Jeff Sessions

The beleaguering of Jeff Sessions

Featured image Last week President Trump complained on the record to New York Times White House reporters Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman about Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Trump expressed profound dissatisfaction with Sessions’s recusal from investigations related to the 2016 presidential campaign. Sessions’s recusal covers what is now the Special Counsel investigation under the direction of Robert Mueller. I read Trump’s remarks to be an (unsubtle) invitation to Sessions to resign. Trump »

Jeff Sessions and the Russian ambassador

Featured image A few days ago, the Washington Post reported that Attorney Jeff Sessions’ statements about what he discussed with the Russian ambassador are at odds with reports by the ambassador to his government about what he and Sessions discussed. However, as I argued here, there is no inconsistency between the statements of Sessions quoted by the Post and the Russian ambassador’s alleged description of his talks with Sessions. The Sessions statements »

The Washington Post swings and misses at Jeff Sessions

Featured image The Washington Post claims that Attorney General Sessions’ statements about what he discussed with the Russian ambassador are at odds with reports by the ambassador to his government about what he and Sessions discussed. The Post relies on, you guessed it, “current and former U.S. officials.” But the Post fails to describe a contradiction between what Sessions has said and what the Russian ambassador supposedly reported. Here are the only »

Trump throws a good man, and a good AG, under the bus

Featured image Most of us understand, I think, that President Trump lacks class and self-discipline. Still, I would not have expected him to rip Jeff Sessions, his Attorney General, in an interview with the New York Times, of all organs. If Trump is this unhappy with Sessions, then fire him. Or accept his resignation, which Sessions reportedly offered after the last time Trump popped off about him. But don’t whine to Maggie »

Mr. Trump regrets

Featured image President Trump has given a wide-raning interview to New York Times reporters Peter Baker, Michael Schmidt and Maggie Haberman. The Mueller investigation is on his mind in a big way. President Trump observes: “Sessions should have never recused himself, and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job and I would have picked somebody else” (audio below). The President further characterizes »

What Russia Investigation?

Featured image The Democrats are making fools of themselves with their investigation of nothing, so perhaps the best thing we can do is laugh at them. Michael Ramirez ridicules their questioning of Attorney General Jeff Sessions. There must be something about Russia lurking in his background somewhere! Click to enlarge: »

Jennifer Rubin swings and misses at Jeff Sessions

Featured image The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin tries to salvage something for the anti-Trump cause from Jeff Sessions’ testimony yesterday. Grasping at straws, she characterizes as “exceptionally weak,” Sessions’ explanation of why his recusal from the Russia investigation didn’t preclude him from participating in the decision to fire the FBI director, James Comey. Sessions’ explanation of why he wasn’t precluded from involvement in the Comey firing is straightforward. In his written testimony, »

Cool Hand Dems

Featured image In his comments on the appearance of Attorney General Sessions before the Senate Intelligence Committee yesterday afternoon John quotes Senator Cotton’s colloquy with Sessions (video below). It brought a rare moment of clarity to the proceedings. The alleged collusion of the Trump campaign with Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election was never more than a pretext. Now it is something like ancient history. As for the alleged collusion, there »

An Investigation of Nothing

Featured image It was said of the Seinfeld show that it was a TV program about nothing. It occurred to me, reading the transcript of Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee this afternoon, that the “Russia investigation”–this part of it, anyway–is also about nothing. Sessions must have wondered, at times, why in the world he was there. He testified that he knew nothing about the alleged Russian spear »

Sessions’ Testimony Should Reveal Absurdity of “Russia Investigation”

Featured image Tomorrow afternoon Attorney General Jeff Sessions will testify publicly, and I assume on television, before the Senate Intelligence Committee. The Associated Press previews Sessions’ appearance as though it were a cage match, but I am pretty sure it will be anticlimactic, if not embarrassing, for the Democrats. Because it will raise, in bald form, the question: what the heck are you investigating? The AP writes: The hearing will bring sharp »

Angry with Jeff Sessions, the New York Times revises history

Featured image “Unity Was Emerging on Sentencing. Then Came Jeff Sessions.” So declares the New York Times in a story bemoaning the failure of Congress to pass sentencing reform legislation in 2016 and the recent order from Attorney General Sessions to end lenient charging practices at the Department of Justice. Jeff Sessions certainly deserves credit for opposing the lenient sentencing legislation. His effort was heroic. But Times reporter Carl Hulse distorts the »

Memo to Jeff Sessions: It’s Time to Clean House

Featured image Of all the Obama administration scandals, what Barack Obama, Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch did to the Department of Justice is one of the worst. Two manifestations of the depths to which DOJ has fallen emerged today. First, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, the highly partisan Democrat who selectively prosecuted Dinesh D’Souza for a felony and tried to send him to jail because he contributed too much to a Senate campaign, »

Too much of nothing

Featured image Do you ever get the feeling there is an elaborate game underway? That the elite media are working overtime on behalf of their political teammates? That to do so they have created something out of nothing? That they themselves have succumbed to the hysteria they seek to foment among us? The Washington Post has devoted six reporters to the story reporting that then Senator Sessions had two meetings with the »

Sessions will recuse himself from Russian election-involvement probe

Featured image Attorney General Jeff Sessions said today that he will recuse himself from any investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign. In fact, Sessions went further than that. He will recuse himself from any investigation related to the 2016 presidential campaign. This was the right thing for Sessions to do. The investigation already underway will likely encompass Sessions’ two “meetings,” such as they were, with the Russian ambassador. Under »

McCaskill piles on Sessions with dishonest tweet

Featured image Democrats and the mainstream media are attacking Jeff Sessions over his two meetings with the Russian ambassador last year. Scott has the story. Sen Claire McCaskill joined the pile-on party by tweeting: “I’ve been on the Armed Services Com for 10 years. No call or meeting w/ Russian ambassador. Ever. Ambassadors call members of Foreign Rel Com.” (Emphasis added) McCaskill was trying to undermine any suggestion that Sessions’ two meetings »

The Sessions connection

Featured image Today’s skirmish in the war on the nascent Trump administration is the Washington Post’s “Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disclose.” The Post reports that Attorney General Sessions met with the Russian ambassador twice last year while the presidential campaign was in progress, once in July and once in September. The second such meeting took place in Senator Sessions’s Senate office. Senator Sessions »

Al Franken triples down on stupid

Featured image I’m not enough of an elitist to believe that only Senators with legal training should serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee. However, the ability to engage competently in legal reasoning ought to be a prerequisite. In his work on the Judiciary Committee, Al Franken has failed to display this ability. Indeed, he shows a lack of competence in basic logic that, in a better world, would disqualify him from the »