General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBreaking from WP - the Con asked Sessions about closing the Arpaio case
before it went to trial and was told no.
We know that he bypassed and ignored Sessions with the pardon.
Is Sessions going to resign now?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-asked-sessions-about-closing-case-against-arpaio-an-ally-since-birtherism/2017/08/26/15e5d7b2-8a7f-11e7-a94f-3139abce39f5_story.html?utm_term=.a52cdabbe195
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)and preserves a fig leaf of barely abiding by the law to keep from being imprisoned himself. Trump has collected the most fetid, lawless group of monsters in the history of the nation.
malaise
(269,157 posts)Yes this bunch of ReTHUG goons are deplorable in every sense of the word. I've never seen anything like this.
Question the Coh guy in the cabinet - is he related to Roy Cohn?
StatGirl
(518 posts)So that he can be Pence's AG, or even the next vice president.
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)malaise
(269,157 posts)Mueller must be taking notes
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)lame54
(35,321 posts)malaise
(269,157 posts)over the recusal
ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)Bains said he believes Trump has a sense that the chief executive controls everything in the executive branch, including the exercise of criminal power. And that is just not the way the system is set up.
So he discussed it with Sessions and then went ahead. I want to know if getting consent from the DOJ is a must for the pardon to be legal or if consent is just another "tradition" that every single president in history has followed (until tRump). So far, I have not seen a clear argument either way.