The prevailing belief is that Sessions recused from investigating anything that had to do with Russia, or some such nonsense. But by the simple act of actually reading the public recusal notice, in combination with the regulation cited, one would learn that Sessions recused from investigating the Trump campaign, because he was an adviser to it.
Before that, in his confirmation hearings, he told Grassley that he would recuse from investigating Hillary and the Clinton Foundation, because his public statements suggest he is biased against them.
Thanks for the wisdom.
The argument that McCarthy has advanced is that there is no such thing as a special counsel over a counter-intelligence investigation. True enough!
And it is also true that Sessions recusing from investigating the Trump campaign gave Rosenstein an opening.
From the perspective of proper application of legal principles, Mueller's appointment is a hot mess. Improvidently granted in the first place, although from a political vantage point maybe a useful yet risky distraction. Scope is "all over the map," with visible action showing Mueller to be as much a political actor as Schumer or Pelosi.
I think it will work out in the end, but it won't be comfortable for team Trump, and I seriously doubt it will, of itself, damage the deep state or the DEM side.
The Mueller appointment also stands for the proposition that the Hillary campaign can reasonably be subjected to the same sort of "hot mess" examination. We see the hypocrisy of the DEMs in resisting call for examination of Russian collusion with the Hillary campaign.