Sessions on the way out?

Meadmaker said:
Meanwhile, on another note, this interaction between Trump and Sessions is yet another thing that is both astonishing and embarrassing. I can't believe I'm seeing this.
Click to expand...
Just imagine for a second the CEO of Apple (or any other huge corporation) repeatedly complaining about and berating a vice president in a public forum. It's pure insanity.
 
Probably deserving of its own thread, but how many original members of the Trump team do you figure will still be there if he finishes his first four-year term? Maybe just Ivanka?
 
Trebuchet said:
Probably deserving of its own thread, but how many original members of the Trump team do you figure will still be there if he finishes his first four-year term? Maybe just Ivanka?
Click to expand...
If you mean the cabinet, there are several with no obvious reason yet to bolt - besides incompetence, and that's obviously not a big factor. As for people actually working inside the White House proper, I'd be shocked if even 5% of the high-level employees/advisors there last the full four years. They're working for what can most charitably be called a madman. If the beast doesn't get rid of them, the continuously mounting stress will probably have them looking for new opportunities ASAP.
 
seayakin said:
I agree completely. I think the only true loyalty he has is maybe Ivanka. However, I wouldn't be surprised if she would feed him to the sharks if it would save her.

The $64 dollar question, at what point to Republicans bolt from him?
Click to expand...

For most members of Congress, the real election is the primary election rather than the general election. So IMHO they won't bolt until his popularity among Republicans takes a significant dive.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
For most members of Congress, the real election is the primary election rather than the general election. So IMHO they won't bolt until his popularity among Republicans takes a significant dive.
Click to expand...

I don't know about most. But I agree that it will take Trump losing support in such a way that GOP members begin to worry about their own elections.

Keep in mind that a good number of Republican house members owe their seats to gerrymandering. The process of Gerrymandering is designed to to create marginally winning districts for your side. There will be many more Republican seats in play than Democrats. The question for them is will Trump’s unpopularity lead to a loss of support for them. It is said any time a President falls below 40 percent support it starts to effect house members of his party. They say below 36 percent it is a disaster. But who knows? Maybe the old rules don't apply.
 
acbytesla said:
I hate Sessions with a passion of a thousand hot suns. I think he is a racist pig. But you are right. He is actually qualified to do his job and Trump is berating him for doing the right thing. I can't imagine the craziness that will occur if Trump fires Sessions and then Mueller.

When Nixon fired AG Elliot Richardson, Deputy AG and William Ruckelshaus and the Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox during the Saturday Night Massacre it came out of the blue. Trump is building up to it.

This would be classic obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

Imagine this circus.

The firing of Comey was suspicious...

This will be entertainment gold.
 
C_Felix said:
Imagine this circus.

The firing of Comey was suspicious...

This will be entertainment gold.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of people in the White House that are pissed at Trump for the way he is treating Sessions. Nobody has been more loyal to Trump than Sessions. They think if Trump can do it to him, he can do it to anybody.

But I think Sessions has just decided he's just going to ignore Trump and just do his job. It's not like they see each other every day. Trump can whine all he wants. If he fires Sessions, he fires Sessions It will only increase the pressure on Trump.

I knew that while I hate Trump, that at least he would be entertaining.

And he hasn't let us down.
 
Babbylonian said:
If you mean the cabinet, there are several with no obvious reason yet to bolt - besides incompetence, and that's obviously not a big factor. As for people actually working inside the White House proper, I'd be shocked if even 5% of the high-level employees/advisors there last the full four years. They're working for what can most charitably be called a madman. If the beast doesn't get rid of them, the continuously mounting stress will probably have them looking for new opportunities ASAP.
Click to expand...

I cannot imagine what misery it would be to be any part of this administration. The constant fear and paranoia, uncertainty, complete lack of a coherent vision, humiliation. It would be a a soul sucking hell.
 
acbytesla said:
There are a lot of people in the White House that are pissed at Trump for the way he is treating Sessions. Nobody has been more loyal to Trump than Sessions. They think if Trump can do it to him, he can do it to anybody.

But I think Sessions has just decided he's just going to ignore Trump and just do his job. It's not like they see each other every day. Trump can whine all he wants. If he fires Sessions, he fires Sessions It will only increase the pressure on Trump.

I knew that while I hate Trump, that at least he would be entertaining.

And he hasn't let us down.
Click to expand...

And in the Trump bridge burning orgy, he may be forgetting to consider if these guys have to gamble on plea bargain vs Trump pardon, Trump is not the better gamble.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
And in the Trump bridge burning orgy, he may be forgetting to consider if these guys have to gamble on plea bargain vs Trump pardon, Trump is not the better gamble.
Click to expand...

So I wonder. Hmmmm. Who is going to be Trump’s John Dean?
 
CapelDodger said:
The Attorney General has recused himself from a subject, not from a mis-deed. This is far from unprecedented. If, as you contend, recusal on a subject by an Attorney General necessitates resignation there'd be no purpose in recusal.
Click to expand...

Of course. It's a ridiculous circular argument that only makes sense if you use the special brand of Trump logic that his brown-nosers seem to favor. Politicians, LEOs, judges, etc. often have to recuse themselves in certain cases. The only possible way you could guarantee this couldn't happen is if you appointed someone who was never involved in any business with another human being in their entire lives. Superbly farcical.
 
logger said:
There hasn't been a crime, our government is now looking for a crime.
Click to expand...

Meadmaker said:
How do you know that? Without an investigation, how can you say that?
Click to expand...

Again, special circular logic. "They shouldn't be investigating! There's no evidence of a crime!" Umm, that's the purpose of an investigation, to uncover and establish evidence. Imagine if this silly standard was applied to everyday crimes. A detective could never investigate anything unless he actually was standing in front of someone during the commission of a crime.

Trump supporters really twist themselves into mental pretzels justifying his BS.
 
Babbylonian said:
Just imagine for a second the CEO of Apple (or any other huge corporation) repeatedly complaining about and berating a vice president in a public forum. It's pure insanity.
Click to expand...

That's one problem with the oft-repeated mantra of "The country should be run like a business!"

Besides the obvious (a country ISN'T a business), most big corporations are run by people who are accountable to others (stockholders, Board.) Trump doesn't think he is accountable to ANYONE, and I can't fathom for a second why his moronic supporters think this is such a great thing.
 
tyr_13 said:
How would Sessions know that he would have to recuse himself from a future investigation into wrongdoings by the Trump campaign?

There are two ways. Either he can see the future, or he knew there were wrongdoings by the campaign connected to him, or the reasonable appearance thereof.
Click to expand...

Trump’s NYT interview was rather bizarre. Trump says Sessions should have told him he was going to recuse himself before he took the job. Trump offered Session the job in November, 2016. He was confirmed on February 8. On March 1 news about his undisclosed contacts with the Russian ambassador hit the press. Sessions recused himself the next day. How does Trump think Sessions should have known he would recuse himself and have told him about it before February 8 when the reason for his recusal didn’t happen until March?

The Trump says after Sessions recused himself that he asked who his deputy and it just happened to turn out to be this Rosenstein guy that nobody hardly knew anything about and was obviously a Democrat (because there are no Republicans in Baltimore) who had it in for him. Except that is not at all what happened. Trump nominated Rosenstein January 31, just over a week into office. On March 10, about a week after Sessions recused himself, Sessions order the remaining U.S. Attorneys to resign. That included Rosenstein. But Trump declined Rosenstein’s resignation.

So after Trump nominated Rosenstein and Sessions’s recusal and apparently talking with Rosenstein about who his deputy is (because Trump apparently forgot one of the few appointments he had actually made), Trump had Rosenstein’s resignation letter in his hot little hands. Bu the declined it. And Rosenstein didn’t get confirmed until April 25. Trump had well over a month after Sessions’s recusal to cancel the Rosenstein nomination.

Sometime in March, Sessions offered to resign. Trump declined. So after Session’s recusal, Trump had resignation offers from both Sessions and Rosenstein. He could have easily gotten rid of them both. But he knew that if he got rid of them and tried to bring in somebody knew he would have trouble getting some lackeys through a Senate confirmation and having the new guys fire Comey would look very suspicious. He needed people who were already in the pipe before he found out Comey wouldn’t play ball and the whole Russia investigation started exploding.

But during this time Trump was actually griping about the Senate not confirming his appointments, even though he hadn’t made many. So it sure looks like Trump intended to use Sessions to quash the Russian investigation and for him to take the fall over any mutterings about obstruction of justice. When Sessions recused himself, he had to move to Plan B of getting Rosenstein confirmed pronto so that he could be Trump’s new scapegoat. As soon as Rosenstein is confirmed, Trump has him write up a memo on reasons why Comey could maybe be fired and then uses that memo to fire Comey. But Rosenstein apparently didn’t like being Trump’s patsy or want to take the fallout from the firing, so Trump ended up with Mueller.

Now Trump wants Sessions to resign so that he can bring a new Attorney General who will be the fall guy Trump always wanted Sessions to be. He can’t fire him because then it will look like he fired Sessions just to be able to bring in someone to quash the Russia investigation. He needs Sessions to quit so that he can say that he is bringing in his new lackey simply as a matter of filling a vacancy.

The question is, who would take the job? Anyone who might interested must know that Trump’s first task assignment is going to be getting rid of Mueller and ending the Russia investigation. They are going to be caught up in the whole rumblings of obstruction of justice. Who would want to jump into that fire?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom