NYT: Trump Tried To Stop Sessions From Recusal

donald_trump_president-elect_portrait_croppedThe New York Times is reporting that Special counsel Robert Mueller has confirmed that  President Donald Trump took the extraordinary step of ordering White House counsel Don McGahn to Attorney general Jeff Sessions to prevent him from recusing himself in the Russian investigation.  I was one of the earliest voices calling for Sessions to recuse himself and continue to believe that he made the right decision not only for himself and the Justice Department but Trump.  The account in the Times states that Trump was irate at hearing that Sessions would follow the advice of his ethics advisors and recuse himself. He allegedly asked why he does not have an Eric Holder or Roy Cohen to protect his interests. If true, it was a grossly inappropriate decision and an even more worrisome analogy. I have been a long critic of Holder and his highly political tenure at the Justice Department.  As for Roy Cohen, he is one of the most reviled and disreputable figures in history.  It would be akin to a CEO asking where is his Bernie Madoff to protect profits.  The accounts is based on two sources that are anonymous and we have not heard from the President.  Obviously, McGahn could also deny the truth of the story but we have not heard from either McGahn or Trump’s personal counsel.

The effort to convince Sessions not to recuse himself only adds to the concerns over obstruction and other allegations.  The use of the White House counsel is also troubling.  It is not clear what the grounds were for McGahn to encourage Sessions not to recuse himself.  As noted above, I viewed the necessity of recusal as clear and compelling.  It is highly problematic for McGahn to seek to block the decision under direct orders from someone who is a possible target of the investigation.  Most lawyers would have balked at the order and cautioned their client on the legal risks of such an intervention.  The allegation reinforces concerns over McGahn’s role as White House counsel in maintaining ethical lines.
In fairness to McGahn, he might have been trying to defuse an explosive situation in the Oval Office by appeasing the President. Reports indicate that McGahn quickly backed off when Sessions said that he was following the advice of his ethical advisers. It is not clear how much McGahn knew.  However, I still believe that the White House should have stayed well clear of the decision making at the Justice Department on both the investigation and the recusal.
Moreover, the impropriety of the alleged intervention turns significantly on the order of the events.  If McGahn was aware that Sessions had already made the decision to recuse himself, the effort to convince him to change his mind is inappropriate in my view.  If McGahn was only aware that Sessions was weighing his possible recusal, it is less alarming that he wanted to discuss the issue and its implications with the Attorney General.  It would still raise some concerns but it would not be as problematic as carrying out an order from a president to pressure the Attorney General to reverse his decision. The White House Counsel has a legitimate interest in who will be conducting or supervising an investigation of the President.  It would be much better to pursue such questions through aides to avoid even the appearance of pressure from the White House.  Once a decision has been made, it becomes much more problematic to have the President dispatch a high-ranking official to try to talk Sessions out of an ethical determination.
That does not mean that Trump has committed a crime or that this was an effort to conceal a crime. However, it certainly does not help.  Trump has long treated litigation as an extension of business.  This alleged action was taken around the same time of the other inappropriate comments alleged in meetings with Comey and others over the Russian investigation.  The President may have learned from those missteps.  The actions taken during that period ultimately compelled not only the appointment of a special counsel but magnify the legal risks for the President and his Administration.  Had Comey been fired at the outset of the Administration or left in office for the conclusion of the Russian investigation, it would likely be over by now for the President.
The decision of Sessions was the correct one on both an ethical and political basis.  The best thing for Trump was to remove any question of political interference and obstruction.  Otherwise, any investigation clearing the President would be marred by lingering questions and uncertainties.
In the same vein, the suggestions of Sessions being fired are mystifying.  Just as the firing of Comey made the situation exponentially worse, the firing of Sessions would reinforce allegations of obstruction and push the controversy into an even more precarious stage for the President.

220 thoughts on “NYT: Trump Tried To Stop Sessions From Recusal”

  1. Throughout history, we have seen the downfall of Kings and Queens who could not outmaneuver a lawless political coup. Charles I and Cromwell come to mind.

    The question remains to be answered how Trump and his Administration will fare with a rather concerted effort at overthrowing him from people who refuse to accept the results of the election. I have often advised that Trump should use the resources available to him, especially in his communications department. But during a coup, you can trust no one, especially not Circe Clinton’s spies, which is why he depends so heavily on his family and small circle.

    If only he had his own trio of dragons…

    1. Because Trump won the election (though not the popular vote), is he above the law? Is there no limit to what he can do, unless and until he is voted out of office?

      1. ” is he above the law?”

        No, but to date, he has governed within the law and has not gone past the margins like his predecessor.

  2. Otherwise, any investigation clearing the President would be marred by lingering questions and uncertainties.

    LOL! Sessions recuses himself; Trump does not fire him and here we are 1 year later with an investigation marred by lingering questions and uncertainties. The problem is that while Sessions consulted with his Ethics Advisor, it does not appear anyone involved in the investigation made such an effort. If President Trump had concerns the playing field would be tilted in favor of the investigators without an ethical referee like Sessions to oversee his DOJ, then I don’t see his concern as an obstruction of justice, but more as a defense against injustice.

    1. They are trying to tie his hands.

      The alphabet soup of the government has been weaponized against all non-Democrats, but especially anyone anti establishmentarian. Fight it, and you’ll be charged with obstruction. Don’t fight it, and you’ll go down. Tread carefully…

      The entire investigation was predicated on a proven spurious dossier prepared by the Russians to slander a Presidential candidate, paid for by Hillary Clinton the DNC. This was supposed to be an investigation into Russian interference into the election, which has been proven to have been orchestrated by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee. Having failed to tie Trump to the Russian interference, now they are just trolling looking to find anything on anyone connected to Trump.

      This is like the government breaking down your door, claiming you manufacture meth. That turned out to be incorrect, but now they are going through your filing cabinet, love letters, emails, library, and computer browsing history looking for something, anything else, and doing the same to your family and friends. The predicating premise was disproven, but now they have found the man they must find a crime.


      1. I’ve got to say, I was really opposed to Trump in the beginning. My remarks previously showed a marked prejudice against him.

        But I deal with facts. He’s had many successes, such as the unemployment rate. And he’s had some missteps and errors, such as a variety of Tweets. He’s a mixed bag, but he’s performed far and away better than I first imagined.

        The most important catalyst in the evolution of my attitude towards President Trump has been the reaction of the Left. They absolutely, positively, will not accept the result of the election. Some have resorted to violence, rioting, burning, and looting like any Third World coup. It’s my way or you’ll get hurt. Others have weaponized the alphabet soup over the years against conservatives for just such a contingency. Perhaps this is the “insurance plan” against Trump alluded to. And that I have a problem with. I love this republic of ours, the bastion of freedom in a world of despots. I would not have it descend into yet another dictatorship of little to no individual rights and an all powerful government.

        That’s how I see the situation. There is a concerted effort to have a single Party State, and I will not have it. Liberals attacking family and friend for how they voted, punishing them if they won’t toe the line pushed me to Trump, and the nation wide attempts at a coup, and the double track we have in the legal system for Democrats and conservatives cleaved me closer. In the meantime, I try to judge the outcome of his decisions and policy on the merits, good or bad.

        Democrats push people away; they do not make any gains.

        1. Republicans have control of the three branches of government. So it really is a one party state.

          1. No, not really.

            A One Party State is when only one party is allowed. Right now, we have a lawfully elected sweep. That happens from time to time on either side. Other parties are permitted and encouraged to participate in elections.

            When we have a One Party State, the government is weaponized against dissent. Right now, we have a Democratically politicized IRS, NSA, FBI, and various other organizations. The DOJ was heavily politicized towards the Left. The Court has been infected with politics. The Media is virtually a Left Media, heavily biased against conservatives rather than merely reporting the facts.

            If you do not voice an opinion in lockstep with the Left, you could be harassed on campus by other students and your own professor, lose your job, be driven out of business…Now, the Left has been promoting hate speech laws, and blasphemy laws, which would lead to incarceration if you voice opinions that do not follow the Single Party State Approved Opinion Handbook. It is anathema to freedom, and contrary to tolerance and variety of opinion.

            That is what the beginnings of a Single Party State looks like.

            1. “The Media is virtually a Left Media.” So how do you explain Fox “News” ???

                1. And some org is probably paying her. Not JT. And it’s just an educated guess.

            2. Karen S, your analysis as always is on target but unfortunately goes over the head of those that simply repeat what they hear from the left wing press. Trump hasn’t had support from even the Republican side of Congress until recently. Many of them probably stupidly believed he would be impeached or cave. Their mindsets are within the beltway and they have no idea what is going on in most of America. Trump is able to take complex issues and speak simply so that mainstream Americans can understand. That ability is not recognized as intelligence by those that have to make things appear too complex for ordinary people to understand.

              1. I’d argue that we’ve been a two-party state in name only for quite some time. Barriers to third parties have hinder their maturation. The lack of legislative branch term limits, has evolved into the two parties into a one-party state of DC insiders. What people outside I-495 don’t understand is the importance of the invite, and that special spot at certain bars and hip spots downtown. Remember John Boehner? Look at the man’s eyes in close-up photos. He certainly cherished his spot at a particular drinking hole downtown. Since DC is such a very blue city, one must make nice with the left to maintain those invites. But anyway…

                Let’s play along and pretend there are stark differences between the GOP and the jack ass party. Trump then represents essentially a third party – very Ross Perot if you think about it – and Sanders represented the same thing. Both draw heavily from the Obama model of populism. Between Trump, Obama, and Sanders – aside from policy – there are a lot of similarities.

              2. “Karen S, your analysis as always is on target but unfortunately goes over the head of those that simply repeat what they hear from the left wing press. ”

                Sure it is, Alla (sic).

                The same group is probably paying Allan. Refer to my last response about Karen being paid.

                1. Anonymous, your comments are so dumb. Why would anyone pay me to write on a blog of this nature? If I wanted to spend this time working my hourly rate would be way too high. You better get back to the kitchen and sweeping the floors.

                  1. But didn’t Russia pay online trolls like you to post things on blogs and as a result defeat Hillary Clinton? You sell your trollmanship short.

                    1. Andrew, it’s the Oligarch’s. They have me surrounded and I am trying to type my way out.

                  2. Allan’s right. My mistake. He’s a complete idiot and you wouldn’t get past the screening process. But pomposity is one of his strong points.

                    “If I wanted to spend this time working my hourly rate would be way too high,” says Allan, making us laugh.

                    And he’s dreaming again.

                    “You better get back to the kitchen and sweeping the floors,” says Allan, giving himself away again.

                    We can always count on Allan to show his true colors.

                    1. AS I said Anonymous “You better get back to the kitchen and sweeping the floors,”. You don’t have much of a future anywhere else.

                    2. “It’s hard to imagine why anyone (Allan?) would spend so much time, here.”

                      It’s hard to imagine that someone like you with such a limited understanding of the world would even be interested in this type of site.

                      Anonymous, why are you so worried about how I spend my time? I am used to long hours so I have plenty of time to do loads of things and even multitask. I have no need for extra income or even more homes. I have everything I want and while I reply to you I do so in a room that has a phenomenal view so that even your unpleasantness is abated.

                    3. Go to anonymous’s “toxic agenda” web page and click on the “about” tab. It actually says:

                      “I believe most governments and big corporation’s only agenda is to rip us all off.Anyway, a while after I bought the domain, I changed my mind based on a few things, and since I was already thinking about starting a blog about making money, I thought why not use this domain that I have got. I know it’s not the best name for a blog trying to help other people make real money while avoiding money-making scams, but it just happened.”

                      What a total absolute sham! Bwahahahahahahahahaha!

      2. Only in this instance the Government broke down your door based upon false information provided by your rival. Prof. T needs to bear in mind that the whole investigation is a sham based on lies. Is it obstruction of justice to say stop investigating a non-crime? Where in the criminal code is collusion listed as an offense?

          1. After 18 months of investigation what, if any, criminal elements of the dossier have proven prosecutable?

      3. A couple of things about your posting. Why do you claim the dossier is “spurious”? Many parts of it have been corroborated. I don’t believe any of it has been explicitly disproven. Clinton allies may have partly funded research into assembling the dossier, but that does not make the dossier bogus. As for Russian motivations, why in the world would they support Clinton? On the other hand, Russians have massively invested in Trump and Trump interests, and have a clear reason to want to protect their investments.

      4. Wrong answer again. Your little echo silo on Pravda Faux News is playing you, and the other gullibles and/or racists for rubes and fools. The special prosecutor is a Republican who was appointed by—wait for it—a Republican. His investigation was triggered by the numerous false statements revealed by trump campaign officials regarding communications and meetings with Russians. Further, I’m glad you’ve been able to determine that something has been “disproven” but I regret to inform that here in the real world, your fantasy ruminations and 50 cents will get you a cup of coffee.

        This is to “isn’t my Hannity shrine neato Karen

        1. Since when have Republicans supported Donald Trump? Don’t you find is strange that for years people like you Mark M whined about the ever powerful state and “the man”, and now that we’re learning who “the man” really is you want to pretend that it is all make believe? You Mark M are a useful idiot of the deep state, carrying the water for people like Strzok who you can’t otherwise defend in any credible way.

          1. Andrew, you give Mark too much credit. He’s a wannabe lawyer who pretends to be one, but the closest he gets to the law is as an assistant file clerk.

              1. Anonymous you can dream these things all you want if you think your dreams make your life better. I’m happy with my life, so I don’t dream about alternative lives. I live them.

                  1. Let me get this straight anonymous…you created the “toxicagenda” website initially to publish your anti-government anti-corporation screeds because you felt they all were “ripping people off”. Then you changed your mind and decided to use the website to try and “make money”. Asking because that’s what you wrote on the “about” tab of your “toxicagenda” webpage.

                    Do try and get out from mom’s basement every now and again. Bwahahahahahahaha!

                  2. Yes, anonymous you (and the blog) are squeezed into my life even though you are the part that one generally leaves behind.

  3. ‘Fire and Fury’ author doubles down on book’s claims on Trump’s mental health



    In one noteworthy exchange with “Today” show host Savannah Guthrie, Wolff claimed that every single person around the president, including senior advisers and family members, questions President Donald Trump’s intelligence and fitness for office.

    “Let me put a marker in the sand here: 100% of the people around him,” Wolff said.

    When asked what else people around the president say about him, Wolff described the one thing that everyone allegedly has in common.

    “They all say he is like a child,” Wolff said. “And what they mean by that is he has a need for immediate gratification. It’s all about him.” -aol dot com

  4. “It is not clear what the grounds were for McGahn to encourage Sessions not to recuse himself.” Was he urged not to recuse himself because it was believed that there was a legitimate legal basis not to? There is nothing illegal with making a legitimate legal case for someone to either recuse, or not recuse himself. But going further and obstructing justice is illegal. Why was the law not applied to Eric Holder, Lois Lerner, Loretta Lynch, et al?

    Or has this degenerated to a fight against the double standard? The well-connected Democrats operate under a completely different set of rules and laws than anyone else.

    I have warned that if the country openly has a two track legal system, as evidence when Hillary Clinton showed gross negligence, but that phrase was changed in order to let her skate free, that the country would demand such lawlessness apply to everyone. To quote the hidden message of a Bene Gesserit left for Jessica of Dune, “That way lies danger.”

  5. None of this will make any difference unless the House starts impeachment IF the election turns it to the Dems. Then we’ll finally see and hear what sworn witnesses are willing to put before the American public. Until then, POTUS has every right to tweet and snicker at what fools we look like.

  6. Tried to my foot. The P is boss. And this nonsense that the Department heads act independent of the W H is poppy cock. And to dump all this on Rosenstein for answers-is- well, insane.

  7. Sessions won’t quit, because he wants to pursue his War on Pot. Russian collusion in our elections is nothing at all, compared to the Evils of the Weed.

  8. The bodies are heaped on 5 ave, empty shell casing litter the streets. But don’t worry, he’s just learning how to shoot. Nothing to see here.

  9. All because the Clinton Camp, Fusion GPS and the FBI concocted a scheme to lay blame on Trump about connections to Russia.

    Ok, well, if they scheme is false, certainly actions from a false scheme can be excused.

    Let’s go back to the beginning.

    Trump is a non-politician and having being sworn in as President of the United States, he did not think this was going to happen.

    Has this happen to Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush? No, nobody interfered with their duties as President.

    I feel bad for Trump for all the land mines that were set for him by the Obama Admin, Hillary camp and his own DOJ.

    1. Being a “politician” means having to negotiate with and interact with people who don’t believe exactly as you do, in the interests of advancing common interests where possible. Evidently that is a hopelessly evil approach to governing these days. Instead, we have “my way or the highway” or “you’re fired” or “your loyalty is to me, not the country or the Constitution.”

    2. The “landmines” have to do with engaging in potentially unconstitutiional or criminal acts. It is a primary duty of the DOJ to keep such things from happening. It is NOT a primary duty of the DOJ to say “we’ll do whatever you want, no matter what.”

    3. I agree with you Jean. FishWings is first learning how to think. That is the reason behind FishWing’s question.

  10. Sessions did the right thing! It was a surprise but he did. Trump was wrong if he engaged in the behavior that has been reported.

    As to the argument that others may have done the same thing….there isn’t any evidence of that but lists assume that’s true. Does that excuse Trump’s allleged behavior,

  11. Or, maybe, Fatso is the immature lying crook who doesn’t understand our system of checks and balances as many critics have claimed. Jon is willing to believe that the Dotard has “learned” something here, or that, perhaps, Comey was fired for some reason other than the Dotard was trying to stop investigations into his finances and his connections with shady Russians. Sometimes if it walks like collusion and quacks like collusion it IS collusion.

  12. Or perhaps as a neophyte politician he just wanted his AG to do his job something that he is just now getting around to finally. I’m sure the expectations of the office and ‘the way things are done in official Washington were a bit much to take as they would be for any citizen but… fast learner Trump back in and now we have Huma Gotcha, the Clinton investigation and that unexpected diversion for the left to worry about concerning marijuana AND a deadline to get the DACAs legalized but I expect the socialist left will take their sort of win and try to obstruct even the DACAs.

    So conjecture aside we are now getting another campaign promise fired up and off the starting block.

    I’ll settle for that. Huma Gotcha as prize catch and the entire Clinton/DNC/progressivesocialists apparatus as the target. if far to important but knowing who funded Allred et fil and the Bimbo Brigades is certainly a part of that.

    1. “fast learner Trump”? NO ONE has ever claimed this. In fact, most people who comment on him claim that he has a short attention span, he doesn’t read or even skim, he doesn’t understand our tripartite system of government, and also doesn’t care to learn. He thinks he is an emperor or something. He thinks the Justice Department and the Attorney General are his private law firm that exist to protect him against people looking into his dealings with shady Russians.

      Do you wonder why, Michael, Fox continues to obsess about Hillary Clinton and her campaign instead of reporting on current issues, like the Wolff book released today? Maybe it’s to appeal to people like you who won’t be convinced that the Dotard is a crook until the federal marshals escort him out of the White House, and maybe the reason for that is that the uber wealthy want to get away with paying as few taxes and to eliminate as many regulation as possible until they are stopped.

      1. I think with Clinton it’s just a matter of our innate sense of justice, that everyone knows she has committed serious felonies, and it just seems like she shouldn’t get away with it.
        As for the uber wealthy, I honestly don’t know anyone, at any wealth level, that doesn’t want to pay as few taxes as possible. Do you?
        Finally, the Wolff book. Too many anecdotes have already been debunked. The guy has no credibility, except for with the TDS sufferers.

          1. Supposedly. I won’t hold my breath as that in itself is an illegal act under any Presidency. The Secret Service will definitely be after his ass. That’s why we waited for the opportunity to flip Huma Gotcha.

            1. The FBI has opened an investigation on the Clinton Foundation. What if Hillary spends some time in an orange jumpsuit a la Martha Stuart. What if Trump is impeached and Jared and Donald Jr. join Hillary in some white collar prison.The country will survive.

          2. Swarthmoron, all too many of the comments are recollections and statements that cannot be verified and apparently, even the author states that many of the statements he quoted are likely untrue. Furthermore, what has the book said that is new? Absolutely nothing. The statements about Trump have been made by the left and never Trumpers from the start and look at how many have been proven to be lies.

            Trump beat, how many experienced Republicans for the nomination? Trump on a relative shoestring budget beat Clinton. Trump got tax reform and an economy that is now thriving after eight years of stagnation. He can’t be as stupid as the MSM says. Maybe it is the anti-Trump crowd that is stupid because they can’t keep up with him.

        1. As to taxes and rolling back regulations, the point is that the uber wealthy will do and put up with literally anything for more money, money, money, including supporting a fat, incompetent liar who is unfit to be President. At the end of the day, when protections like Dodd Frank and air and water quality standards are gone and the deficit skyrockets, we’ll all lose even more money.

          Other than Fox viewers, NO ONE believes that HRC is a criminal. She was already investigated by the FBI and cleared. Fox harps on HRC and her campaign in an effort not only to pander to the Dotard’s base, but to divert culpability from what the criminal charges they likely know are coming–the theory being to try to convince people that since everyone in Washington is a crook, the Dotard isn’t that bad. The entire premise is flawed, and no media, other than the extreme right, is reporting on this crap because it is crap.

          The Dotard is a blemish on the Office of the President. He needs to go.

          1. Sweetheart, she IS a criminal. That’s why we know her as Crooked Hillary. That’s why when news broke that there was a fire at her Chappaqua home yesterday, the first thing most people thought was, “hey, she’s destroying more evidence.”

            You may want to steer clear of using absolutes. NO ONE other than Fox viewers? Really? Then that alone would put the number who think HRC is a criminal at about more than half the country. Cleared by the FBI? Oh come on. What a joke.

            1. Now that the FBi has reopened the investigation of the Clinton Foundation at Trump’s behest, will the FBI still be referred to as the “deep state” by the Trumpers or is that only true when the Trump family is being investigated?

            2. Does Clinton now get to claim she is a victim of Trump’s deep state?

              1. It’s not really Hillary’s style to claim that she’s a victim of the Deep State.
                It’s more likely that she’ll go back to her “it’s all part of a vast rightwing
                conspiracy” bit.

                1. I think the Trump”deep state” would work better for her.should she want to play the victim. It has worked well enough for Trump and his cult.

                  1. We’ll see if Hillary goes with the “Deep State” meme, but I still think she’ll prefer the vast, right-wing conspiracy
                    Maybe she’ll say that it’s only a basket of deplorables
                    who are against her.

                    1. Trump asked his deep state to investigate her and they decided to re-open the investigation.

                    2. If she is smart she won’t blame anyone or do anything to obstruct the investigation, she will just cooperate.

                    3. SW Mom,..
                      I didn’t know that you were one of the Deep State Conspiracy believers.
                      Trump said during the campaign that he would have Hillary investigated.That kind of public declaration is not typical of the murky, deep state operations that you seem to believe in.
                      I think that the criminal referrals concerning Hillary have come from Congress…..the deep state theorists usually don’t focus on proceedings that can be found in the Congressional Record.
                      So your believes about operations of a deep state apparatus put you somewhat at odds with other deep state conspirists.

                    4. Session is just trying to keep his job so he is doing Trump’s bidding in opening this back up.

                    5. Session is just trying to keep his job so he is doing Trump’s bidding in opening this back up.

                      I realize you may not be clear on the actual duties of the Attorney General (it’s been awhile), but I’m pretty sure this is his job. I’m also confident it is President Trump’s job to expect his AG to do his.

                    6. Sessions is going after the marijuana growers and the Clintons. Most of the growers are in states that voted for Clinton so maybe they are considered to be enemies of Trump,too.

                    7. Well, when the Justice Dept. investigates Trump, his supporters call it a witch hunt.

                    8. Actually the complaint regarding Trump was that it was an investigation in search of a crime. Clinton’s was a crime in search of an investigation.

                    9. Was Sessions doing “Trump’s bidding” when he recused himself from the Russia investigation?

                    10. The foundation may merit another investigation. I hope it is not political revenge. Mueller can keep working and hopefully Trump will now quit squawking about he is a victim of his own appointees.

            3. No, “most people” didn’t think Hillary set her own house on fire to cover up “more evidence”, because she wasn’t even home. Even if she and Bill had been there, they have Secret Service there around the clock because Bill was the POTUS, so why would they start a fire? What “evidence” of what, exactly, did she “cover up” in the first place? You really, really need to stop watching Fox. They’re trying to divert your attention away from the truth. Do you really think the entire FBI employs only HRC supporters? Don’t you know they already investigated the alleged e-mail “scandal” that Fox keeps trying to create, and found no evidence of any crime?

              BTW: most of this country does not approve of the fat, lying Dotard, so that’s nowhere near “more than half the country”. If Fox is telling you this, they are lying.

              1. Probably the secret notes from the tarmac meeting between Bill and Lynch, right?

              2. Nutacha – holding HRC accountable — and Obama as well as anyone else who knew and supported her pay for play would go a long way in restoring faith in our institutions – especially the justice system. Will it happen? Probably not. And if the Trump boys were laundering money they should be locked up too.

                  1. Exactly. I’m sure people also wondered if it was Bill rubbing sticks and stones together to spark a little afternoon delight that got a little out of hand, if you know what I mean, wink wink. But nah, my money’s on Hillary burning evidence. 😉

              3. Maybe try not being so literal ‘all’ the time, either. “Hey, there’s a fire at the Clintons! Hmm…wonder if she’s destroying evidence again?” Ba dum bump. 😉

                (But remember, she used ‘burn bags’ to burn her State Dept. schedules that should have been preserved as federal records, so it’s not like she hasn’t burned ‘evidence’ before, you know.)

                BTW: it wasn’t an “alleged email scandal” – it was an actual scandal. But you could call it an “alleged” investigation by the FBI b/c we all know it wasn’t an “actual” investigation.

              4. “BTW: most of this country does not approve of the fat, lying Dotard, so that’s nowhere near “more than half the country”.”

                Or, as Pat Caddell (former Democrat Pollster) recently said:

                “I would guess Trump’s actual approval is somewhere in the high 60’s and inching up – one must always add at least 20 points to the skewed polling being done these days – just as we knew to deduct a minimum of 20 from Obama’s.”

            4. And in other news:

              On Thursday, a U.S. District Judge denied Fusion GPS’s effort to keep the House committee from bank records it sought. Judge Richard Leon, who took over the case after the previous judge Tanya Chutkan recused herself midway over unspecified conflicts, smacked down all four grounds by which Fusion GPS tried to block the congressional subpoena. That subpoena included requests for records of payments from Fusion GPS to journalists who have covered the Russian dossier story.

              Fusion said the request for records lacked a valid legislative purpose, were overbroad and irrelevant, violated First Amendment rights to speech and association, and violated financial privacy laws. The judge disagreed on each count.

        2. There is what “everyone knows,” and there are explicit offenses that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, in a court of law.

        3. Name 2 issues that have been debunked, why are liars allowed to post BS without proof, FFS? Get some class and argue based on principles.

      2. I don’t wonder at all I only wonder at why Michael Fox obsesses . ha ha so much for that throw line . The only only wonder is the poor level of Marxmanship by people like you but no problem a target is a target no matter who is your programmer and what it’s instructions are for the day.

        Maybe the social climber wannabe neo aristocrats of the ruling class of the classless society … the social media plus Gates. speaking of the rich. Gates went from 40 billion to near 80 billion with that phony great recession and heavy indebtedness which ended up being at direct attack on the senior citizens by you people so kindly just plan your exit remember there is no more Soviet Union to call homle and rejecting your citizenship by taking allegiance to a foreign ideolgy only made you an undocumented illegal waiting for
        ICE To show up.

  13. I forgot, why did Bill Clinton meet with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac in Arizona?

    1. To discuss changing grandchildrens diapers? Or how to plug up leaks in their own operation. They forgot the key fly on the wall though. When does that start?

      1. There are a lot of Fox viewers and they apparently vote.
        Doesn’t mean there isn’t a real problem.
        Just saying.

        1. Roscoe,…
          There are a also a lot of people who get their news from MSNBC, Vox, The Intercept, etc.
          The frequent complaints you see here about Fox News are not complaints about bias per se; they are complaints about “the wrong kind” of bias.
          That’s why some of those who post here criticise FOX for bias, then, apparently with a straight face, turn around and post links from a David Brock publication.

          1. If you are onto something about media, Nash, we’ll hear about Illinois’ Dick Uihlein spending $23 mil. in Wisconsin to get Baldwin’s seat for a Republican. (Uihlein is a name to add to Allan’s list of oligarchs.)

            Nash, you democracy-lover, you want to prohibit spending on campaigns from anyone out of the district? Congressional members won’t take e-mails from out of district citizens, why not prohibit money?

            1. Linda,..
              I made a comment about media bias and “preferred biases”, and you come back with
              a rant about oligarchs, a Wisconsin campaign, and campaign finance.
              If you can concentrate long enough to specifically respond to my comment, that would be nice.
              Instead, you make your usual scatter-brain comments that have nothing to do with what I wrote.
              I’m not interested in listening to a disjointed speech or lecture from you.

                1. Linda,…No, I don’t.
                  You can write about oligarcy all you like, as you do.
                  There are other venues for you as well….there are areas where street people shout and preach the same things, over and ovef again, on street corners.
                  My specific complaint to you was that a comment or reply should be at least somewhat related to the comment it’s reference to.
                  Riscoe Coltrane had a post that I commented on, and my comment was related to whay ge wrote.

                  Then you go off the rails and respond to my commemt with your pet items gaving nothing to do with my comment.
                  Keeping an exchange halfway on track should be common sense, but I’d never accuse you of having that.

                  1. The confines of the rails, have been ideal for serving the Koch’s, Gates, et.al.
                    Imposing the ruling construct of the 400 richest families will become more and more difficult, whether it is in personal dialogue, executive offices (both government and private), state and federal congresses, discriminatory law enforcement or in courts.

                    The share of national income going to labor is now, at the lowest level in recorded U.S. history- IT DEMANDS CHANGE. The Gates/Walton attempt to destroy public education- IT DEMANDS CHANGE. Carried interest for hedge funders- IT DEMANDS CHANGE. Big Pharma’s gouging- IT DEMANDS CHANGE.

                    The smoke of collusion with Russia showed us that America can not be great, not even be adequate to protect us as long as republicans are at the helm.

                    1. Linda,…
                      As long as we have saviors like you chanting the same slogans again ana again and again, thete is hope that the 99.9% will be saved from the .1%.
                      I’m not sure what any of this has to do with my comments about different types of biases in the media, but your crusade super cedes any need for normal, rational exchanges.
                      When someone who posts here gets on their soapbox and responds to one of my comments with a list of their pet grievances that has nothing to do with what I wrote, there’s not much point in explaining to that person how a rational, orderly dialogue should work.
                      Keep pkugging away with what you do best….repeat “oligarchy” another few hundred times “Koch Brothers”, Waltons, .1%, and all the rest of your stock slogans.
                      It doesn’t really matter what the topic is, or if it has any relationship to a particular comment you are supposedly respondong to.
                      Also consider expanding your venue to a soapbox on a street corner.

                2. That soap box on the street corner would have been a better idea before Pew and John Arnold started their program for aerial community surveillance, while elected leaders of the community had no knowledge about it. A republic or an oligarchy? Town and Country magazine and the Baltimore Sun reported on the program.

                  You want to narrow the blog discussion so that it obscures the forest. Your talking points like those of Fox, convince guys like Andrew Workshop that his neighbors are living lavish lifestyles on his tax dollars. You and I both know that it’s the Trump’s and hedge funders bilking Andrew and the middle class. Fox never reported that Trump called people “stupid” for paying taxes and, you sure as h_ll wouldn’t share that info., because you are an apologist for CEO’s at companies like Mylan.

      2. I’ve never met the mythical No One. Is that your other name? And why do you cast aside the group with the most votes (40%) in the last election more than either of the parties without a mention as if we don’t exist. Perhaps it’s the other way around. No One is You. 40% is much closer to 51% than what ever yours was but another result was 55% to 45% in the real election with the following results Priority …Cliniton shattered and except for the upcoming legal problems yet we do care. We are rejoicing. The DNC turned into an ant hill run over by a road grader. More work needed. And your sole surviving but dwindling right wing of the left the RINOs Yes life is sweet

          1. It appears you must have eaten some rabid possum or was it inbreeding that did you in.

            1. No, YNOT, I leave the inbreeding to you and those close to you. Rabid possum isn’t something on my diet so you can have it all to yourself. Share some with Anonymous.

      3. Yeah, who cares about a gross ethical breach by a sitting Attorney General? Who cares about obstruction of justice? Who cares that it stinks to high heaven? Who cares that this tarmac meeting was used as an excuse by the FBI Director to declare himself not only investigator, but also grand jury and prosecutor — and then usurp the AG’s authority to declare the whole matter case closed? Yeah, who cares?

      4. If that were true, then everyone except for Fox News viewers would be stupid. I don’t think that is true. Maybe your comment was stupid.

    2. “Why did Bill Clinton meet with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac in Arizona?” Since we weren’t there, we’ll never know. But I guess you find it impossible to believe that those two could ever have a private conversation, that wasn’t suspicious. Could they see each other at the theatre? Walking down the street? At a restaurant? Horrors ! Must be nefarious collusion.
      I only blame the two of them for naivete.

      1. Oh come on. Naivete? Bill Clinton? Not a chance, it was nefarious collusion on his part, without a doubt.

        1. Note how jay s tried to change the story. Fact is, Bill and Lynch didn’t meet up while causally strolling along. Fact is, the both tailored their flight schedules to meet up at an airport in Arizona. No one was supposed to know about it and when word got out, the FBI went insane trying to find out who had taken the video and told local media. In fact, had Bill and Lynch merely wanted to talk about grandkids and golf, they’d have done better to have pulled a Hillary and stumbled upon one another while walking in the woods with a media team in tow.

  14. “That does not mean that Trump has committed a crime or that this was an effort to conceal a crime. However, it certainly does not help.”

    In other words, Trump didn’t do anything wrong except perhaps he didn’t wear white gloves. Considering the fact that Rothstein hasn’t recused himself, the former attorney general’s probably broke the law and the FBI has been politically weaponized, I don’t think too much about asking Sessions to turn in his resignation if that even happened. How does one actually know what was said unless there is a recording or a transcript?

    JT is a smart guy and I agree with the way he views things ought to be done, but in real life, the implementation of such thinking can be disastrous.

    1. Haha. You Pravda Faux News bots amuse me. The FBI is now a hotbed of socialists, hippies, one worlders, or some such. Change the channel, you’ve been pwned.

      This is to “Hannity says Hoover used LSD” allan

  15. The actions taken by Trump resemble those taken by previous Presidents along with the characteristics of the lawyers and others employed by Presidents. It is the unfortunate reality that along with a necessary efficacy comes other baggage. However, the reasons why previous Presidents such as Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc muddied the holy waters was primarily to advance programs and changes that they and/or their party/backers deemed necessary and in the best interests of the people and more often than not, special interests. Such is the case with the oligarchy that is the US. With Trump there can be found an addition of reasons why overstepping is becoming routine. With Trump, along with protecting himself from allegations becoming fact, we see reasons almost entirely peculiar to his megalomania. From not standing when he enters the room to offending him by doing the ethical thing, Trump is using his office to get away with that which he and his other mutts have accused the opposition. Anyone lower than his office would have hit the road a long time ago.

    There are two elements at play here. First there is the question of how far a President can venture in the direction opposite to the people’s expectations of the office. Trump has defiled the Presidency in such short a time that it has to stand as a benchmark of perversion. Secondly, there is Trump, a liar, narcissist, and chief oligarch. Typically, as with Nixon, this sort of thing happens after an individual has been in power, ‘too long’, and acts outside of the world’s expectations. Trump has never been in anything other than this element of power, prestige, megalomania. Trump began at the top and knows nothing of the elements that most people deem necessary by which to live. America elected a monarch, one akin to those that for reasons between mental instability and outright ego, the world had rid itself of centuries ago. It is interesting to ponder why the country that labels itself as the origin of government of the people, by the people, for the people would design these conditions where oligarchs produce despots by themselves, for themselves, and why the people still think they had a successful shedding of the monarchy.

    1. Issac,

      I won’t argue that Trump is a terrible, evil person but you seem to think he is the only problem we have in this nation. Had Clinton been elected if you were being truly honest, you would need to have said the same things about her. This is a system wide problem. If it was only Trump it could be solved. For example, there are plenty of actual reasons to impeach him (as in war crimes). Don’t you ever ask yourself why Democrats won’t go after him for his known criminal acts? Why did Pelosi take impeachment off the table? Seriously, if this was because there was only one evil, crazy person, this problem could be solved.

      As citizens we need to quit the partisanship and look at the truth. The entire system is corrupt. I wish that partisans would set aside the blinders and look. If you would do this, there would be enough numbers of citizens who might then be able to reclaim the rule of law.

      1. “evil person ”

        Jill, I understand that you don’t like him, but what exactly makes him evil?

          1. What civilians?

            If you are talking about civilians in the Middle East fighting ISIS, what do you expect? That would mean you would find all American Presidents evil.

            Do you realize how many civilians have been killed in the Middle East and the rest of the world?

            Since all American Presidents must be evil by your definition what else makes Trump evil?

      2. Jill

        Trump is not the only problem we have. The main problem is that the US is an oligarchy where select special interests purchase our leaders to do their bidding. Trump is the head oligarch. He started out saying stuff like a single payer health care insurance system as can be found in Canada would be the way to go, he was going to get rid of all the oligarchs, that the system was a swamp and he was going to drain it, etc, etc, etc. Even given that he was and still is a buffoon and a liar enough people took a chance. The result is the top end got two thirds of the tax reductions, special interests are rolling back decades of programs and conditions to pursue fast money, and Trump and his family will come out hundreds of millions richer, along with his pals. The unemployment rate has been going down for several years thanks to Obama and his policies and the natural rebound of the economy due to cheap labor and cheap goods. Trump drizzled a little Dr. Feel Good on the stock market which will drop shortly only to rise again. If you attribute anything to Trump after only a year then you have been suckered in by his BS. There is no there there.

        1. Hillary vastly outspent Trump in the campaign, and her contributions from the “oligarchy” far outstripped those that Trump received.
          The “forces of the oligarchy” may not be as great as some believe.

          1. She outspent Trump exponentially. She had total control over the DNC. She had the media backing her six. And she had the Obama administration preparing an insurance policy complete with a faulty FISA warrant and unmasking. No wonder she forgot the most basic aspect of campaigning – to actually get out there and campaign. She took the summer off. She skipped entire swing states entirely. And now she wants everyone to think Russia got Trump elected?

          2. Au contraire, Nash, the “forces of the oligarchy” resulted in stupid people leading Americans from the frying pan into the fire. What Americans, then, found out was that the Bannon/Mercer brand, was one and the same with the oligarchy. The Trump/Koch cabinet proves it.

            1. Very clever of them….the oligarchs spend a ton contributing to the Clinton campaign, banking on Hillary winning.
              Trump pulls off one of the upsets of the century, and therefore the oligarchs diabolically got what they wanted by not backing Trump.
              Another scholarly dissertation from you.😄

              1. Credit where credit is due- Trump’s upset was built on the image Bannon crafted. It would not have been possible without the public’s disgust for political insiders who worked for the wealthy. Nothing has changed except the outsider, Trump, calls N.Y.C. home, instead of D.C. And, he had no skill nor interest in putting together a governing team- the void was filled by McConnell and Ryan, political insiders.

                1. I don’t dispute your view that wanting “an outsider” was a key to Trump’s win.
                  That still leaves the question of why the oligarchs back Hillary by a wide margin.
                  That’s an indication that the oligarchs believed their interests would be better served by Hillary.

                  1. Oligarchs- Mercer, Koch, Adelson, Crowne, Home Depot’s co-founder, Pappa John’s, Chik-fill-a, Menard’s and Hobby Lobby’s founders and, and a slew of others back Republican candidates.

                    Donna Brazile told the public a few months ago that during the Presidential campaign the Democratic Party was in debt. We know that Hillary reached out to Bloomberg for the convention speech and we know some of the tech tyrants (Gates) and discount retailing tyrants (Walton’s) view the Center for American Progress as their policy center.

                    People with money who back candidates that support the common good are a very rare breed and their wallet’s don’t provide much.

                    Talkers like Warren Buffett have no problem with their pretense. Warren was very vocal about not giving money to his kids. In 2012 he gave $600,000,000 to the foundations they started with their Mother’s money.

                    1. None of that has anything to do with the fact that Wall Street money heavily backed Clinton in 2016, and Obama in 2008 over McCain.

                  2. The donor class delivered America to its financial Armageddon in 2008. Some thought, going forward a Democrat would be able to bring the country back from the brink (Obama) and, hedging their bets, some stuck with the party to assure influence.

                    The American future, documented in increases in troubling statistics- a declining life expectancy, increased suicide rates in specific populations, a significant number of people without medical care, no salary increases in 40 years, increased domestic abuse, the world’s largest incarcerated population, a tax code that is unfair, billions in offshore corporate profits, is bleak. Trump’s cabinet is proof that nothing will change while he is President.

                    I understand that your role as hall monitor forces you to tell me to focus on one narrow issue. I choose ALEC.

                    1. “Trump’s cabinet is proof that nothing will change while he is President.”

                      Cabinet positions change, but the President is there for four or eight years. Trump has already demonstrated tremendous change much of it positive for the ‘working class’, but you are blind to everything because you are consumed with howling Oligarch, Oligarch, Oligarc…

                2. “Trump’s upset was built on the image Bannon crafted.”

                  Very unlikely.

                  “he had no skill nor interest ”

                  He was a bit naive about Washington politics and didn’t have Washington know how which might have been a good thing.

                  For a person with as you call it ” no skill “, he has done a remarkable job. Obama was all talk. Trump’s results speak for themselves very positively. Stalinists and the lovers of a totalitarian rule might think differently, but that is the underlying dispute between many on this blog.

                  1. Allan,
                    Regardless of whether the inage of Trump as an outsider was “crafted”, or who crafted it, the “outsider” perception of Trump helped him in the 2016 election.
                    It didn’t help fill his campaign coffers from Goldman Sachs and other major Wall Street donors; those “oligarchs” put their money behind Hillary.

                    1. Trump has been an outsider for decades and has speeches advocating public policy for years. He has been both a Republican and a Democrat. His campaigning was so brilliant that he won spending a tiny fraction of what Hillary spent with almost all the news media and Hollywood against him along with the vast majority of the “oligarchs”. He actually spoke for the people, not the ideological or Stalinists rather the American people who so happen to work for a living and provide for their families.

                      He has been brilliant enough to push the news media to focus on the wrong ball while he erased many of the regulations created by Obama. Like it or not he passed tax reform with cuts no one believed could be accomplished. The economy is rapidly improving. All and all it appears his policies are brilliant as well.

                      Let the dummies call him names. It focuses their attention away from what he is doing.

                      Go, Trump.

  16. “I hope everyone of them is exposed and tried for their crimes.”

    Well, they are definitely being exposed. But fat chance on their being tried for their crimes. How will Sessions, Rosenstein, or Comey be tried by their own fellow DOJ cronies? Will Congress ever stop being a bunch of drunken gutless wonders and/or narcissistic grandstanders?

    I think that Trump really ought to get a second special counsel in there to investigate Mueller and his team, as well as the FBI.

    1. Scott,

      I agree, this is system wide corruption. Other nations people have faced this problem of systemic corruption and defacto dictatorship. We need to work together as citizens to resolve it. It may be that what we can do is have a truth and reconciliation process. I don’t know what the answers are, but I do know it will be citizens who care about our nation that will bring this to a peaceful resolution.

    2. Who knows. The President is slowly but surely learning about DC and using it to our advantage. The most important items currently are Huma Gotcha who should be know be lawyered up and looking for a deal before the line gets too long ….and he own safety. And the part of the money trail leading from DC to Alabama via the Allred et fil conduit and the use of the Arkansas Field Office not the Washinton DC Field office but it’s looking better all the time.

  17. Couldn’t Sessions turn in his resignation if he isn’t allowed to recuse himself?

    I continue to be amazed at how corrupt every one of these people are. Trump will never do what is right or just. Therefore it would need to be Sessions who acted and resigned. He is no more honorable than Trump so that won’t happen either.

    It is only thanks to FOIA requests and whistleblowers that we the people will have any chance of knowing what this evil govt. has been doing for such a very long time. As a citizen, I am sick of what our govt. is doing to our people, other people and to this earth. I hope everyone of them is exposed and tried for their crimes.

    1. J. Edgar Hoover was the killer of John Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy. Ask for an investigation into that.

    2. It would back long before 1898 or 1913 but it has been extra evil since then. On the other hand you could turn your property over to a local descendent of the first indigenes and return back to wherever your ethnic background came from .

      But let it ride for a while and those who you are calling out will have a chance to remove the foreign ideologists we citizens have risen against. At that point it will be our responsibility to uphold our Constitutional Republic and do a little house cleaning of our own.

      You see we learned at the best school in the world how to apply reverse Marxmanship. But we also never forgot our oath of allegiance to The Constitution nor our priorities.

      it will be a nice experience to die of old age in the country I have only read about in history but never experienced until last fall.

      Just like everyone else.

    3. “He is no more honorable than Trump so that won’t happen either.”

      Jill, what did Sessions do to make him dishonorable?

Comments are closed.