I've seen that theory. I'm not sure he's much of a witness to anything though.
The scope and nature of Sessions' recusal is chronically mis-represented. I think 90% of Freepers, and about 100% of the public have an incorrect impression relating to his recusal. DoJ "corrected the record" after Comey's testimony last week, in addition to putting out a press release when Sessions announced his recusal. The facts are out there.
-- There could be more than one reason for the recusal... --
I totally agree with that. The DEMs will try to broaden the recusal. Right now they are asserting Sessions is recused from deliberations on firing Comey. That's nonsense when you think about it. What if there was evidence that Comey was a criminal? Just for talking purposes. Sessions is "recused" from firing Comey? I don't think so.
And before people jump to the conclusion that firing Comey to close the Russia investigation is per se wrong, consider 1) the investigation continues, and 2) facts might show that Comey fabricated or radically embellished this issue - dirty cop framing innocent victims. Is Sessions supposed to let the dirty cop stay in the job? I don't think so.
At any rate, sorry for rambling there, the point I was trying to make is that the scope of recusal is elastic in all sorts of directions, and eventually is a political calculation couched in legal mumbo jumbo. Sessions may agree to avoid touching some issues that he has no obligation to recuse from. Depends on how he anticipates that issue to be resolved.
I agree with the other poster. You seem to understand this much better than anyone else. Appreciate your comments. This is an example of why FR is so great! I come here to learn from folks like you.
Yes I can see the political games. In fact Trump may have leaked he was angry with Sessions as a head fake, who knows. The hearings usually produce some surprises, good, bad, or both.