[Alberta's Child]

The difference is that Democrat administration ignored it so they could be complicit in wrongdoing. In this case, the intent is to investigate and prosecute the wrongdoing ... which means there is a much different risk if an attorney ignores these kinds of ethical constraints.

The worst-case scenario would be for someone who is prosecuted by Sessions to file a complaint against Sessions for ethical misconduct over a conflict of interest. Even if the charge doesn't stick, it could be sufficient for a criminal charge against that defendant to be dismissed, or a conviction overturned. Is that really a risk you would ever want to take ... just so the AG can be a "fighter" in your mind? Please.

[TheTimeOfMan]

If there is a clear conflict of interest - I agree. But does the mere fact that Sessions was nominated by Trump constitute such a conflict? In reality yes. Legally? I don’t think so. But I have to concede that even if that is true it could be grounds for an appeal - with all of its attendant uncertainty.

So - ok I agree with you.