Exactly WHY am I or any other POC rooting for this racist Motherfucker? Tell me how my life will be worse is Sessions in gone.
I'm not rooting for him in any way, but I'm not sure want him fired just yet since he's virtually the only thing standing between #45 and unchecked power.
Eta: make no mistake, Sessions is dangerous and has already done damage and I will be more than glad to see him go.
Exactly WHY am I or any other POC rooting for this racist Motherfucker? Tell me how my life will be worse is Sessions in gone.
People are wrongly clinging to the belief that Meuller is safe from firing if he stays. He isn't. If 45 wants to fire him, he will. End of story. And I'm sick of the "well, xyz might/will be worse" Stop that damn nonsense!! It's foolish and shortsighted, and completely discounts what people are actually going through with this goddamn racist asshole in office.
Exactly WHY am I or any other POC rooting for this racist Motherfucker? Tell me how my life will be worse is Sessions in gone.
I don't think you should root for him. Sessions made his bed and he can lie in it. I understand the Mueller/Russia argument, but honestly this entire thing comes down to Congress growing a spine or getting voted out. It's just a matter of when. Trump fires Sessions and gets rid of Mueller? Well, then they need to decide sooner. Sessions/Mueller stays on, Mueller releases his results? Congress still has to decide. I don't see how a racist elf makes a difference.
I'm sure 45 has people waiting in the wings for a job. Any job.
Remember Jared hates Christie, because Christie prosecuted Daddy.ย
The whole administration is one giant knot. Meanwhile all we can do is watch this stupid game of chicken with 45/Sessions to see who will fold. Top this off with the healthcare vote today and I already need a drink.
Giuliani already made a statement that Sessions' recusal is the right call, so I don't see how Trump gets to a different place with him. I can't think of anyone worse than Sessions tbh, not even Cruz. I also agree that Mueller is as good as gone within a month no matter who is AG. Trump will Saturday Night Massacre as a Plan B.
Giuliani already made a statement that Sessions' recusal is the right call, so I don't see how Trump gets to a different place with him. I can't think of anyone worse than Sessions tbh, not even Cruz. I also agree that Mueller is as good as gone within a month no matter who is AG. Trump will Saturday Night Massacre as a Plan B.
Cruz is definitely an improvement over Sessions, but I don't see Trump picking Cruz. Trump's strategy has been to float "normal" choices, then appoint crackpots. Remember when we all thought Mitt Romney would be SoS?
I also don't see Cruz taking it. He's got way more power and job security as the senate's dick than he would as a chew toy in the Trump administration.
I'm hearing that Sessions supporters will break from Trump if he fires him. Did we know how much of Trumps base that may be?
I don't have an answer to that. I do hope he fires sessions because he thinks it will gain him favor with the people that dislike the elf (liberals) and it blows up in his face again.
I'm just over here thinking that it should all burn. If anything, firing Sessions would just show that Trump is running scared and can't keep control of his people. Sessions is a PHENOMENALLY bad choice for AG. I really don't think there's anyone worse 45 could appoint. Sessions has know-how and the smarts to do a lot of damage in his position. Whereas I think the damage could be mitigated with another less competent appointee.
Giuliani already made a statement that Sessions' recusal is the right call, so I don't see how Trump gets to a different place with him. I can't think of anyone worse than Sessions tbh, not even Cruz. I also agree that Mueller is as good as gone within a month no matter who is AG. Trump will Saturday Night Massacre as a Plan B.
Really? I can. What about Paul Lepage from Maine? or Rep Blake Farenthold? I'm not fan of Sessions but he's now where near the bottom of the GOP.
Even some of the old Trump folks could be in place and that are comparable to Sessions IMO. Newt, Huckabee, Santorum could all be on the table if we're talking about a recess appointment. Trump's show very little regard for respecting norms when it comes to qualifications for roles.
I'm hearing that Sessions supporters will break from Trump if he fires him. Did we know how much of Trumps base that may be?
What I'm really wondering is whether firing Sessions be enough to push the Senate to do something. Sessions - while disgusting - had relationships in the Senate and was not hated by his colleagues on a personal level the way Ted Cruz is. OTOH, they probably don't want to mess up their plans to destroy Medicaid and give tax breaks to millionaires.
Giuliani already made a statement that Sessions' recusal is the right call, so I don't see how Trump gets to a different place with him. I can't think of anyone worse than Sessions tbh, not even Cruz. I also agree that Mueller is as good as gone within a month no matter who is AG. Trump will Saturday Night Massacre as a Plan B.
Cruz is definitely an improvement over Sessions, but I don't see Trump picking Cruz. Trump's strategy has been to float "normal" choices, then appoint crackpots. Remember when we all thought Mitt Romney would be SoS?
I also don't see Cruz taking it. He's got way more power and job security as the senate's dick than he would as a chew toy in the Trump administration.
Maybe we'd get Newt Gingrich.
Now I'm wondering - is there any actual requirement that the attorney general be, you know, an attorney?
I don't want to fall into the trap of discussing "who could be worse than Sessions" because trump is so beyond the realm of normalcy. We are still talking about the possibilities like he's normal. He's not. I feel like he made some normal picks for his cabinet the first time around (all things considered, senators and congressmen are not crazy picks, even if Sessions himself is crazy), and I think now he regrets that and he's going to do what he wants. So when we float names like Cruz or even Giuliani.....I can see Trump putting freaking Kasowitz in there. Maybe that's why he stepped down from his legal team. But I think its going to be more like when he picked Tillerson for SoS after making Romney come crawling .I think he's going to make Cruz crawl to him and then be all, "nah."
Cruz is definitely an improvement over Sessions, but I don't see Trump picking Cruz. Trump's strategy has been to float "normal" choices, then appoint crackpots. Remember when we all thought Mitt Romney would be SoS?
I also don't see Cruz taking it. He's got way more power and job security as the senate's dick than he would as a chew toy in the Trump administration.
Maybe we'd get Newt Gingrich.
Now I'm wondering - is there any actual requirement that the attorney general be, you know, an attorney?
There is not. The only appointed position in the federal government that by law requires a person be an attorney is the job of Solicitor General, and that's because that person needs to be admitted to a bar to be able to go to court and argue for the administration. For every other position, there's no formal requirement. We've never needed a requirement because we've had leadership that abides by norms and picks qualified people to ensure Senate approval. So you know, they pick people with law degrees to do legal jobs. Trump wouldn't give a fuck if his pick was qualified and, as we've seen, neither do Senate Republicans.
Giuliani already made a statement that Sessions' recusal is the right call, so I don't see how Trump gets to a different place with him. I can't think of anyone worse than Sessions tbh, not even Cruz. I also agree that Mueller is as good as gone within a month no matter who is AG. Trump will Saturday Night Massacre as a Plan B.
But if Sessions recused himself for Russia connections, isn't it possible that a new AG could both say that Sessions was right to recuse himself but also that the new AG (and I'm not saying Giuliani specifically, just someone) does not need to recuse himself* because he does not have Russia connections? In other words, there is a logically consistent argument that is possible here.
I don't know what actually happens to Mueller if there is a non-recused AG.
*I wanted to write "him/herself" because I try to do that in my writing in general but to be realistic I'm confident that 45 wouldn't even consider a woman for his AG position.
Now I'm wondering - is there any actual requirement that the attorney general be, you know, an attorney?
There is not. The only appointed position in the federal government that by law requires a person be an attorney is the job of Solicitor General, and that's because that person needs to be admitted to a bar to be able to go to court and argue for the administration. For every other position, there's no formal requirement. We've never needed a requirement because we've had leadership that abides by norms and picks qualified people to ensure Senate approval. So you know, they pick people with law degrees to do legal jobs. Trump wouldn't give a fuck if his pick was qualified and, as we've seen, neither do Senate Republicans.
well, in that case, I'm guessing Sean Hannity is on his short list for appointees.
I honestly don't know. I assume it gets turned over to the DOJ and archived.
Does that mean it never sees the light of day?
There's no way Mueller doesn't have fail safes in place. I don't know what will happen, but I know that like Comey, he's interested in preserving the institution and process, as well as the mounds of evidence.
Who knows what anyone will do with it, but I don't think that his will ever go away for 45. Or his co conspirators.
I know Trump feels personally wronged by Sessions, but I'm surprised we don't hear more talk about Trump firing Rosenstein. He could replace Rosenstein with a lackey that would then fire Mueller. In Trump's mind that solves Russia investigation problem while still keeping an exceptionally vile AG.
Post by litebright on Jul 25, 2017 12:54:31 GMT -5
#45 keeps going back to wanting someone to prosecute Clinton. He said that the reason he fired Comey was because he wasn't tough enough on Clinton. Now he's using the same argument to lay the groundwork to get rid of Sessions.
Does he actually want to deliver on the whole "lock her up" thing and is working up to it and trying to get someone in place who will go after her, or is it deflection and distraction and/or his go-to excuse for firing someone? I don't even know.
I saw a comment the other day that Republicans are going to have to choose between rule of law or hatred of liberals. History provides very little confidence that the former will win out.
ETA: I'll also keep reiterating that the new GOP base WANTS an authoritarian government. A lot of people are very happy right now.
I cannot believe the GOP fancies themselves the "true" patriots of this country. A patriot would not stand by and watch this happen.
I saw a comment the other day that Republicans are going to have to choose between rule of law or hatred of liberals. History provides very little confidence that the former will win out.
ETA: I'll also keep reiterating that the new GOP base WANTS an authoritarian government. A lot of people are very happy right now.
I cannot believe the GOP fancies themselves the "true" patriots of this country. A patriot would not stand by and watch this happen.
They're saving us from the evils of multiculturalism and equality.
#45 keeps going back to wanting someone to prosecute Clinton. He said that the reason he fired Comey was because he wasn't tough enough on Clinton. Now he's using the same argument to lay the groundwork to get rid of Sessions.
Does he actually want to deliver on the whole "lock her up" thing and is working up to it and trying to get someone in place who will go after her, or is it deflection and distraction and/or his go-to excuse for firing someone? I don't even know.
There's the rumblings of discontent in the base. Quickest way to pull them back is to offer up the campaign rhetoric.
I saw a comment the other day that Republicans are going to have to choose between rule of law or hatred of liberals. History provides very little confidence that the former will win out.
ETA: I'll also keep reiterating that the new GOP base WANTS an authoritarian government. A lot of people are very happy right now.
I cannot believe the GOP fancies themselves the "true" patriots of this country. A patriot would not stand by and watch this happen.
And it's equally disappointing to watch the GOP loyalists (at least the ones in my life) also standing by with their heads in the sand/ fingers in their ears "La la la- we love America more than liberals, LaLaLa!!"