Althouse: Trump can fire Sessions, Rosenstein, and Mueller, so "The real question is why Trump doesn’t fire them himself rather than whine constantly about all three of them."

July 26, 2017

Trump can fire Sessions, Rosenstein, and Mueller, so "The real question is why Trump doesn’t fire them himself rather than whine constantly about all three of them."

Ed Morrissey frames the question, and once the question is framed, I think you see the answer, don't you?

And that's why "Trump will sit and fume, but do nothing about it."

And if you see it, obviously Sessions, Rosenstein, and Mueller know it.

66 comments:

Michael K said...: Sessions bailed out early on the Russia thing and left Trump with the weasels.

I understand why Trump is annoyed with him although the way he is doing this is unseemly.; 7/26/17, 8:55 AM
MayBee said...: I don't like what he's doing to Sessions.
As Michael K said, it's unseemly.; 7/26/17, 8:57 AM
Kate said...: Scott Adams would find a different answer.

My answer: soften the ground and fire him. Civil assets forfeiture. Continued prosecution of the Little Sisters. Four years goes by in the blink of an eye. Get stuff done with a vengeance.; 7/26/17, 9:01 AM
Sebastian said...: Morissey approaches the why-doesn't-he question from the vantage point of the swamp--polls are against it! he'd lose Republicans! it would be a "disaster"!; 7/26/17, 9:03 AM
traditionalguy said...: Civil Forfeiture reinstated makes the Kustice Department into a criminal armed robbery cabal. Fire Saint Sessions for that. The weasel earned it.; 7/26/17, 9:11 AM
Unknown said...: "My answer: soften the ground and fire him. Civil assets forfeiture."

Not going to fly. Trump himself is on record as being in favor of Civil Asset Forfeiture laws.

Remarks by President Trump in Roundtable with County Sheriffs, in which he assures them he would uphold Civil Asset Forfeiture laws.; 7/26/17, 9:18 AM
bgates said...: Trump himself is on record as being in favor of Civil Asset Forfeiture laws.

Leftists are opposed to government confiscation of property from people who haven't been convicted of a crime, unless they are fairly reimbursed. Like those nuns who were forced to purchase health insurance they don't want, but are getting discount condoms out of it.; 7/26/17, 9:23 AM
Unknown said...: Trump won't lead on Civil Asset Forfeiture laws.

Interesting how you Trumpists blame Sessions for doing Trump's bidding.

Why aren't you aware of Trump's stance on this?; 7/26/17, 9:23 AM
Otto said...: Trump is perfectly correct in being annoyed with Sessions. This idiot didn't have the foresight or political acumen to replace double crosser Rothstein with a republican deputy AG before recusing himself. He alone due to his stupidity has allowed the Democrats through Rosenstein to handcuff Trump. Drain the swamp.; 7/26/17, 9:27 AM
Unknown said...: "Leftists are opposed to government confiscation of property from people who haven't been convicted of a crime, unless they are fairly reimbursed."

Why say it's leftists who don't like Civil Asset Forfeiture laws, when so many Trumpist commenters here are ready to hang Sessions over his and Trump's supportof these laws?; 7/26/17, 9:27 AM
Unknown said...: Teump supports Civil Asset Forfeiture laws even without conviction.

"“We’ll destroy his career,” President Donald Trump said of a Texas legislator who has reportedly introduced legislation to curtail civil asset forfeiture — the practice of taking a person’s property allegedly used in the commission of a crime — unless the individual is convicted of a crime.

Trump made his remarks, which were taken as joke, at a February 7 White House meeting with sheriffs from across the country (shown). But even if the remark was not taken seriously by the sheriffs, who laughed at the “threat,” it is clearly indicative of the president’s position on the issue.

During the meeting with the sheriffs, the issue of civil asset forfeiture (CAF) was discussed at some length. Sheriff Aubrey of Jefferson County, Kentucky, raised the issue: “The other thing is asset forfeiture. People want to say we’re taking money and without due process. That’s not true. We take money from dope dealers.”

Trump then asked, “And you’re not allowed to do it now?”

Sheriff Aubrey said it had been “curtailed a little bit,” after which Trump asked whether it was for “legal reasons” or “just political reasons?”

Aubrey answered, “They make it political and they make it — they make up stories.”

Trump told the sheriffs that he would like to “look into that.” He then said to Dana Boente, the acting attorney general, “So what do you do? So in other words, they have a huge stash of drugs. So in the old days, you take it. Now we’re criticized if we take it. [Note: The criticism of CAF is not the taking of illegal drugs, but rather property which is only alleged to have been involved in the drug trade or some other alleged crime]. So who gets it? What happens to it? Tell them to keep it?”

Boente explained, “Well, we have what is called equitable sharing, where we usually share it with the local police departments for whatever portion that they worked on the case. And it was a very successful program, very popular with the law enforcement community.”

No doubt it is, since local law enforcement is able to procure through CAF cars, boats, cash, and other valuable property through this program in which local law enforcement and federal agents work together on a case.

Boente told Trump, “There’s been a lot of pressure not to forfeit, in some cases.”

Trump responded, “Who would want that pressure, other than, like bad people, right?” He then told Sheriff Aubrey that he could count on his support in his efforts to continue CAF."; 7/26/17, 9:32 AM
Matt Sablan said...: Oddly enough, CAF is one area the right and left tend to agree, and Trump seems intent on botching it.; 7/26/17, 9:37 AM
Darrell said...: Gee, Impostor Inga, you would have thought that Barack Obama would have ended Civil Asset Forfeiture in his eight years, then, right? Especially when the Democrats controlled the whole ball of wax at the start of his first term.; 7/26/17, 9:41 AM
mockturtle said...: I sometimes complain about my dog but don't intend to fire him.; 7/26/17, 9:44 AM
Larvell said...: Trump is perfectly correct in being annoyed with Sessions. This idiot didn't have the foresight or political acumen to replace double crosser Rothstein with a republican deputy AG before recusing himself. He alone due to his stupidity has allowed the Democrats through Rosenstein to handcuff Trump. Drain the swamp.

I know, it was stupid of Sessions to nominate Rosenstein for Deputy AG. Only an idiot could have done something like that. Wait, what?; 7/26/17, 9:45 AM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: The commenters here so far are avoiding the answer to the question. Now say his name. Nixon. You're goddam right.; 7/26/17, 9:46 AM
madAsHell said...: I thought Lewandowski was dismissed last summer. What is his present role in the administration?; 7/26/17, 9:47 AM
Browndog said...: I disagree that "civil forfeiture" resides in the left.

It was born of the "law and order/war on drugs" right. You can argue it was a result of the liberal left cutting funding for law enforcement, thus creating a need to fund law enforcement.; 7/26/17, 9:50 AM
bagoh20 said...: CAF is just about the most un-American policy in existence, and that's a high bar. Who here defends it?; 7/26/17, 9:54 AM
Darrell said...: Trump needs to end CAF on the same day he replaces Session in Recess. End the proposed new Federal war on marijuana, too. Both ships have sailed.; 7/26/17, 9:58 AM
Darrell said...: If you want to give surplus military equipment to local LEOs, do that. Surplus government donuts, too.; 7/26/17, 10:00 AM
bgates said...: Why say it's leftists who don't like Civil Asset Forfeiture laws

I'm kidding. Why would leftists be opposed to civil asset forfeiture - they hate the idea of private property to begin with.; 7/26/17, 10:00 AM
Unknown said...: "...you would have thought that Barack Obama would have ended Civil Asset Forfeiture in his eight years, then, right?"

Trump Justice Department reverses Eric Holder policy on Civil Asset Forfeiture.

"Sessions' new policy reverses a 2015 decision by former Attorney General Eric Holder that put restrictions on civil asset forfeiture.

Holder's memo told state and local jurisdictions that federal officials would restrict "adoptive" forfeitures, which is when the federal government adopts property taken by law enforcement authorities and forfeits it under federal law. As a result of the process, local agencies can get back up to 80 percent of the proceeds of forfeited property, while the federal government keeps at least 20 percent.

In 2015, Holder said the limits on seizures were meant to "take the profit out of crime and return assets to victims, while safeguarding civil liberties."

Holder's policy created a broad disincentive for police to seize goods under federal law, since in many cases, their state's forfeiture laws were tougher then what the federal government had in place. Rosenstein admitted that under the Holder memo, "one of the numbers you see is sharp decline in revenue, the other number you see is the increase in drug abuse and drug overdose deaths.""
--------------------
"The politics of civil forfeiture were somewhat unusual. The more problematic federal forfeiture laws were introduced and pushed through by Republicans in the 1980s, with support from some Democrats; but efforts to reform forfeiture laws have also come from the right,[13] as libertarians in Congress have focused on the basic idea as offensive to property rights.[13] In many areas civil forfeiture adversely affects persons from minorities and low-income communities, in which the typical seizure is less than $500, and Democrats have also been critical of civil forfeiture programs.[13] The ACLU has also been a long time opponent.[13]"

Wiki; 7/26/17, 10:04 AM
Unknown said...: "CAF is just about the most un-American policy in existence, and that's a high bar. Who here defends it?"

bgates.

"Leftists are opposed to government confiscation of property from people who haven't been convicted of a crime, unless they are fairly reimbursed."; 7/26/17, 10:07 AM
cubanbob said...: Trump could order the DoJ to appoint several additional special prosecutors. One to watch Mueller. Another to investigate the FBI. Another to investigate the DoJ. Another to investigate the CIA and NSA and there is the always the obvious suspects the Clintons and Obama. If Trump wants to drain the swamp that is how to do it.; 7/26/17, 10:24 AM
Earnest Prole said...: Like there aren't thirty more just like them in the federal bureaucracy to step in and take up where they left off.; 7/26/17, 10:27 AM
Mike Sylwester said...: If President Trump gets rid of Jeff Sessions, Rob Rosenstein and Robert "The FBI White-Washer" Mueller, then he will be accused of covering up a real investigation.

To collapse that accusation, Trump should declassify and release to the public all of the evidence that exists in this bogus investigation.

Let the public investigate the investigators and see for itself that the investigation is bogus.

Here is a start in declassifying documents.

* The FISA application of June 2016, along with all supporting documents and the FISA judge's decision.

* The transcripts of the conversations between National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyakov.

* All memoranda and communications written by Acting Attorney General Sally Yates claiming that those conversations made Flynn vulnerable to RUSSIAN BLACKMAIL for violating the LOGAN ACT.

* A timeline of the FBI's wire-tapping and surveillance of Kislyak, especially for the period after the election.

* All Internet-traffic data and analyses indicating that Russians tried to hack US election organizations' computer servers.

* All US government information about Christopher Steele's dossier and about the efforts of the FBI and other intelligence agencies to pay Steele.

* A comprehensive explanation from the new Director of National Intelligence that all 17 intelligence agencies did NOT participate in the report that the Russian government meddled in the US election.

* Any DNI memoranda that discussed whether the DNI should issue a public statement clarifying Hillary Clinton's campaign accusations that Trump was ignoring the findings of "all 17 intelligence agencies".

* The transcript of Kislyaks' telephone conversation about his talk with Sessions.

* A complete list of all staff members hired so far by Robert "The FBI White-Washer" Mueller for his investigation.

* A comprehensive description of all known personal and professional interactions between Mueller and his BFF "Crazy Comey the Leaker".

* All memoranda and analyses written so far by any Intelligence Community member about RussiaGate.

That's a good start. President Trump should continue to systematically declassify and release all intelligence information about RussiaGate as long as he continues to be accused of covering up the bogus investigation.; 7/26/17, 10:29 AM
cubanbob said...: Setting aside Trump and Sessions, where are the supposed Conservative Constitutional Republicans in Congress hiding with respects to civil asset forfeiture? Maybe they should stop bullshitting and ban the practice and only allow assets to be seized after a conviction upheld on appeal.; 7/26/17, 10:31 AM
Kevin said...: Sessions bailed out early on the Russia thing and left Trump with the weasels.

I understand why Trump is annoyed with him although the way he is doing this is unseemly.

Trump is actually mad at Sessions because he can still go after Clinton, Podesta, and the whole crew, but declines to do so. It's not just that he recused himself from the Russia investigation, but he seems to have recused himself from looking into any wrongdoing of the previous administration, that has Trump's attention of late.

The recusal was strike one. This is strike two. We'll see what turns into strike three.; 7/26/17, 10:31 AM
Mike Sylwester said...: I will add one more item to my list:

* All documents in the Intelligence Community that contain information about the activities, meetings and conversations of Jeff Sessions while he was a US Senator and until his occupying the position of US Attorney General.; 7/26/17, 10:35 AM
bgates said...: Who here defends it?

No, I said it's a policy favored by leftists. I agree that CAF is just about the most un-American policy in existence. Leftists are anti-American.; 7/26/17, 10:47 AM
Paddy O said...: Civil assets forfeiture is among the reasons I didn't trust Trump (and still don't) to be entirely on the side of the people. He's the sort of guy who will shake your hand at church then steal your land through shady (but vaguely legal) methods.

If progressives want to damage Trump then need to start hitting him with these kinds of issues, but the question is whether they disagree with Trump on this. Authoritarians gotta authoritate.; 7/26/17, 10:50 AM
Mike Sylwester said...: Mike Sylwester at 10:29 AM

* A timeline of the FBI's wire-tapping and surveillance of Kislyak, especially for the period after the election.

I want to elaborate on this item. I expect that a significant increase of wire-tapping and surveillance of Kislyak could be demonstrated to have occurred soon after the election of Donald Trump.

The purpose of the wire-tapping and surveillance was to catch Trump's associates, especially those being considered for appointments to positions in his upcoming administration.; 7/26/17, 10:55 AM
Unknown said...: 1. If he can, let Trump fire Sessions, Rothstein and Mueller.
2. Congress will immediately create an independent special counsel headed by Mueller.
3. As Sessions was part of Republican Congress until recently, the Republicans will vote for an independent special counsel.
4. Tillerson is already on the way out and will be followed by McMaster.
5. In the meantime, Government will come to a halt.

"The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind".; 7/26/17, 10:57 AM
Mike Sylwester said...: Any Trump associates caught communicating with Russian Ambassador Kislyak would be accused of violating the LOGAN ACT. This was Sally Yates' pet project.; 7/26/17, 10:58 AM
Unknown said...: He doesn't fire them for the same reason Mr Obama didn't produce his birth certificate (for such a long time), he gets a benefit from the chaos that ensues from the discussion. When Oprah Winfrey asked Trump about the birther issue years ago he replied that he believed there was a legitimate certificate and raised the question why Mr Obama didn't just produce it. Mr Trump plays pretty much the same game Mr Obama did.; 7/26/17, 11:01 AM
bleh said...: Trump must know that firing any of them could be disastrous, politically, so he would rather just complain about them and hope he gets his way. Though I sometimes wonder if the reason he's attacking Sessions and Rosenstein (and Mueller) is to bolster the perception of independence at the DOJ. In other words, the media will instinctively feel sympathy for those three and think of them a "beleaguered" public servants rather than lackeys. At least with Sessions, the strategy makes sense and probably won't backfire. Not so sure about Rosenstein and Mueller.; 7/26/17, 11:10 AM
Brando said...: I don't see it. Repeatedly trashing a guy who has been loyal from day one and stuck his neck out early sends a bad message to everyone else on the team.

Plus, if you really want to get rid of Sessions because of his recusal, maybe don't announce that that's your reason? Had he just quietly asked for Sessions' resignation, there'd be little uproar--Sessions was not loved by the Left, and much of the Right was starting to grumble about him (over the asset forfeiture thing). By saying it's because of the Russia recusal, you now have most Republicans and even a lot of Democrats squawking about this.

Maybe this is part of Althouse's "everything is secretly genius" theory, but it's also possible this is just a bad idea.; 7/26/17, 11:26 AM
Brando said...: Also--for Trump's complaint that Sessions "isn't going after Clinton enough", does he think everyone forgot that after the election Trump himself said he'd lay off Clinton? Who exactly is that meant to fool?; 7/26/17, 11:28 AM
Unknown said...: Re: Maybe this is part of Althouse's "everything is secretly genius" theory, but it's also possible this is just a bad idea.

You just gotta laugh-out-loud on the "everything is secretly genius". Sure it is.; 7/26/17, 11:58 AM
RichAndSceptical said...: It would be many months before a new AG could be sworn in.

Trump is trying to goad Sessions into being more proactive on defending the presidency.; 7/26/17, 12:05 PM
Birkel said...: I'm still laughing out loud at the secret genius that is Hillary Clinton.
Anybody know how long it will take to get her sworn into the presidency after they impeach Trump?

#Lefitsts; 7/26/17, 12:35 PM
Mike Sylwester said...: Mike Sylwester at 10:29 AM

* A comprehensive description of all known personal and professional interactions between Mueller and his BFF "Crazy Comey the Leaker".

I want to elaborate this item.

* A list of all instances when Mueller and Comey worked in the same location.

* Photocopies of all performance evaluations and recommendations that Mueller wrote or endorsed about Comey.

* All Justice Department or FBI public-relations photographs in which both Mueller and Comey appear.

President Trump should be completely open about ordering the assembly of such information. He should tweet out regular progress reports on this effort.; 7/26/17, 12:36 PM
Achilles said...: I stopped going to Hot Air just after the election. During the election I was only there to slag Allah and Ed. After they got bought out by Salem Inc. they went off the rails down the globalist track.

Ed and Allah are sellouts. Hot Air completely tanked during and just after the election. I would be surprised if they had 25% of the traffic they used to. Their comment section sure dried up.; 7/26/17, 12:45 PM
Achilles said...: Michael K said...

I understand why Trump is annoyed with him although the way he is doing this is unseemly.

A special prosecutor can only be appointed in response to a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

There is no CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION. No CRIME has been cited. No probable cause. Nothing.

There is a COUNTER INTELLIGENCE investigation. So far it has turned up NOTHING that even resembles a CRIME or is prosecutable in connection to the Trump campaign.

On it's face appointing a special prosecutor is UNLAWFUL in this situation. Rosenstein should resign and face censure for breaking the statute.

There is nothing keeping Sessions from firing Rosenstein and asking Mueller to resign and then firing him if he refuses. And the fact that Sessions hasn't cleaned house at the DOJ is mystifying. And he only now starts the leak investigation?

Sessions is a massive disappointment. If this kick in the ass gets him to shape up it is the least he deserves.; 7/26/17, 12:58 PM
Brando said...: "You just gotta laugh-out-loud on the "everything is secretly genius". Sure it is."

I used to mock Andrew Sullivan when he applied the same theory to everything Obama did ("3 dimensional chess!"). Althouse seems to be doing this with Trump. Sometimes a blunder is just a blunder.; 7/26/17, 1:12 PM
Otto said...: @ larvell
You are correct in that Trump appointed Rosenstein as Asst AG and that was not a smart move by Trump. However The person who appoints a special counsel is the AG. Sessions being a seasoned lawyer knew that and he also knew that when he recuses himself he gave the power to appoint a special counsel to Rosenstein. And remember Rosenstein made the special counsel decision almost immediately after the Session recusal. Trump was not wise but he didn't know that Sessions would recuse himself, thereby opening the door for the Democrats. Sessions is the real idiot here.; 7/26/17, 1:26 PM
Pinandpuller said...: Sessions, Rosenstein and Muller, how may I direct your call?; 7/26/17, 1:32 PM
Yancey Ward said...: I still think it likely Mueller wraps this up by the end of the Summer with no scalps to hang on the wall. The complete lack of evidence of collusion is still the elephant in the room, and I am still of the opinion that Mueller won't go beyond his initial remit. I think Mueller knew this when he took the job and it explains why he actually hired pretty hard-core Hillary! supporters as part of the team- he needed them as cover for the decision he already knew he would have to make in the end.

When he was nominated, my main concern about Sessions was this- he is 70 years old. Of the 70 year old and older men I know, essentially none of them are vigorous and able to focus on any task at all. It isn't that they are senile, it is just that stamina of all kinds is simply not there any longer. The quick recusal is simply a product of that- he simply didn't have the fight in him to refuse to do so.

Mike Sylvester is correct above, though- if I were Trump, I would start declassifying all the information that supposedly supports the collusion narrative with proper redacting where necessary to protect actual people in the field. Make it all subject to FOIA. I still believe, and have no reason to date to change that opinion, that the entire narrative rests on the claims by the DNC about their leaks and the Steele dossier- those two things were used to justify every thing else, and both are almost certainly fabrications in their entirety.; 7/26/17, 1:53 PM
Michael K said...: Sessions is a massive disappointment. If this kick in the ass gets him to shape up it is the least he deserves.

Driving to the barbershop this morning and listening to Rush.

His theory now is that this is a gambit by Trump to rehabilitate Sessions with the lefty Senators who are now defending him and attacking Trump for being mean to him.

Then, the theory goes, Sessions goes after leakers, mostly Obama holdovers, with felony charges. enforces immigration law and the left has now got to do a 1941 flip like the Hitler invasion did to communists.

I don't know if that is possible or a stretch.

Interesting theory.; 7/26/17, 2:33 PM
Hari said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/26/17, 2:46 PM
Hari said...: On any given day, the media needs something Trump related to be hysterical about.
Trump is accommodating, but he is moving the focus to more and more trivial issues.
We've gone from impeach Trump because he colluded with the Russians to Trump is tweeting outrageous stuff.
The media no longer even covers Trump's enforcement of immigration laws.
No more stories about people being deported.
Now the saddest story of the day is what mean thing Trump said to a professional politician.; 7/26/17, 2:47 PM
Brando said...: "His theory now is that this is a gambit by Trump to rehabilitate Sessions with the lefty Senators who are now defending him and attacking Trump for being mean to him."

Why would those lefty Senators not turn right on Sessions again once Sessions starts doing Trump's bidding? They're only "defending" Sessions now because they think Trump is just trying to cover up for Russiagate (a theory helped by Trump actually saying his problem wish Sessions is due to the Russia recusal).; 7/26/17, 3:19 PM
Patrick Henry was right! said...: Sessions is in on it. Duh.; 7/26/17, 3:27 PM
Michael K said...: "The media no longer even covers Trump's enforcement of immigration laws. "

I think that is the point.

"Why would those lefty Senators not turn right on Sessions again once Sessions starts doing Trump's bidding?"

I think his theory, which is supported by lefty commenters here, is that the hysteria is multidirectional.

Stealth immigration enforcement.; 7/26/17, 3:27 PM
johns said...: I believe that Obama kept the birther thing going by refusing to release his long form birth certificate because birtherim helped him. And Trump keeps the Russia idiocy going because it helps him by covering up the other work that is being done. Front page of the NYT today had a story titled something like "Trump is destroying the EPA." It appears to be gone now. Front page is dominated by transgender hysteria.
If not for the Russia, transgender and other hysteria stories, the media would be running non-stop with condemning Trump for EPA deregulation and immigration policy.
So I continue to hope that there is an actual plan here that Trump is executing.; 7/26/17, 3:38 PM
Michael K said...: "I continue to hope that there is an actual plan here that Trump is executing>"

Me too.

He has a long history with TV.; 7/26/17, 3:50 PM
gadfly said...: In fact, since the mind of Donald Trump and the reasons, or lack thereof, of his public actions is indiscernible to the sane among us. We really do not know why he has attacked Sessions except that he may imagine that acceptance by the public give him permission to ignore the rule of law altogether (something that I have believed he always does anyway).

Trump says he was wronged because Sessions did not tell him that he would recuse himself from any Russian investigation - but the subject of Russia was not an issue at the time of Session's appointment because Trump and his family had denied any connection to the Communists.

And the finger-pointing by Trump at Sessions in the matter of prosecuting Hillary's wrongdoings (which Trump talked about every day in the campaign) and the Clinton Crime Family Trust - was put on hold by DJT himself because she had suffered enough already.; 7/26/17, 3:58 PM
Michael K said...: "put on hold by DJT himself because she had suffered enough already."

Maybe he is operating on theory of fighting forest fires, which this whole thing resembles.

Heard of "backfires ?"; 7/26/17, 4:01 PM
johns said...: Speculation about Trump's strategy is getting a lot of discussion at JOM today.; 7/26/17, 4:42 PM
Night Owl said...: Welcome back to the reality show, "Trump: The Presidency". To recap: in act one, against incredible odds, our protangonist beat 16 candidates to become the GOP presidential nominee and then went on to win the election!

We are now in act two, where things look bleak for our president. His administration is in chaos... He is surrounded by his enemies... Is he losing his mind?... Will he be impeached?... Isn't anybody going to help that poor man?

In upcoming act three-- After months and months of digging by an army of lawyers into Trump's past, and after much nail-biting on the part of the anxious public, will any actual high crimes and misdemeanors be uncovered-- or maybe just enough "appearances" of impropriety-- that the majority-GOP congress impeach the president? Or will the president be vindicated, yet again?

Stay tuned!; 7/26/17, 6:12 PM
Night Owl said...: Whatever the reason for the never-ending investigation of a democratically-elected president-- who hasn't even served out his first year-- based on no evidence of any crime but merely innuendo and accusations, and no evidence that the election was tampered in any way that would have affected the outcome, half the country is going to be extremely unhappy at the end of it. We should brace ourselves for a bumpy road ahead.

Our leaders in DC, and their lackeys in the media, are a disgrace. They're willingly tearing this country apart, because the current producer and director of the reality show that is DC politics-- the one chosen by we the people-- is not the one they wanted.; 7/26/17, 6:13 PM
Ralph L said...: half the country is going to be extremely unhappy at the end of it.
You mean half of the 5-10% that care enough to pay any attention.

The NeverTrumpers are lose-lose regardless.; 7/26/17, 6:36 PM
Joe said...: One argument is that Trump has some sort of strategy going on. Perhaps, but his behavior indistinguishable from a clueless blowhard.; 7/26/17, 11:49 PM
Wince said...: I tend to think Session is "colluding" with Trump in this.; 7/27/17, 4:30 AM
Pharmer said...: "Otto said...
Trump is perfectly correct in being annoyed with Sessions. This idiot didn't have the foresight or political acumen to replace double crosser Rothstein with a republican deputy AG before recusing himself. He alone due to his stupidity has allowed the Democrats through Rosenstein to handcuff Trump. Drain the swamp."
This was perfect...
The whole Mueller investigation could have been avoided had Sessions been a little more concerned with Trump and MAGA and not so worried about his own "now tarnished" reputation. I feel history will not shine a favorable light on his actions.; 7/27/17, 12:18 PM