Attorney General Sessions is scheduled to testify before the House Judiciary Committee tomorrow at 10:00 AM in open session. I will endeavor to make the time to have a post up with the live feed. This evening a letter from AG Sessions to the chairman and majority members of that committee was released. It has gotten everyone stirred up. CBS’s Paula Reid has actually posted the letter to social media. Click on the tweet and then the letter to embiggen it.
NEW: AG Sessions considers special counsel to address concerns about Uranium One & gives R's new line of q's for Sessions hearing tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/q2IUbGswpi
— Paula Reid (@PaulaReidCBS) November 14, 2017
Lawfare‘s Benjamin Wittes has taken the time to provide his actual expert opinion on what this all means. His thoughts are below.
Ok, this thread is a kind of data dump of thoughts on this letter, of which I am genuinely unsure what to make. The following is worth what you are paying for it, but it's what I can do based on the text of letter alone—along with a certain institutional knowledge of the DOJ. https://t.co/6A3dyI2ODZ
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
Second, there is good reason to be concerned about the dangling of the possibility of a special counsel here. The reason, as @nytmike and @maggieNYT emphasize in their story, is that Sessions is under a lot of pressure from Trump himself to investigate Hillary Clinton…
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
…dangling the possibility of a special prosecutor to investigate the President's opponent, particularly when the attorney general's job is on the line, you have to take seriously the possibility that an egregious abuse of power is either taking place or being contemplated.
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
Both in July and in September, House Judiciary Committee Republicans wrote letters to the attorney general calling for a special counsel to investigate a raft of supposed Clinton wrongdoing. Here are the two letters.https://t.co/nBLi7btkkvhttps://t.co/OptT636XGB
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
The rest is after the jump!
Sessions is testifying tomorrow. So it's not a total surprise that he felt compelled to answer these letters from the Chairman and majority members of the committee before which he is testifying before he did so.
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
So what I think DOJ may be doing here is declaring a process in which senior career prosecutors will review the matter and make recommendations to the AG or the DAG (more on that formulation in a moment) as to how to proceed. Theoretically, this could lead to a special counsel.
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
When the attorney general (or the DAG) then dismisses the matter, he will be acting on the presumably unanimous recommendation of his senior career prosecutors.
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
participation in the matter would be a grotesque violation of his recusal—which promised non-involvement in all matters in any way related to the 2016 campaign. Certainly, appointing a special counsel to investigate the President's opponent—or contriving to do so—would be a…
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
from the specific matter, to the DAG." Not all of the matters in the letters are obviously covered by the recusal. One absurd example: Your esteemed Judiciary Committee called for an investigation of @Comey's leaks to @nytmike dating back to 1993—which the latter was 10. pic.twitter.com/3FD0rOzVaR
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
That's why, I think, the letter says that "These senior prosecutors will report directly to the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General, as appropriate." This is an implicit acknowledgement that, in fact, Sessions will be recused.
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
At least, that's what I hope it is.
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
That's all I got.
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 14, 2017
Open thread.
Omnes Omnibus
They are so fucked.
Cheryl Rofer
Thanks, Adam. I hope that Wittes makes this into a blog post.
From the point of view of how a bureaucracy works, this makes a lot of sense.
Sessions is a liar, but getting tangled up in his recusal could be more trouble than he wants. Even more than being a liar, he wants to keep his post.
Another big hearing tomorrow on the bill to limit (slightly) Trump’s ability to use nuclear weapons. I’ll probably have something to say about that.
Cheryl Rofer
And with that, I’m outa here. Will check back in tomorrow morning.
Corner Stone
How in the world could Wittes be so naive?
Adam L Silverman
@Cheryl Rofer: He doesn’t have to. I did it for him!
More seriously, no argument at all. As I wrote in a comment earlier this evening about this:
https://balloon-juice.com/2017/11/13/balloon-juice-public-service-announcement-immigrant-integration-event-in-denver-on-november-14th-2017/#comment-6633728
Corner Stone
Gobsmacked.
Brachiator
@Corner Stone:
half-Wittes? Dim-Wittes?
jl
Maybe Wittes is correct, and a Congressional chairperson, apparently, has the prerogative to ask executive to conduct investigations that may verge on persecution of political opponents. The president doesn’t, and is corrupting DOJ is not his prerogative. Wittes might be correct, but we do not know that he is correct. Intentions play a role in determining what kind of criminal or Constitutional offense was committed. but (IANAL) I think sometimes the mere act constitutes a crime, and this may be a case.
So, I think we have reached a point where a credible case for impeachment, conviction and removal from office can be made and substantial portion of public can be persuaded.
piratedan
and as the wheels grind on, is there anyone associated with the Trump campaign that may actually be clean? I mean, could they ALL really be guilty (Sessions, Conway, Guiliani, Christine, Manafort, Flynn, Bannon, Miller, Page, Preibus, Lewandoski, et al)?
and I guess as far as that goes, is there anyone in the GOP leadership that can also be included in that subset? Does anyone think Pence, Rohrbacher, Nunes, Ryan, McConnell, Scalise, McCarthy, or Cornym aren’t involved, in either the laundering of the money, the direction of the strategically aimed social media attacks or of the cover-up of the first two?
It scares me to think how deep this runs, that they were all stupid enough to think that it wouldn’t be uncovered, did they think that the entire country was just going to go Meh?
Corner Stone
@piratedan:
Glad to see you finally got to where most of us where several months ago.
piratedan
@Corner Stone: would have been there earlier, but I was busy typing “Fuck LBJ”,
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl:
Kinda hard to do when the folk that can do it have their fingers in their ears and are screaming “nah, nah, I can’t hear you”.
jl
@Corner Stone: “: that the allegations are not substantial and—at least insofar as I understand them ”
Maybe a job as constitutional scholar on Fox News is opening up.
I think if you want to talk about problems role of big money in US politics and Bill Clinton and Foundation being unwise, something to say about the uranium business. Serious scandal or any legal issue at all with the uranium bogus scandal: zero, zip, nothing.
If DOJ is not corrupted and an investigation reveals several Big Lies the Trumpsters and GOP have told about the uranium deal to the public, some good might come of it. However, now, that is another thing we can not count on or assume. Trump’s corruption and unconstitutional behavior is what it is, time to start seriously talking impeachment and trial. Public debunking of Big Lies and removal from office would be a win-win.
eemom
Oh yes! Let’s by all means focus as much attention as we can on this desperate bullshit sideshow. It’s not like we have anything better to do.
Corner Stone
@jl: I am having a hard time figuring your comment out. What do you mean?
Kay
Couldn’t it just be complete bullshit they fed to media for purely political reasons? Sessions lied to Congress. Repeatedly. He’d much rather talk about locking up Hillary Clinton. He sure as hell doesn’t want to talk about Don Jr. and Wikileaks or the mall stalker.
The timing of this seems extremely convenient for Sessions and Trump.
jl
@?BillinGlendaleCA: If the GOP can’t remember Nov 7 election, that is their problem.
Have liberals have given up on trying to persuade the public?
No you BillingGlendale!, not you?
Mike E
@eemom: This reality teevee show clearly is a one season affair…it’s shooting its entire wad, sad
jl
@Corner Stone: Long winded way of agreeing with you. From everything I have read about the bogus Uranium One non-scandal, and I have read quite a bit, there is no even remote evidence of anything criminal at all to investigate. I think good case can be made that no reasonable and informed person would think so, therefore evidence that Trump is attempting to corrupt DOJ.
Is that clear enough?.
Corner Stone
@Kay: Of course it is. It’s a political filibuster. He wants to keep the focus on Trump’s political opponents so he can continue doing what he loves.
Yarrow
@piratedan:
Of course they’re all guilty. It’s been obvious for months. How that will play out I don’t know.
Kay
Ugh. And the NYTimes is flogging it. So there’s a shocker.
There seems to be a direct Trump bullshit pipeline at that paper. It goes straight from the Trump Administration to the front page. They can’t let the little weasel distract with another Clinton witchhunt tomorrow. Find out why he lied to congress. That’s the issue.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl: I think the public is persuaded. You seem to be in the “assume a can opener” phase here.
piratedan
@Kay: I can see what Wittes is getting at… Sessions has to show that he’s still doing his job but he also has to steer clear of getting any further on the bad side of his recusal on all things Clinton. So while he may suspect the allegations are bullshit, he kicks it downstairs to have it evaluated to see if there’s anything there. That gives him the appearance of doing something about the allegations, which should make Trump and the Fox News crowd “happy” so they can claim that she’s under investigation again (regardless of how true that really is) and allow them to speculate wildly about how thick the chains will be to place on her for her treasonous actions. Meanwhile, the aforementioned prosecutors will determine if there’s a there there and if they don’t find anything (as expected) the RWNJ’s will get to shout Conspiracy! one more time and make more hay out of that…..
Yarrow
@Kay: Of course it’s convenient. They’re in charge so they get to do stuff like this. Doesn’t mean the investigations aren’t also happening and that more dirt won’t drop, even this week. Perhaps an indictment might make the week more interesting. One of the Flynns, perhaps? Or both!
Corner Stone
I don’t know anything about Chuck Rosenberg (on TRMS tonight). But he seems like an impressive individual.
jl
@?BillinGlendaleCA: You saw something that majority of US public supports impeachment, conviction and removal from office? Srsly? What is it?
Yarrow
@Kay: Don’t you wonder if there’s some other issue at play with the NYT. Didn’t Carlos Slim own part of it for awhile? Wonder how much influence Russia has over the top people there and what way. What are they hiding?
Corner Stone
Anyone who thinks a shifting of responsibility to charge HRC from Sessions to anon prosecutors is going to satisfy Trump and keep the maddening crowd at bay is cray cray.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl: Not asked in so many words, but I’ve seen polling that indicates that.
Kay
@piratedan:
Yeah, I’m sorry butI feel like the Trump/Sessions relationship has been so over-analyzed it’s ridiculous. It doesn’t matter whether Trump DOES or DOES NOT want to fire Sessions. Grounding all these theories about motives in that is weak.
Jeff Sessions should be held accountable for the public work he does- what we SEE, not some elaborate motive and double twist back handspring where he says he’s launching an investigation but what that REALLY means is he is NOT. Sessions lies repeatedly and now seems to be playing some game to weasel out of a hearing where he was to be asked those lies and now comes the “breaking news!” letter 12 hours before hearing.
That’s the story- not whether Donald Trump “likes” Jeff Sessions or not or whether Sessions is planning some elaborate ruse where he fake-evaluates a Clinton scandal.
jl
@?BillinGlendaleCA: Since you travel in respectable company, you probably don’t have a good understanding of economist jokes. We assume a can opener when there is none. You said that there was in fact a can opener.
A Pox on You
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHSVdfvfpqA
Kay
@Yarrow:
I was wondering if it’s the Mercers. There’s something hinky going on there. Their relationship with the Trump Administration is just WAY too tight. It’s almost like they’re part of it- like the bland “neutral” outlet who launder Brietbart stories and make them mainstream.
Yarrow
@Kay: I haven’t seen anything about the Mercers being involved with the NYT but nothing would surprise me. They have been funding all sorts of stuff related to the racist rightwing and certainly have been part of putting Trump in the WH. It’s not just random chance that Bob Mercer suddenly decided sell his company to his daughter. He’s up to his eyeballs in Russian treason. Watching him do a perp walk will be delicious.
Thepatriotherald
Why not just write a blog post instead of abusing Twitter in this way?
mike in dc
The idea behind investigating Uranium One is to try to get Mueller conflicted out(because he was FBI director in 2010). One, it likely won’t work. Two, pretty sure that would wind up with Rod Rosenstein appointing a Mueller deputy or another experienced guy with an impeccable rep for probity to replace him. Three, it might accelerate a move to issue more indictments to give irresistible impetus to the investigation.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl:
I have an advanced degree in the dark arts.
burnspbesq
@Corner Stone:
You’re out of your depth here. Shut up and don’t embarrass yourself any further.
Juice Box
@Corner Stone: The unmoderated comments in the WP are sure full of Uranium One and HRC.
Duane
If Sessions wasn’t such a pathetic suck-up, and in a precarious position himself, he would have told Goldwatte not to waste his time, and that of his department, on such obvious political nonsense.
Duane
@jl: After seeing that video, I am wondering about the company you keep.
So much for that respectable economists thing.
danielx
I suppose it’s possible that Sessions could maintain a hold on what remains of his self-respect and send Trump a resignation letter to the effect that he feels he has lost the confidence of the country and of Trump, etc etc.
And pigs might have wings, too.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Duane:
“Assume a can opener…”
Mary G
The baby cannon today was spectacular:
I couldn’t tell what that was he shot; he’s already done Reddi Whip (who pulled their ads off Hannity today too). Some type of foam insulation?
Anne Laurie
@Yarrow:
The check-writers at the NYTimes, which is a very tradition-bound paper, hatehatehate the Clintons — especially Hillary — with a depth and purity unbound by logic or reason. The people who intend to make a high-dollar career at the NYTimes, e.g. Maggie Haberman, know that anything which “hurts” the Clintons is an easy front-page layup. If Trump were replaced by Pence / Ryan / Roy Moore tomorrow, the NYTimes would run stories defending Talibangelical law/Objectivism/child molestation by Friday, as long as those stories were framed as “Of course Hillary would be even worse!”
jl
@Duane: That link was the for the edification of young @?BillinGlendaleCA:
I try to tone up this joint with some classical music, and what thanks do I get?
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jl:
That was once the case, sadly no longer. ?
TenguPhule
When it comes to Donald Trump and company, the worst speculation is invariably the correct one.
David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch
Nixon did this during Watergate.
He wanted congress/DOJ to investigate LBJ for bugging the Nixon campaign during 1968.
Historians note LBJ said he would reveal Nixon had committed treason regarding Vietnam and that Nixon had illegally received $500,000 from the Greek military junta.
You only act desperately when you know the end is near. It didn’t work for Tricky Dick and it won’t work for Dim Don.
TenguPhule
@piratedan:
Yes.
Emerald
@Kay:
Sometime in the future, History is going to have something to say about that newspaper, and it will not be pleasant.
They believe they write history, of course, as “The Newspaper of Record.”
That job ought to be transferred to the Post fairly quickly, if the Time keeps up this crap.
Unglaublich.
David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch
@Anne Laurie: Trump’s spokesperson, Maggie Haberman
/fixed.
TenguPhule
@David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch: Point of order.
Nixon reportedly nearly started WW III while drunk.
Let’s not assume Trump won’t go that far.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch: And LBJ died 13 days later.
TS
@Omnes Omnibus: That about covers it – a government which criminalizes its political enemies is no democracy
NotMax
@BillinGlendaleCA
Still can recall the slight shock of seeing pictures of him from around that time, after he had allowed his hair to grow to shoulder length.
Aleta
Why is there smoke?
Because there’s fire.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Aleta: Burning down the house.
?BillinGlendaleCA
It seems as though spelling errors now put you in moderation, I’m fucked.
Cermet
@piratedan: Exactly – this is a method to prevent the orange fart cloud from firing him to get someone else so they will remove Mueller.
Aleta
@?BillinGlendaleCA:
No visible means of support
and you’ve not seen nothing yet
Everything’s stuck together
And I don’t know what you expect
staring into the TV set
Fighting fire with fire
SFAW
This has probably been answered elsewhere, but:
Wittes keeps talking about KKKeebler Elf not wanting to compromise his recusal, or some such. What I want to know is: what if he does? What if he says “Fuck it, I’d rather take my chances with [insert name of quasi-regulatory group here] than with having Shitgibbon fire me”?
This is not snark, I really have no idea what punishment — if any — would await him, nor who would administer it, were he to violate the terms of his recusal.
ETA: I’m speaking in theoretical terms, since if the “quasi-regulatory group” is Congress, I expect nothing will happen.
different-church-lady
@Cheryl Rofer:
He did make it into a blog post. He just did the thing everyone does nowadays: use a one-liner software to blog with. Because
languageTwitter is a virus.bystander
I could use a new indictment to cheer me up. Waiting for another opportunity to wear my Men Are Getting Arrested t-shirt again.
Jeffro
@Corner Stone: several? Like, 18-20?
randy khan
@jl:
If they appointed a special counsel for Uranium One, it could be the shortest special counsel investigation ever.
SFAW
@randy khan:
Given Congress, it’s half-life would be somewhere between that of Strontium-90 and infinity.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@randy khan: We saw this with White Water, Congress would whine about biased counsel until they got a card carrying wingnut and then it would be years of nothing until 2020 and some token charge like Hillary was late on her taxes one year.
SFAW
@SFAW:
ITS, not it’s. What a maroon.
Matt McIrvin
@piratedan:
They thought that by the time it was all uncovered, rank corruption would be so normalized that they could disparage it as a non-story. Or that their power would be so complete that they could simply rule by terror and force.
Matt McIrvin
@SFAW: Republicans will be investigating the Clintons’ remote descendants 500 years from now.
Uncle Cosmo
@Mary G: Pray for ReddiWip – if that red can was Raid roachkiller, the entire neighborhood just morphed into a Superfund site. “Hey kids, it’s snowing nerve gas! :p”
retr2327
@jl: The theory that Sessions is just passing the decision to not appoint a special prosecutor down to the career officials so as to get Trump and Goodlatte off his back is an intriguing one, with some plausibility. But here’s one possible way of testing it: is there a record of similar practices in the past? (i.e., sending requests for special counsels/investigations down the line as a way to kill them, instead of making the decision at the top). If there is such a record, then I’d say Wittes is probably on to something. And note: he has the experience and connections to know about such a practice.
Mart
Day late but always like to note that per the NRC neither of the Uranium 1 mines in the USA are licensed for export