Pages

Showing posts with label Jeff Sessions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeff Sessions. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 4, 2020

Jeff Sessions Places Second, Forces Runoff

President Trump had something to say about the Republican primary for US Senator:

This is what happens to someone who loyally gets appointed Attorney General of the United States & then doesn’t have the wisdom or courage to stare down & end the phony Russia Witch Hunt. Recuses himself on FIRST DAY in office, and the Mueller Scam begins! 
https://t.co/2jGnRgOS6h— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 4, 2020

My supposition has always been that Sessions did a corrupt deal with Chuck Schumer according to which, in exchange for a narrow confirmation as AG, Sessions would recuse from all things Russia Hoax. Rod Rosenstein was enthusiastically confirmed as DAG, 94–6. Just for the record, here are the Nay voters, those who voted against Rosenstein:

Blumenthal (D-CT)
Booker (D-NJ)
Cortez Masto (D-NV)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harris (D-CA)
Warren (D-MA)

Overall, the Dems had faith In RR.

I've heard "conservatives" express sympathy for Sessions, because of Trump's harsh public criticisms. For the record, I have no such sympathy and regard Session's actions--failing to inform Trump of his clearly premeditated recusal--as a selfish betrayal of Trump and of the national interest of the American people.

Sunday, June 23, 2019

Trump: My Biggest Mistake

Well, this one's a no-brainer. Bill Barr won't say it, but Trump will. From an interview with Chuck Todd:

CHUCK TODD:

If you could have one do over as president, what would it be?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:

Well, it would be personnel.

CHUCK TODD:

Who is it?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:

I would say if I had one do over, it would be, I would not have appointed Jeff Sessions to be attorney general. That would be my one --

CHUCK TODD:

That’s your, in your mind, that's your worst mistake?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:

Yeah, that was the biggest mistake.

CHUCK TODD:

Is Bill Barr your Roy Cohn?

Monday, May 27, 2019

BIG BIG UPDATE: Why Did Trump Wait So Long To Declassify?

Many have asked this question, frustrated at the slow pace. Today Jed Babbin offers the answer. He doesn't say so in quite those words, but the elements of the answer are largely there.

The need for declass has been obvious since the very start of the Trump administration. Perhaps Trump initially believed that the problem would go away, but with the start of the Mueller Inquisition the overwhelming need for training a spotlight on the Deep State coup attempt could no longer be denied. Unfortunately, by that point declass had become a practical impossibility.

The reason for this practical impossibility of declass lies in the fact that all the agencies involved--and there are many--get a say in the process. The President has too much going on in his life to ride herd over the process. He needs a strong leader with authority to serve as his proxy. We know that Jeff Sessions betrayed the country by recusing himself. The country was further betrayed by Rod Rosenstein who cooperated with the stonewalling agencies--especially the FBI and CIA--rather than with the President. And, importantly, NeverTrumpers in the Senate also worked against the President--who was vocally frustrated by what was going on. But they had Trump over a barrel, as the two top GOP senators on the Judiciary committee clearly stated:

Republican lawmakers [had] long warned the president against firing Sessions and tried to prevent him from doing so by signaling their refusal to confirm a replacement. Graham himself said a year ago there would be “holy hell to pay” if Trump fired Sessions and stated point-blank: “There will be no confirmation hearing for a new attorney general in 2017. Grassley, too, was adamant he would not clear time on the Judiciary Committee’s schedule for confirmation hearings for another attorney general.

The break came in the late political season of 2018 when the Senate returned to Washington, DC. The Kavanaugh SCOTUS nomination was the main item before the public eye, but something had changed. Kavanaugh was top of the agenda, but Grassley and Graham openly stated that a change was needed:

Wednesday, May 22, 2019

UPDATED: Briefly Noted: Why Did The FBI Keep Getting FISAs Against Carter Page?

Carter Page stepped down from his position as a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign in September, 2016--a month before the FBI obtained a FISA warrant against him. Not only that, but the FBI got three renewal warrants against Trump. The FISA coverage of Page--which is incredibly comprehensive and intrusive--continued until Team Mueller allowed it to lapse in August 2017. The question is: Why? Why all this intensive spying on someone who had only briefly been associated with the Trump campaign, which spying was justified on the theory of an "enterprise counterintelligence investigation?" (Mueller's "Enterprise" Witchhunt)

Margot Cleveland ran a blog yesterday that sheds light on this question: Carter Page: Obama’s FBI, DOJ May Have Spied On Trump Admin, Not Just Campaign. What emerges from recent statements by Page is that the FBI appears to have been spying on the inmost counsels of the new Trump administation--not just on the candidate, or the transitional President-Elect, but on the post-inauguration new Trump administration.

Friday, May 17, 2019

UPDATED: "A Real Attorney General"

If you haven't watched this interview with Devin Nunes, it's a must view. Nunes is clearly worked up and more plain spoken than I've ever seen him.

In response to segments of the Bill Barr interview with Fox News, in which Barr says that he has more questions now about the Russia Hoax than when he first started as AG, and that the questions he's received are inadequate, Nunes points out that the same is true for the House. For example, he says, just this week, even today, they've finally seen interagency emails regarding Christopher Steele--emails that "the FBI" (he means "Chris Wray") had hidden from Congress.

How did we just find out about this [the Kavalec email]? ... I think what you're seeing is, you're seeing a real Attorney General, a professional, and someone who's not gonna take this poisonous garbage [started by the Dems, and still pushed by irresponsible Dems and their media allies.]

I think I get it. Jeff Sessions wasn't a real Attorney General, nor was Rod Rosenstein. If Devin Nunes knows this, count on it: Bill Barr sure knows it. And I think he's telling us that Barr told Chris Wray how high to jump. When opportunity offers, Wray will be gone. Barr doesn't want to go through another confirmation just now, but if Wray wants to leave, it'll be: Hey, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. In the meantime, he's got him on a leash--a short one.

As for Barr not shying away from the word "spying"?

Sandra, it's ridiculous. Every American out there knows what spying is. This [objecting to the "S" word] is all about narrative building by the Left to cover up what they did, and you have accomplices in the media. This is foolishness. ... He [Barr] used to work at the CIA, for God's sake. I've never seen something so ridiculous, where the media is culpable for this nonsense. Everybody in the media oughta be laughing at these politicians ... It's a joke, it's a joke.

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

John Dowd Speaks Out

ABC News has done a bang up interview with former Trump attorney John Dowd. For anyone who doesn't know who John Dowd is, read his Wikipedia page: John Dowd. Big league player, attorney, big time experience both in the law and in Washington.

I've edited and condensed the transcript of the interview, boiled it down. Read the original for all the detail and the full context, uncondensed, listen to the audio. But it really speaks pretty much for itself. I've bolded what I thought jumps out. Here goes:


ABC NEWS' KYRA PHILLIPS: So, John, word is the Mueller report is going to drop within the next couple of weeks.

JOHN DOWD: I don't think there'll be a report. The rules of the department say, no report.

ABC NEWS' CHRIS VLASTO: So you don't think the public's gonna see anything. You think it's $40 million. Mueller investigated it. And that's it.

DOWD: The idea that you would take that information and make it public, you know, violates the whole concept of the grand jury. What's the grand jury for? To protect the innocent. ... Does that ever get reported? No.

PHILLIPS: Do you respect what Mueller is doing? I know you know Mueller well.

DOWD: Well, I respected it in the beginning. My style is I always trust the other side, until I didn't. In my opinion, on March 5th, we were done. He had everything. He said he had everything. He told me that no one had lied. He told me they had every document we asked for. He told me that it was nothing more. He told me that the president was not a target. That is, he did not have any exposure, that he was a witness subject, which is perfectly normal for someone's conduct you're looking at, but they don't have exposure. What people don't understand about the president is you have too much information in your life. I mean, the amount of information that he intakes every day, gets prepared for, is staggering. And in my questioning him or talking to him--you know, first question, easy. Second question, easy. Third question, he wasn't sure. And he doesn't like being unsure. So he'll guess. There's your trap, right there. It's not whether he lies or not. 

Monday, November 19, 2018

Fake News, Real News, Hot News

On the Fake News front we have some depressing real news--or, as real as polling gets:

John Hinderaker at Powerline, in The Ultimate Fake News, digs down into a poll run by The Economist/YouGov during the first week of November. The poll asked: Did Russia “tamper with vote tallies in order to get Donald Trump elected President?” Hinderaker points out what every sentient human person now knows for fact:
There is no evidence–I repeat, none–that Russia “tampered with vote tallies.” To my knowledge, no one has claimed that Russia tampered with vote tallies. I am not aware of any plausible theory on which a foreign power could tamper with vote tallies. To say that Russia tampered with vote tallies is as credible as asserting that the moon is made of green cheese.
Nevertheless.

The poll reveals, paraphrasing Hinderaker's summary, that