power reminiscent of a police state.
Trump once more is playing 4D chess with the idiot press and Democrats. He now has them rallying around backing Sessions. If Sessions finally goes after the corrupt DNC and the Clintons, they will be completely paralyzed doing back flips to tell Trump he should get rid of Sessions.
Starr’s mission was to appear to be going after The Rapist. He accomplished this by exposing lots of filth. But he was in the bag for the Uniparty and the BushClinton Crime Family, and was rewarded.
Because of Starr I hope Baylor loses every game from now on. He is pure slime.
I’m not saying my analogy was perfect, but neither was yours.
Political appointees serve at the pleasure of the President. Running for cover when he needs you is NOT how one ingratiates himself in such a job.
You act like this is a position at ABC widget corp. It’s not.
No. But implying it my responsibility to verify YOUR claim is out of line in the first place.
That isn’t my point and yes you are correct he does serve at his pleasure as do I at my present employer. That doesn’t mean it’s ok that my present employer air its disappointment with me publicly just because it’s “cool” and the “hip” thing to do which is tweet. Fire him I’d have no issue with but what he did is ridiculous and passive aggressive
No, he does NOT serve “as you do” at the pleasure of your employer. And I can’t prevent you from trying to identify the situation that way as you seem to be determined to do so.
However, let’s make your analogy a bit more realistic. At best, the relationship between Trump and Sessions is more that of a CEO that has appointed a senior VP to run a particular division, NOT a wage-enslaved employee of the ABC widget corp, protected by the myriad of legal regulations that have become internalized by the corporate culture. At that level of power, not “employment,” there are literally no rules. And anyone who doesn’t understand that doesn’t belong there.
If you want to take the measure of a man, why hasn’t Sessions resigned in outrage over such public treatment by his “boss?” And I don’t want you to treat that as a rhetorical question.
Really...why does Sessions neither quit, NOR modify his recusal as I understand is within his purview? Why did he not even discuss the action with his “boss” before taking that very controversial public action? And no, I don’t have the answers to those questions, but I think YOU SHOULD before criticizing the President on how he “treats” crucial appointees in his administration.
Certainly, after seeing what his “subordinates” have done with his recusal, Sessions would been eminently justified in withdrawing his recusal and rolling some heads in defense of not just his boss, but the traditional American understanding of what is meant by JUSTICE.
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.