Washington Post, "Sessions considering second special counsel to investigate Republican concerns, letter shows":
In response [to an inquiry from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)], Assistant Attorney General Stephen E. Boyd wrote that Sessions had “directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate certain issues raised in your letters,” and that those prosecutors would “report directly to the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, as appropriate, and will make recommendations as to whether any matters not currently under investigation should be opened, whether any matters currently under investigation require further resources, or whether any matters merit the appointment of a Special Counsel.”New York Times, "Justice Dept. to Weigh Inquiry Into Clinton Foundation":
The letter appeared to be a direct response to Mr. Trump’s statement on Nov. 3, when he said he was disappointed with his beleaguered attorney general, Jeff Sessions, and that longstanding unproven allegations about the Clintons and the Obama administration should be investigated.
Any such investigation would raise questions about the independence of federal investigations under Mr. Trump. Since Watergate, the Justice Department has largely operated independently of political influence on cases related to the president’s opponents.....
Posts
169 comments:
Special counsel for Hillary's crimes? They are gonna need a bigger number of counsels!
Uranium One?
What's in YOUR wallet, Hillary?
I am Laslo.
We already know Clinton broke the law, Comey acknowledged as much. If a new special counsel is needed, it's to investigate Holder, Lynch, Comey and Mueller's involvement in Uranium One, the Clinton email investigation, the Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting, Fast and Furious, etc.
...and that longstanding unproven allegations about the Clintons and the Obama administration should be investigated.
I don't recall the phrase unproven allegations popping up in their coverage of Trump/Russia collusion. I wonder why?
Since Watergate, the Justice Department has largely operated independently of political influence on cases related to the president’s opponents.
HAHAHAHAHA
We also need a special counsel for Comey and his leaks, and whether he coordinated and conspired with Rosenstein.
"Any such investigation would raise questions about the independence of federal investigations under Mr. Trump. Since Watergate, the Justice Department has largely operated independently of political influence on cases related to the president’s opponents....."
Yeah, that one does NOT pass the smell test... Pretty hilarious though.
http://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/
Bill should be in jail for rape. Hillary, for corrupt money grubbing with foreign entities and ruining Haiti. Because the Clintons care about blacks. Terry McAuful should be investigated, too. He's just another Clinton.
Hivemind *no! It's not true. Our leaders are wonderful and we don't believe Fox News.*
The No Reasonable Prosecutor rule is in effect!
Any such investigation would raise questions about the independence of federal investigations under Mr. Trump. Since Watergate, the Justice Department has largely operated independently of political influence on cases related to the president’s opponents...
Unlike the Obama DoJ that outsourced the task to FusionGPS?
At least the WaPo notes the letter was in response to an "inquiry from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte."
Will Rosenstein have to recuse himself?
A Republic, if you can keep it.
Lots of hand-wringing that Trump promised not to prosecute Hillary. For which I don't recall any of them praising him, BTW. It's her due, doncha know.
Trump's declaration was intentionally limited, as it should be.
There are 3 women talking to reporters right now about being harassed and molested by the Special Prosecutor.
So the lack of any direct evidence against Trump colluding with the Russians on the election is cause for Impeachment, but direct, verifiable evidence of Clinton's corruption is "inconclusive" according to "http://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/"
Up is down, left is right, and Mini-Truth says it is time for the next 5-minute hate.
"Hivemind *no! It's not true. Our leaders are wonderful and we don't believe Fox News.*"
The commenters at the WP are in complete denial and the standard response is something like "This is just retaliation for the Russia probe". Now we see what the Russia probe was really for: preemptive strike. Sort of like the slogan "Bush Lied" prepared the sheep to accept any and all lies from Democrats. Info Wars indeed.
Does this disgust you? Then you must be a Democrat.
I seem to recall that Hillary supposedly screamed at a campaign aide "if he wins, we will all hang". I hope she is right.
Hmm,
Here's an idea-
A permanently embodied ombudsman run by a coalition of State governments to conduct constant investigations of the "permanent" portions of the Federal Government.
This will not add to government efficiency, but perhaps will keep them too busy and preoccupied to harass the people.
They are going to need a bigger counsel. Anybody know of any former US Attorney willing to fight who will be looking for work in 2 months?
So no special counsel because Trump thinks there should be one. Right, got it. Dems always right and Rep always wrong.
"Since Watergate, the Justice Department has largely operated independently of political influence on cases related to the president’s opponents....."
What about the President's friends?
You would think that even the MSM would get tired of protecting the Clintons at some point. After all, it doesn't mean they can't continue to trash Trump at every opportunity. It would also be a good way for them to remove Herself from 2020 contention. But I guess protection mode is just a kneejerk reaction for them at this point.
The assumption that it's "political" is probably not that accurate. As more details have emerged about a clearly corrupt transaction between the Clintons and Russia, it would be malfeasance for the Executive branch to ignore this. Why should they not investigate this? The Obama administration was clearly a politically driven dept. It's a fact that all Attorney Generals are the most political of all Cabinet members. This talk about a fantasy of the Justice dept being independent is laughable. A large number of people want an investigation.
No. Apparently the biggest story of the day is Donald Trump Jr. got a whole bunch of messages from Wikileaks and actually answered 3 of them. OMG.
Once again, can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?
What you really need is a Mongol invasion of Washington DC and portions of Maryland and Northern Virginia.
But you will have to be really nice to the Mongols for taking the trouble.
Just for the record could someone tell me exactly how many times the Clintons have been 'investigated'.
But Obama wouldnt have had to berate Holder into anything.
A wink and a nudge at best.
Actually it would have come from Jarrett.
can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?
I can imagine but the Obama AG was spending most of his time investigating Obama's political opponents along with the IRS, the FBI and the rest of the Obama regime. He needed no "berating."
Since Watergate, the Justice Department has largely operated independently of political influence on cases related to the president’s opponents.....
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
If Clinton has done nothing wrong then she should welcome a full and fair investigation into the Uranium One transaction. What's she afraid of? What are her sycophants afraid of?
Michael K, that is right wing fantasy.
How many times have the Clintons been investigated?
Just once afaik, the long, long process under Starr in the 1990s, handling various matters. A very effective series of strategic diversions in retrospect. There was no desire to find malfeasance.
But something was being done of course.
"Michael K, that is right wing fantasy"
A lot of people involved took the Fifth for a fantasy.
It would be nice if Sessions would stop thinking about doing things and actually start doing them.
"Once again, can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents"
Yeah, this Russian investigation appeared out of thin air.
Once again, can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?
Are you suffering from the delusion that Obama did not interfere in investigations in a very public and prejudicial way? Do you not recall the following statements, just for starters?
"There's not even a smidgen of corruption" behind Internal Revenue Service targeting...
President Obama said Sunday that Hillary Clinton showed “carelessness” by using a private email server, but he also strongly defended his former secretary of state, saying she did not endanger national security...
There is much much more of course.
Where is Chuck? Hillary Rodham Clinton needs defending.
This is going to blow up in Trump’s orange face. If a special prosecutor is installed it will look like a political witch hunt and at the same time he will no longer able to whine about the investigation into his campaign. If his own Attorney General does not give into pressure by Trump then that will give Clinton a clean bill of health while at the same time further deteriorate the relationship between Trump and Sessions.
My guess is that Sessions will tell Trump to go fuck himself.
NIK: "Once again, can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?"
You didn't really give this comment alot of thought before hitting "Publish Your Comment", did you?
LOL
Last time I checked, the FBI and Hillary actually paid a foreigner to work with Putins pals to create a fake dossier which was used as the inappropriate (illegal? The FISA court thinks so) basis for a FISA warrant in order to illegally spy on their domestic political opponents and then that information was routed throughout the intelligence services and illegally leaked to lefty/LLR friendly media outlets.
And that is just the beginning.
NIK: "If a special prosecutor is installed it will look like a political witch hunt..."
LOL
Tom Delay and Ted Stevens and Scooter Libby send their regards.
Again, try and engage whatever deeper thought processes you may possess before publishing.
If we had the rule of law (yeah, yeah, as if), there'd be no need for a "special" counsel, cuz, you know, prosecutors smelling rot would be right on it.
Since so far only one side has been playing the game, I'd say bring it on. While we're at it, investigate the criminal Mueller leaks.
Don’t you right wing nut jobs have some coffee machines you need to blow up?
My wife has many coffee machines, most in the garage.
I think we can spare a few, If I can find some right-wingers in San Francisco.
No Keurigs though. I dont know if we hate Krups these days.
I can’t tell sometimes if NY Times is being serious, or if they’re just having fun seeing how much they can infuse their pro-Democratic bias into everything. “Longstanding unproven” “raise questions” etc.
Sounds like a good thing to investigate. Obviously Trump should not push for it; it might look like he was trying to fulfill his campaign promises...
In general I am in favor of weaponizing every weapon the Democrats used against us. Let them understand the perils of weaponized government first-hand.
It's always fun to read Glenn Greenwald's articles pointing this out, and suggesting that the Democrats apologize for their sanctimonious hypocrisy.
Only afterwards it would be okay to reach across the aisle and pass some bipartisan legislation to prevent abuses that by then have been used to hurt both sides.
What we have with the present special counsel investigation, is essentially the FBI investigating itself.
There really should be another special counsel investigating the DNC related matters, but that cannot be done unless it is the Democratic Party that requests it.
In the end, the machinery of government depend on persons of good will operating it. Lacking that, it all degenerates innto B.S.
Now I Know! is going on about political witch hunts?
HAHAHAHAHAHA! Irony alet.
“A permanently embodied ombudsman run by a coalition of State governments to conduct constant investigations of the "permanent" portions of the Federal Government.
This will not add to government efficiency, but perhaps will keep them too busy and preoccupied to harass the people.”
We essentially have that with department and agency Inspector Generals, but it depends on the ruling party, and esp the President, having some shame. When IGs got too troublesome, turning up Obama Administration corruption, Obama just fired them. And didn’t bother replacing them. You heard about it on the conservative media (FNC, etc) but not in the MSM, which were supremely disinterested in what, exactly, the corruption was that was being covered up by the firings. Maybe that is the answer - you don’t need shame if you have them (the MSM) covering for you.
Once again, can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?
Investigating McCain and Romney? ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
Frankly, I think a special prosecutor should be appointed to look into the dealings of even administration as it walks out the door. It would go a long way toward keeping people operating within the law while they're in office.
So I not only applaud this move, I think we should make it a permanent feature.
Just for the record could someone tell me exactly how many times the Clintons have been 'investigated'.
This would be a more compelling argument if not for the New York Times' acknowledgement today that people dishonestly defended Bill Clinton against rape charges.
After months of berating us with claims of Trump's "collusion" with the Russians and the revelations to come from these intense investigations with no evidence at all to go on, NIK is now outraged - outraged I tell you! - at the thought of other such investigations which might look into whether the Democrat's interactions with Russia violated any laws.
Hypocrisy, thy name is NIK.
The next time you change your screen name, how about, "Yes I'm a Hypocrite, But Wait"?
Because now we all know....
Remember folks, it matters not what evidence there is: Now I know and the rest will strenuously defend the left. If we get a video that has drunk Hillary boasting "yeah, I had Seth Rich killed. Just like Vince Foster!" and a copy of an email from Hillary to Putin offering Alaska if she gets elected...
Our leftists would still demand no investigation. Witch hunt! Because only Democrats can investigate their political enemies. See the John Doe investigations in Wisconsin, which no doubt Now I know fully supports.
--Vance
This would be a more compelling argument if not for the New York Times' acknowledgement today that people dishonestly defended Bill Clinton against rape charges.
If he be tried they insist it be on the pages of the NYT, where words can be massaged to evoke exactly the right level of feelings and all manner of incarceration is unavailable.
"Now I Know! said...
Michael K, that is right wing fantasy."
Or, as the Left likes to call rape, a vast right-wing conspiracy.
Once again, can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?
He was too busy using the IRS to punish them.
Just for the record could someone tell me exactly how many times the Clintons have been 'investigated'.
Not enough.
The investigation leads where it leads, NIK, and it leads to Clinton. Even Mueller had to acknowledge that the Podestas were involved.
If he be tried they insist it be on the pages of the NYT, where words can be massaged to evoke exactly the right level of feelings and all manner of incarceration is unavailable.
I wasn't suggesting that the Time's has any integrity - of course it doesn't. I'm just observing that there's no good reason to infer Clintonian innocence from past "investigations".
Investigating the previous administration was the duty of new Roman proconsuls. The Spanish made it customary as well, new governors and viceroys investigated their predecessors.
This custom was not applied against the central government though. That was left to dictators with their powers of proscription, and the Emperors of course, who had dictatorial powers.
buwaya said...
What you really need is a Mongol invasion of Washington DC and portions of Maryland and Northern Virginia.
But you will have to be really nice to the Mongols for taking the trouble.
As long as they stop at the Anne Arundel County line.
It was in fact such a new governors investigation that stripped my ancestor of his concessions in the provinces he conquered for Spain, as previously arranged with Governor Claveria. He went to his deathbed litigating the question.
Else we would be extremely rich today. Live by the sword, die by the pen.
It’s fair to conclude that because of Broaddrick’s allegations, Bill Clinton no longer has a place in decent society. But we should remember that it’s not simply partisan tribalism that led liberals to doubt her. Discerning what might be true in a blizzard of lies isn’t easy, and the people who spread those lies don’t get to claim the moral high ground. We should err on the side of believing women, but sometimes, that belief will be used against us. - New York Times
An easy way to prevent the "right wings from using your own standards against you is to live up to them as best you can, and own and deal with your failures.
Sessions just testified a few minutes ago that there was not enough reason to appoint a Special Counsel regarding the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One.
If a special prosecutor is installed it will look like a political witch hunt
To be fair, it'll be in pursuit of a political witch.
One who's committed a lot of crimes, too.
It wasn't that hard, for anybody but Chuck and the various liberals here to figure out that Juanita was telling the truth, and the New York Times carefully shields their readers from the testimony of this woman who found her crying, bleeding, and with torn clothes.
But I am sure that this time they are innocent, and it's all a right-wing smear job.
Sessions just testified a few minutes ago that there was not enough reason to appoint a Special Counsel regarding the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One.
Better to wait until she's the Democratic nominee in 2020.
As the Menendez trial is demonstrating, it is very difficult to prove quid pro quo bribery. Here, when the alleged bribes are going to another entity (to which POTUS has himself donated in the interest of currying influence), it is hard to imagine a prosecutor concluding he or she could make a case beyond a reasonable doubt.
"It’s fair to conclude that because of Broaddrick’s allegations, Bill Clinton no longer has a place in decent society."
I believe Broaddrick, but the reasoning encapsulated in this sentence is absolute lynch-mob insanity. The attainment of which is the only reason The Left would now throw the Clintons under the bus.
I think now that The Atlantic and the New York Times have come out that Bill Clinton most likely committed violent rape, Hillary Rodham Clinton is toast.
Her main qualification for every job was being his enabler, error, I mean wife.
Once you believe Juanita, the other stories, from the rape as a student at Oxford, to Paula Jones doesn't seem that hard.
Covering up Bill Clinton's misbehavior inoculated Trump against scrutiny of his own possible naughtiness. If the Dems clean their own house, that might leave Trump vulnerable to attack on the hanky-panky front.
witch hunt away. The clintons are criminals and it's long past time they pay.
Only hive mind moral degenerates believe the clintons are innocent.
These trolls who denied Clinton's guilt while prattling on about Trump's far less disturbing behavior, though still objectionable, just showed it was all about scalp hunting.
We never had a choice on that issue other than the lesser of two evils.
The question re Broaddrick is not whether Clinton is fit for decent society, but whether the society that accepted him has ever been decent.
Now I Know! said...
can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?
11/14/17, 9:29 AM
Sure can. The AG works FOR the President and he/she/xe/xi/ze can direct the AG to start or stop any investigation at any time. Specifically to your comment, Obama never had to as the AG "knew" what he wanted and willingly did it (i.e. attack the right and protect the left).
Sessions just testified a few minutes ago that there was not enough reason to appoint a Special Counsel regarding the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One.
Sessions also didn't think there was enough reason to appoint a Special Counsel regarding Trump's alleged collusion with the Russians.
And yet here we are.
can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?
Obama's AG was too busy covering the crimes of Obama's officeholders to do anything like that.
"Sessions just testified a few minutes ago that there was not enough reason" Memo to Jeff: the process is the punishment. If that's not enough reason for you, you're just conceding the game to the other side.
Sessions said it would be wrong to use the DOJ against political opponents.
“We will not be infected by politics or bias.”
Sessions
"It would also be a good way for them to remove Herself from 2020 contention."
-- The media wants her in and to win. Just like they did every other time she's ran.
Sessions is playing this just right. UnknownInga hardest hit.
"Once again, can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?"
-- He did get his administration to investigate his political opponents, using the IRS as one arm, while illegally wire tapping journalists and Congress. And, rightly, people were upset about this.
It’s truly amazing how so many of you are afraid Clinton will run in 2020. What are you afraid of? You should be thrilled if it were to come to pass, as she would surely lose again. The Democratic Party will not run her, the liberal and Democratic base don’t want her to run. Why are you folks still so obsessed with her? How very odd, Clinton Derangment Syndrome on steroids.
Sessions is doing his job, his testimony has been more beneficial to Democrats than to Trumpists, no one on my side is being “hit” by his testimony.
Really, it's the Left who want Hillary under the bus. It's in the interest of the GOP to keep her as the face of the Resistance, and as the candidate in 2020.
Wrong for Republicans, SOP for Democrats.
“It's in the interest of the GOP to keep her as the face of the Resistance, and as the candidate in 2020.”
Go right ahead, I don’t think the GOP has a clue anymore what is in their best interests. This continuous obsession with Clinton just makes you folks a laughing stock. The Resistance is much bigger than Clinton.
The big takeaway here is that Sessions knows history will not be kind to him if he follows the directives of Trump. He will continue to do his job as the Attorney General lawfully ( it appears) until Trump gets the balls to fire him.
"history will not be kind to him"
Its interesting who "history" is "kind" to.
Normally not kind to milquetoasts.
I mean, really. look it up.
Sessions said it would be wrong to use the DOJ against political opponents.
So Dems can violate any law during the Trump Administration without fear of prosecution because any attempt to prosecute them will be seen as political opportunism?
Didn't seem to work that way when Obama was in office.
"If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly."
Martin Luther
“We will not be driven by politics...”
Sessions
Good for you AG Sessions, as it should be.
He should’ve never lied for Trump or associated himself with Trump. I’m quite sure he’ll regret (probably already has) it for the rest of his life. I feel bad for him, but he should’ve known better.
"When IGs got too troublesome, turning up Obama Administration corruption, Obama just fired them."
-- And smeared them as senile.
The big takeaway here is that Sessions knows history will not be kind to him if he follows the directives of Trump. He will continue to do his job as the Attorney General lawfully ( it appears) until Trump gets the balls to fire him.
The big takeaway here is that Sessions has shown himself to be independent of Trump in UnknownInga's eyes.
He is now free to follow the law, whether the direction pleases Trump or not, without UnknownInga calling him out for politicization.
Well done, Jeff!
Unknown: "This continuous obsession with Clinton just makes you folks a laughing stock."
How dare the republicans even think about the Democrat nominee for President and most powerful democratic family.
I mean, that would be like obama and the dems talking about the Bush family for years after obama was elected......oh, right.
Fabi: "Sessions is playing this just right. UnknownInga hardest hit."
Quite right.
I fully expect an appointment of a special counsel with Sessions doing the "I'm just a simple country lawyer who had professional investigators look into these matters and they have recommended we open an investigation".
After all, RUSSIA hacked our election eleventy!!1! and we need to look at everything they were up to!
Fusion GPS/Clinton Campaign has already fessed up to quite a bit of skullduggery with Putins pals. Why not get to the bottom of it dems?
If you are innocent there is nothing to fear, eh?
Suddenly, our lefty pals seem extraordinarily reluctant to get to the bottom of these Russia matters.
Very, very suddenly.
Very.
"Why are you folks still so obsessed with her?"
-- You do know she stood up a PAC, as candidates tend to do, and that she has been taking other actions that tend to point towards running again, right? If not, take some time to get caught up on current events.
"Fusion GPS/Clinton Campaign has already fessed up to quite a bit of skullduggery with Putins pals."
-- Eh, they've admitted to paying a foreign agent to conduct espionage on political, American opponents. At this point, there is no reason to treat the Clinton campaign as legitimate. People should be facing consequences.
"Why are you folks still so obsessed with her?"
Ask Donna Brazile.
Here is how far off UnknownInga is on this issue:
Did Sessions say he didn't see a reason to investigate the Clintons? Seems reasonable. I'll take her word for it.
But in reading the parts of the article Althouse pulled out for us today, it's clear he has launched investigations into these areas and is expecting those investigators to report back and make recommendations to him at a future date.
And when they do, might Sessions have information which changes his opinion? And will he have depoliticized the issue with his statements today?
By UnknownInga's own admission, he has.
Well done, Jeff Sessions, well done.
Unkown,as the New York Times pointed other generally, finds contemplation of his own hypocrisy, and what might have caused it, "painful."
So he would like to pretend that decades of his side covering up crimes and smearing victims, obvious to everyone, and the thing that blunted the whole Access Hollywood tape, never happened.
"So he would like to pretend that decades of his side covering up crimes and smearing victims, obvious to everyone, and the thing that blunted the whole Access Hollywood tape, never happened."
-- The consequences, they were unexpected.
Sessions just a minute ago, said he “has to follow the rules of the DOJ”, when asked about again about a Special investigator for the Clinton.
“Attorney General Jeff Sessions threw cold water Tuesday on Republicans clamoring for the Department of Justice to appoint a special counsel to investigate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) pressed Sessions on why it had taken the Justice Department months to hint, as it did Monday, at the prospect of considering a special counsel to probe years-old matters connected to Clinton.
Jordan said he thought evidence unearthed in the last year about how FBI decided not to charge Clinton over her handling of classified information at the State Department appeared to be enough to warrant a special counsel.”
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/14/jeff-sessions-no-trump-influence-doj-clinton-244885?lo=ap_b1
“Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Tuesday that it would be inappropriate to pursue leads that linked the State Department then headed by Hillary Clinton to giving control of large amounts of U.S. uranium to the Kremlin.”
“I have not been improperly influenced and would not be improperly influenced” by President Donald Trump, Sessions reportedly said during a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee.
“I would say the Department of Justice can never be used to retaliate politically against opponents, and that would be wrong,” Sessions told Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) when asked why no special counsel has been appointed to follow the Clinton/Kremlin leads.”
https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2017/11/14/sessions-doesnt-believe-needs-special-council-investigate-clintons-kremlin-uranium-deal/
"Sessions just testified a few minutes ago that there was not enough reason to appoint a Special Counsel regarding the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One."
This is incorrect.
“This is incorrect.”
No it’s absolutely correct. Haven’t you been watching the hearing? I have.
Yes I did and you are wrong.
“Sessions added that he feels there’s not enough evidence to pursue an investigation into the Clinton State Department.
“‘Looks like’ is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel,” Sessions said.”
https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2017/11/14/sessions-doesnt-believe-needs-special-council-investigate-clintons-kremlin-uranium-deal/
“Yes I did and you are wrong.”
No you are wrong. We could go back and forth a few more times, lol. You are trying, it seems, to read something into his testimony he clearly did not say.
The Republicans are like a drunk at a roulette table. They keep thinking, 'if we just spin it one more time we'll be winners'. This time they can't even win anything, they're just going through the motions out of habit. They need help, desperately.
Do we *have* to have more investigations? ARM makes a good point. Everyone has known that Hillary Clinton hasn't got an honest bone in her body since her cattle trading days. She has become a billionaire by selling favors from the office Obama gave her as a booby prize in the 2008 campaign. Can't we just lock her up without further todo?
Obama; "You're lockable enough, Hillary. No doubt about it."
I suppose it all has to be legal. Plus, that way we can lock up the Podestas too.
Jordan said that it "looks like" this that and the other happened and later Sessions said that "looks like" is not enough reason to appoint a special counsel (as per your quote).
In this he is obviously correct. He was noncommittal on whether or not he agreed with the need for a special council but said that he would follow department policy which does not base that decision on "looks like" assertions.
buwaya said...
What you really need is a Mongol invasion of Washington DC and portions of Maryland and Northern Virginia.
But you will have to be really nice to the Mongols for taking the trouble.
We wont need their help.
“The Department of Justice can never be used to retaliate politically against opponents. That would be wrong,” Sessions said when asked about Trump’s tweets calling on the DoJ to investigate his former rival in the 2016 presidential race.
“The president speaks his mind. He is bold and direct about what he says,” Sessions added. “We do our duty every day based on the facts.”
Trump and Republicans have been clamoring for the DoJ to examine the sale of a uranium company to a Russian agency in 2010. The deal, which was approved by the state department when Clinton was at its helm, has been newly seized upon by Trump and Republicans despite no evidence of impropriety.
Sessions said appointing a separate special counsel to investigate Clinton would require “a factual basis”.
In a heated exchange with Jim Jordan, a Republican congressman from Ohio who asked what it would take to appoint a special counsel to investigate allegations against Clinton, Sessions said: “We will use the proper standards, and that’s the only thing I can tell you.
“You can have your idea, but sometimes we have to study what the facts are, and to evaluate whether it meets the standards it requires.”
A fiery Jordan continued to allege misconduct by Clinton. Citing additional reports that her campaign and the Democratic national committee funded the Fusion GPS dossier into Trump’s ties to Russia, Jordan maintained it “looks like” there was enough evidence to warrant naming a second special counsel.
Sessions tersely responded: “I would say ‘looks like’ is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/14/jeff-sessions-special-counsel-hillary-clinton
Thank you for your work in backing-up my 12:30 comment.
“We wont need their help.”
Ooooo the big scary tough talkin’ internet revolutionary again. You’re a joke.
It's a quandary. To argue with a troll or to let a false assertion stand unchallenged.
“Thank you for your work in backing-up my 12:30 comment.”
Which accurately reflected my comment that you refuted.LOL!
The left is already throwing the Clintons under the bus today. They are just tools of the real problem. The same people that own the media own the Clintons. There will be no tears shed for them.
They were well paid tools to be sure but they were not players. In fact I will bet their masters hang them out to dry for Hillary's failures in the election. My guess is the Clintons will end up being the flag the real players wave in front of the bull to keep themselves safe before it is over.
Rabel: "In this he is obviously correct. He was noncommittal on whether or not he agreed with the need for a special council but said that he would follow department policy which does not base that decision on "looks like" assertions."
Correct. Sessions is waiting until he receives the reports from his investigators.
Why would he commit to a course of action prior to examining the evidence gathered by his investigators? I mean, who do you take him for, James Comey?!
“It's a quandary. To argue with a troll or to let a false assertion stand unchallenged.”
Not everyone who disagrees with the majority here is a troll. You seem to have issues with definitions and comprehension.
So, Unknown, are you saying that, if a Democrat is President, the DOJ cannot investigate Republicans?
Because it sure sounds like that's the inevitable conclusion of what you're saying. If Trump's DOJ is not allowed to investigate Democrats, why are Dems allowed to investigate Republicans?
Sessions said appointing a separate special counsel to investigate Clinton would require “a factual basis”.
Sessions tersely responded: “I would say ‘looks like’ is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel.”
Both true. But he's already put out the feelers to create "a factual basis" and gather evidence to move beyond "looks like", and to receive recommendations from career prosecutors as to whether he should appoint a Special Prosecutor.
Assistant Attorney General Stephen E. Boyd wrote that Sessions had “directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate certain issues raised in your letters,” and that those prosecutors would “report directly to the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, as appropriate, and will make recommendations as to whether any matters not currently under investigation should be opened, whether any matters currently under investigation require further resources, or whether any matters merit the appointment of a Special Counsel.”
It's all right there for people who have the interest and capacity to read.
Althouse, as usual, did the work for you.
“Correct. Sessions is waiting until he receives the reports from his investigators.”
Keep hope alive.
Achilles: "The left is already throwing the Clintons under the bus today."
Indeed.
I guarantee that in 6 months Hillary, Bill and Harvey Weinstein will have been secret republicans all along.
Of course, the pictures will all have to be "touched up", lots of news stories/articles/analysis will have to be altered and quite a bit of history will have to be re-written by the new Ministers of Truth.
But then again, those are precisely the skills the left has spent a hundred years perfecting.
Unknown: "Keep hope alive."
So now you are officially taking the position that Sessions does not have anyone looking into these matters?
Once again, can you imagine Ann’s and her right wing readership’s reaction if President Obama tried to berate his Attorney General into investigating his political opponents?
He didn't need to berate them. They did it all on their own.
Not everyone who disagrees with the majority here is a troll.
It's not an issue of whether one disagrees. Everyone worth their comments disagrees with the majority from time to time here.
The issue is whether one is responsive to the other arguments, or simply repeats her ideas with increasing emphasis until she quits in disgust.
It's not the other commenters but the writer herself who determines her trollness.
I don't think we need a special counsel. I think that the DOJ should simply do its job and have an honest man at DOJ conduct the investigation.
If we can gather up Diogenes, his barrel, his lamp and his dogs we may be able to find one eventually.
Pardon me, but looking at all of the miasma unfold over the last twelve years or more outside the territorial waters of the lower forty-eight, it begins to look, more and more, like the classic Kirk Douglas 1964 thriller, Seven Days In May: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058576/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Now in that telling, the wonderful John Frankenheimer "coup d'etat" thriller had the Army seeking to takeover the country because there was a president in power who wanted to cut back on nukes. Ironically, it is a military officer, (Douglas) who saves the day.
Suppose that in this case, it was the President (current and Former) who wanted the Good Ole' Days of exploitation, swag, and pussy was there for the taking although a little bit of polish, if not pure power, was needed in certain cases. They plot to throw the election by demonizing their opponent, a fucking clown, and putting the blond bimbo behind the desk and party hearty for the next eight years. What could POSSIBLY go wrong??
Look. Everybody's been helping themselves to swag for the last thirty or forty years. Business is done in the bar at the annual professional convention of your choice. For the last twelve years, the cultural dissonance has accrued more compression than the Great Earthquake Fault Line Through Hollywood--easy to see from outside; hard to see from inside.
Or so it seemed.
What happened last year, and continues through today, is that the electoral college, perhaps the most WIDELY misunderstood institution in the US, SUDDENLY meant something. Like the Great Harry Sheldon himself, holographing in from the past, being elected to THIS college really meant something--the American Revolution. DUH. The Party is OVER.
That's what everyone is starting to realize. Cleaning the SWAMP is not just Foggy Bottom. The Tar Pit is just as messy.
It's like standing on the side of a highway and watching a collision between speeding vehicles unfold in spellbindingly slow motion. We have the privilege of watching an archetypal tragedy with Biblical overtones unfold in heretofore unimagined pagentry.
Good News. Keep right on going. What a show!
"The left is already throwing the Clintons under the bus today."
I'm a bit surprised but at the same time it's obviously opportunistic because they want the Clintons to go away.
I assume part of the problem has always been the risk of collateral damage. Who else will end up being brought down if the dam really breaks?
And then how far are they willing to go? If Hill and Bill keep wandering around like zombies, will they go for the headshot by exposing Bill's escapades with Epstein? Probably a lot of risk for other powerful people if that all comes out. Could be exponentially worse than the Weinstein scandal because of pedophilia and human trafficking.
So I don't know...I suspect there will be a few more calls for "accountability and then it will quietly fade away.
From The Guardian:
[Sessions] nonetheless demurred when asked to explicitly say whether he had recused himself from any such inquiry into Clinton at the moment.
“To announce recusal in any investigation would reveal the existence of that investigation, and the top ethics officials have advised me I should not do so,” he said.
Look, I don't care if you cucks insist on sucking Trump's shriveled little chub of a cock if it hair-lips everyone on Bear Creek. If Hillary and the Clinton foundation goes down the tubes, that will be a great day for this country. Unfortunately, the higher up the food chain and the bigger the crime, it is more likely they will be rewarded and awarded for their treason. It's still Chinatown, Jake.
Without media support Hillary will go down quicker than an Alabama teenage beauty queen.
AReasonableMan said...
The Republicans are like a drunk at a roulette table. They keep thinking, 'if we just spin it one more time we'll be winners'. This time they can't even win anything, they're just going through the motions out of habit. They need help, desperately.
11/14/17, 12:37 PM
ARM, like a broken clock you are finally right but like the clock, for the wrong reasons. Because it is Democrats in the crosshairs you comfort yourself by framing it as Don Quixote going after windmills whereas the reality is that many/most Republicans still believe in justice and the rule of law and want to see it happen to the Clintons especially after they have committed so much "wrong" and gotten away with it. I view it as the Republicans continuing to fight the good fight regardless of how the odds are stacked against them actually ever getting justice. Glass half empty/half full I guess.
"Since Watergate, the Justice Department has largely operated independently of political influence on cases related to the president’s opponents..."
This is my shocked face (well I borrowed it from Sarah Hoyt). This is an incredibly ballsy statement considering how the last administration used DOJ.
Unknown said...
It’s truly amazing how so many of you are afraid Clinton will run in 2020.
I am praying that Hillary runs again!
You are an imbecile.
“Assistant Attorney General Stephen E. Boyd wrote that Sessions had “directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate certain issues raised in your letters,” and that those prosecutors would “report directly to the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, as appropriate, and will make recommendations as to whether any matters not currently under investigation should be opened, whether any matters currently under investigation require further resources, or whether any matters merit the appointment of a Special Counsel.”
No one is doubting that Sessions hasn’t directed his staff to look into all things Clinton. By Sessions testimony today, it appears that they have found no grounds on which to proceed with a Special Prosecutor. He was pretty clear that it would be a cold day in hell before a Special Prosecutor would be appointed. It’s kind of pathetic that you Rightists and Trumpists are still so invested in bringing down the Clintons. They are out of power. No one gives a shit about them. Except you who suffer so aggregiously with Clinton Drerangment Syndrome.
They need a “full effective detailed assessment” to proceed with a Special Counsel. It won’t happen and Sessions has signaled that pretty clearly.
Howard: "Look, I don't care if you cucks "
You have no idea what "cuck" actually means in a political sense do you? It only makes sense if you level it against the Left and the NeverTrump "conservatives."
The left has become so unimaginative and childish it can't even come up with original insults any more.
Do you really think that Sessions who is in deep shit already for lying about meeting with Russians regarding the Trump campaign, will throw away his reputation to be Trump’s little bitch? He will not stoop to prosecuting even his own boss’s political enemies for the sake of doing so.
Unknown: "Do you really think that Sessions who is in deep shit already for lying about meeting with Russians..."
LOL
One of his "meetings" was walking down a receiving line at a reception and shaking hands!
Howard: "It's still Chinatown, Jake."
Hard to argue with that.
Unknown: " It’s kind of pathetic that you Rightists and Trumpists are still so invested in bringing down the Clintons."
LOL
Unknown has just promoted Donna Brazile, the NYT, Chris Hayes, etc into the "Rightists and Trumpists" camp.
And here I was saying it would take at least 6 months for the insane leftists to do that. It only took Inga about 45 minutes.
I know exactly what "you people" think cuck means in a political sense. I'm just holding up a mirror, Wednesday, to see which of you gets triggered.
Howard: "I'm just holding up a mirror,..."
Well, could you steady up a bit? I'm getting vertigo.
Howard: "...to see which of you gets triggered"
I refuse to be triggered prior to the cocktail hour.
-50 Internets for not using cucktail hour.
Matthew Sablan: "-50 Internets for not using cucktail hour."
-100 Quatloos!
Why are our lefties so upset this week -- did they forget about their "wave" of election victories last week?
Why are our lefties so upset this week...
1. They recognize they have been so wrong about Trump causing economic devastation. The talking point they so desperately covet isn't materializing. Though they don't understand how it will happen they are worried tax reform will happen and help people.
2. Russia is backfiring. Watergate is really more of a noun than a verb.
2. There's a leftie Supreme that's sick or sick and tired. The vitamins they keep sending aren't working.
Unknown doesnt answer whether she will be consistent and deny Democrats the ability to sic the DOJ on Republicans, since that would also be "weaponizing justice" against the President's political opponents.
This is my shocked face.
Oh, you meant our lefties? Who knows...wrestling with captcha?
Howard said...
I know exactly what "you people" think cuck means in a political sense. I'm just holding up a mirror, Wednesday, to see which of you gets triggered.
You should turn the mirror around if you want us to see ourselves. Idiot.
Do we know what is DOJ guidance on
it is a ham sandwich?!
Vs.
it does look like a ham sandwich?!
I just watched Sessions answering Conyer's questions. His statements are not as the leftist media and the leftists here are portraying them.
First Conyer's is going Senile. Strom Thurmond had more wits about him at the end.
Second the left has already cut the diseased Clinton arm off. It is clear Sessions is going to appoint a special counsel and they all know what is coming. Do they think they can save Obama from facing his criminality? And the IRS/FBI/EPA and other weaponized federal agencies are going to look to cauterize this wound.
Why are our lefties so upset this week?
I think they're oh-so-slowly recognizing what the belated acknowledgment of the Clintons' criminality reveals about the Clintons' voters.
(Inga will probably figure it out in a week, when she'll pirouette back from "'Looks like' isn't enough" to shrieking "The investigation's not over!" at her cats.)
Like I predicted this mourning up thread, Sessions told Trump to go fuck himself.
Now I Know! said...
11/14/17, 2:53 PM
You appear to be ad-libbing quite a bit there. Issues with reading comprehension? Or is it just wishful thinking?
“I think they're oh-so-slowly recognizing what the belated acknowledgment of the Clintons' criminality reveals about the Clintons' voters.”
What lefties are upset this week? This has been a very good week for the Left. Not so for you Trumpists and rightists. Good lord. You people really do live in an alternate realty. Sad!
Too bad Trump has been such an asshole to Sessions. Sessions may be getting his revenge on Trump for humiliating him. No Special Prosecution for you!
Well one can hope. The Clintonistas have long done many, many things which can't stand the light of day. So as long as we are engaging in political follies and warfare on the Potomac, bring it all on. There are sewer dwellers aplenty there.
Achillies: Does the conspiracy ideation help ease your simple mind when faced with a complex world or do you suffer from post-concussion syndrome. Joe Rogan had a great podcast last week about how fungi could help with Phil Stamets.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPqWstVnRjQ
The guy is just down the road from you in Olympia. Show him your dd214 and I am sure he can hook you up. Good Luck with That!
Drago: Speaking of triggered, where's Chuck? BTW, that TED talk Onion-style was classic, thanks.
Post a Comment