Donald lashed out yesterday (once again) at Attorney General Jeff Sessions for having the audacity to run a Justice Dept. that dared file charges against two of Trump’s earliest Congressional supporters. (The charges against Rep. Collins and Hunter were not for that particular lapse of ethics and taste, of course, but for a variety of securities fraud, insider trading, campaign finance violations, etc.)
For Donald, the great crime here seems to be that … well, Sessions wasn’t partisan enough. Because of course the Attorney General should be partisan, otherwise what is the point of having the President being able to nominate him?
I mean, look at the “charges” Donald is lobbing:
1. This was a “long-running” investigation — because Donald wants to be able to just accuse people of things and have it go directly to trial. Long-term investments, careful gathering of evidence, careful consideration of what charges can be prosecuted, that’s all just namby-pamby process to him. Which, as we all know, is something Donald abhors.
2. These were “Obama era” investigations — therefore it is immediately suspect, probably evil, and certainly something out to get Donald Trump. The Justice Department should clearly only prosecute crimes the President wants them to prosecute, and any investigations still ongoing from a previous administration should be immediately dropped as soon as someone new is in the White House.
(Note: the Duncan Hunter investigation actually began during the Trump Administration. But why cavil over dates, amirite?)
3. The accused are “two very popular Republican Congressmen” — because being very popular should make one immune to prosecution (careful of the implications of that line of thought, Donald), and the fact that they are Republicans should make them doubly immune, right?
4. This came out in “a well publicized charge” — because of course only the “Fake Media” would have any interest in publicizing that two members of the US House of Representatives were facing federal charges.
5. The charges came out “just ahead of the Mid-Terms” and when “there is not enough time” for them to be fully prosecuted / defended / dismissed before the election — There’s an informal rule at Justice that you don’t release charges and stuff like that within 60 days of an election (thus Democratic outrage at Comey’s “October Surprise” — which Donald loved at the time) — but not only is that not actual law, these charges came out well before that informal 60 day limit before the November midterms.
I mean, what does Donald think should represent a go/no-go point for charges to be filed? 60 days? 90 days? 180? Or does Donald thing that charges should never be filed against the President’s co-partyists?
Does anyone truly think that Donald would be pitching a fit if these charges were against Democratic Representatives? That, right there, is telling.
6. These Congressmen were facing “Two easy wins now in doubt” — That may or may not be so (Donald, of course, is convinced that the GOP are going to blow the Dems away in November, because he knows this is a referendum on him, too), but this accusation only makes sense if one assumes that these charges are made up out of whole cloth, presented and timed solely for political reasons.
Bottom line, Donald Trump thinks the Justice Dept. should serve the interests of the party in power in the White House — and not only thinks it, but is willing to say it.
That, right there, should be grounds for gelding any influence he has by getting rid of GOP majorities in both houses. I’d even suggest it shows a disrespect for the rule of law that should be impeachable, though I doubt that will actually happen.
Just to add to the mix, he later tweeted:
Again, remember that all politics is personal to Donald, not unlike a Mafia capo. The idea of a mixture of loyalties, of appreciating things about a person vs not appreciating other things, is foreign to him. You are either loyal to Donald Trump, or a traitor to him.
Speaking personally as a Democrat, I do not love Jeff Sessions. His policy positions are, generally, loathsome. I do feel sorry for the guy sometimes — he gave up an influential Senate seat to take on a cabinet position he thought would be at the forefront of (legally) implementing a conservative reign over American law, only to become a perpetual punching bag for his boss because of one, very public ethical stance he took: recusing himself from any oversight of the Mueller investigation because of his own role in the Trump campaign.
I admire that stance. I don’t love the man. But, then, not understanding that kind of nuance seems to be Donald’s way.
Similarly, I (like many others) still strongly disagree with Comey’s disclosure of more possible stuff to investigate just prior to the 2016 election — one more factor in how that election played out — but can do so without considering him a foul fiend, or without appreciating his apparent candor and ethics regarding Trump’s shenanigans. Again, it’s nuance, something that With-Me-Or-Against-Me Donald doesn’t recognize.
Which is ironic. Because just as Trump accuses the Dems of flip-flopping on Comey (“hating” him until suddenly they “loved” him), so Donald flip-flopped on him, “loving” him for his October Surprise, until he refused to bow knee and kiss the ring sufficiently; then Donald suddenly “hated,” him, fired him, and has released unrelanting vitriol toward him.
Which should be a lesson to us all: when Donald is accusing someone of something, look to see how that reflects is own behavior.
Trump blasts Sessions over GOP congressmen indictments – CNNPolitics
President Donald Trump on Monday blasted his Attorney General Jeff Sessions and lamented the indictments of two lawmakers who were his earliest supporters in Congress during the 2016 election, suggesting they should not have been charged because they are Republicans.
Original Post
