“Unfortunately, leading the assault on the Dem corruption is not one of them.”
Would there be any political upside to Trump (via Sessions) leading the assault on Democrat corruption?
How would voters feel about Trump using his executive powers to try and convict the Obama administration of crimes?
I think the Democrats deserve to hang, and here on FR, I’d get a fair amount of support for that sentiment, but I have no illusion that I am in the majority - even among Republicans who voted for Trump.
When you add in the 50% of voters that actually voted for these Democrats - what percent of voters overall would favor an assault by a Republican administration on the prior Democrat administration?
My question is - wouldn’t the optics of this be simply horrible? Wouldn’t it be super easy for the Left to spin it as political retribution by an authoritarian POTUS?
Wouldn’t a smart guy like Trump instruct Sessions to steer clear?
I think Trump/Sessions can do a lot to expose the corruption, and run them out of town, so to speak. He may even be able to tarnish their brand so badly that the swamp s essentially drained.
But maybe he long ago decided to stop short of pursuing criminal prosecutions of Obama administration - and that might explain the AG and DOJ inaction on this front.
The only other explanation is that Sessions is protecting and covering for deep state corruption - and that just doesn’t ring true from where I stand.
100% agree. If you listed “getting Zero” or “getting Cankles” I think fewer than 10% of the voters would have that as a high objective, let alone their #1. I think Trump is doing exactly what the voters want, in the order they want it.
48% at Rasmussen today—ahead of Zero-—and I think that’s about 10% undercounted.