• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it is not glory.

Republicans in disarray!

My right to basic bodily autonomy is not on the table. that’s the new deal.

There are some who say that there are too many strawmen arguments on this blog.

The republican speaker is a slippery little devil.

After dobbs, women are no longer free.

We will not go back.

The rest of the comments were smacking Boebert like she was a piñata.

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

If you can’t control your emotions, someone else will.

A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals

The words do not have to be perfect.

Welcome to day five of every-bit-as-bad-as-you-thought-it-would-be.

Republicans choose power over democracy, every day.

I am pretty sure these ‘journalists’ were not always such a bootlicking sycophants.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

Michigan is a great lesson for Dems everywhere: when you have power…use it!

I’m starting to think Jesus may have made a mistake saving people with no questions asked.

This has so much WTF written all over it that it is hard to comprehend.

Since we are repeating ourselves, let me just say fuck that.

The only way through is to slog through the muck one step at at time.

It is possible to do the right thing without the promise of a cookie.

You cannot love your country only when you win.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / America / Benjamin Wittes Shares Some Expert Thoughts on AG Sessions’ Letter to Congress

Benjamin Wittes Shares Some Expert Thoughts on AG Sessions’ Letter to Congress

by Adam L Silverman|  November 14, 201712:06 am| 74 Comments

This post is in: America, Domestic Politics, Election 2016, Election 2017, Open Threads, Politics, Silverman on Security, Not Normal

FacebookTweetEmail

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.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Proof of Life: Photos from Sunday’s LA-Area Meetup
Next Post: Tuesday Morning Open Thread: Breathe! »

Reader Interactions

74Comments

  1. 1.

    Omnes Omnibus

    November 14, 2017 at 12:14 am

    They are so fucked.

  2. 2.

    Cheryl Rofer

    November 14, 2017 at 12:14 am

    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.

  3. 3.

    Cheryl Rofer

    November 14, 2017 at 12:16 am

    And with that, I’m outa here. Will check back in tomorrow morning.

  4. 4.

    Corner Stone

    November 14, 2017 at 12:17 am

    How in the world could Wittes be so naive?

  5. 5.

    Adam L Silverman

    November 14, 2017 at 12:18 am

    @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

    Those prosecutors are career DOJ. They will take their time and quietly review everything that was done with each thing they’ve been asked about. Some time, starting in about 90 days or so, with potential delays because of the holidays, they’ll report back that there is no factual basis to further investigate any of this and that the Comey email investigation is before the IG, as Sessions knows, and therefore needs to remain off limits so the IG can proceed unimpeded. It is going to be very, very difficult for Sessions to turn any of this into something that DOJ will actually move forward on. But by doing this, and leaking that he’s doing it, he get’s both the President off his back, as well as the couple of members of the House that were saying today he needed to either do this or resign. Sessions is a racist ideologue. He already knows he’s on thin ice with the FBI and the Intel Community over the Russia interference stuff. This is him just buying time by assigning make work.

  6. 6.

    Corner Stone

    November 14, 2017 at 12:21 am

    The reason is that the allegations are not substantial and—at least insofar as I understand them—they will not serve as a proper predicate for a criminal investigation, let alone require a special counsel.

    Gobsmacked.

  7. 7.

    Brachiator

    November 14, 2017 at 12:22 am

    @Corner Stone:

    How in the world could Wittes be so naive?

    half-Wittes? Dim-Wittes?

  8. 8.

    jl

    November 14, 2017 at 12:23 am

    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.

  9. 9.

    piratedan

    November 14, 2017 at 12:25 am

    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?

  10. 10.

    Corner Stone

    November 14, 2017 at 12:27 am

    @piratedan:

    I mean, could they ALL really be guilty (Sessions, Conway, Guiliani, Christine, Manafort, Flynn, Bannon, Miller, Page, Preibus, Lewandoski, et al)?

    Glad to see you finally got to where most of us where several months ago.

  11. 11.

    piratedan

    November 14, 2017 at 12:28 am

    @Corner Stone: would have been there earlier, but I was busy typing “Fuck LBJ”,

  12. 12.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 12:29 am

    @jl:

    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.

    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”.

  13. 13.

    jl

    November 14, 2017 at 12:29 am

    @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.

  14. 14.

    eemom

    November 14, 2017 at 12:30 am

    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.

  15. 15.

    Corner Stone

    November 14, 2017 at 12:32 am

    @jl: I am having a hard time figuring your comment out. What do you mean?

  16. 16.

    Kay

    November 14, 2017 at 12:34 am

    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.

  17. 17.

    jl

    November 14, 2017 at 12:35 am

    @?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?

  18. 18.

    Mike E

    November 14, 2017 at 12:37 am

    @eemom: This reality teevee show clearly is a one season affair…it’s shooting its entire wad, sad

  19. 19.

    jl

    November 14, 2017 at 12:38 am

    @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?.

  20. 20.

    Corner Stone

    November 14, 2017 at 12:38 am

    @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.

  21. 21.

    Yarrow

    November 14, 2017 at 12:39 am

    @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?

    Of course they’re all guilty. It’s been obvious for months. How that will play out I don’t know.

  22. 22.

    Kay

    November 14, 2017 at 12:39 am

    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.

  23. 23.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 12:40 am

    @jl: I think the public is persuaded. You seem to be in the “assume a can opener” phase here.

  24. 24.

    piratedan

    November 14, 2017 at 12:41 am

    @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…..

  25. 25.

    Yarrow

    November 14, 2017 at 12:42 am

    @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!

  26. 26.

    Corner Stone

    November 14, 2017 at 12:43 am

    I don’t know anything about Chuck Rosenberg (on TRMS tonight). But he seems like an impressive individual.

  27. 27.

    jl

    November 14, 2017 at 12:43 am

    @?BillinGlendaleCA: You saw something that majority of US public supports impeachment, conviction and removal from office? Srsly? What is it?

  28. 28.

    Yarrow

    November 14, 2017 at 12:44 am

    @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?

  29. 29.

    Corner Stone

    November 14, 2017 at 12:46 am

    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.

  30. 30.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 12:49 am

    @jl: Not asked in so many words, but I’ve seen polling that indicates that.

  31. 31.

    Kay

    November 14, 2017 at 12:50 am

    @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.

  32. 32.

    jl

    November 14, 2017 at 12:52 am

    @?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

  33. 33.

    Kay

    November 14, 2017 at 12:54 am

    @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.

  34. 34.

    Yarrow

    November 14, 2017 at 1:01 am

    @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.

  35. 35.

    Thepatriotherald

    November 14, 2017 at 1:04 am

    Why not just write a blog post instead of abusing Twitter in this way?

  36. 36.

    mike in dc

    November 14, 2017 at 1:09 am

    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.

  37. 37.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 1:09 am

    @jl:

    Since you travel in respectable company, you probably don’t have a good understanding of economist jokes.

    I have an advanced degree in the dark arts.

  38. 38.

    burnspbesq

    November 14, 2017 at 1:33 am

    @Corner Stone:

    You’re out of your depth here. Shut up and don’t embarrass yourself any further.

  39. 39.

    Juice Box

    November 14, 2017 at 1:38 am

    @Corner Stone: The unmoderated comments in the WP are sure full of Uranium One and HRC.

  40. 40.

    Duane

    November 14, 2017 at 1:39 am

    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.

  41. 41.

    Duane

    November 14, 2017 at 1:44 am

    @jl: After seeing that video, I am wondering about the company you keep.
    So much for that respectable economists thing.

  42. 42.

    danielx

    November 14, 2017 at 1:53 am

    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.

  43. 43.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 1:53 am

    @Duane:

    respectable economists

    “Assume a can opener…”

  44. 44.

    Mary G

    November 14, 2017 at 1:54 am

    The baby cannon today was spectacular:

    Boom!!https://t.co/7Dn3cGEUqY pic.twitter.com/BRmfYdtiK4— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) November 13, 2017

    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?

  45. 45.

    Anne Laurie

    November 14, 2017 at 2:00 am

    @Yarrow:

    Don’t you wonder if there’s some other issue at play with the NYT.

    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!”

  46. 46.

    jl

    November 14, 2017 at 2:03 am

    @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?

  47. 47.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 2:10 am

    @jl:

    young @?BillinGlendaleCA

    That was once the case, sadly no longer. ?

  48. 48.

    TenguPhule

    November 14, 2017 at 3:09 am

    When it comes to Donald Trump and company, the worst speculation is invariably the correct one.

  49. 49.

    David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch

    November 14, 2017 at 3:11 am

    Nixon did this during Watergate.

    He wanted congress/DOJ to investigate LBJ for bugging the Nixon campaign during 1968.

    On Jan. 9, 1973, Nixon said that “if this could be cranked up, LBJ could turn off the whole congressional investigation” of Watergate. The request and the threat were duly conveyed to the LBJ ranch in Texas. According to Haldeman, the ex-president, talking to DeLoach, threatened, in response, to reveal something damaging to Nixon. That something has, until now, been a mystery. Haldeman’s diary, as published last year, says, “LBJ got very hot and called Deke and said to him that if the Nixon people are going to play with this, that he would release [deleted material].”

    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.

  50. 50.

    TenguPhule

    November 14, 2017 at 3:12 am

    @piratedan:

    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?

    Yes.

  51. 51.

    Emerald

    November 14, 2017 at 3:14 am

    @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

    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.

  52. 52.

    David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch

    November 14, 2017 at 3:15 am

    @Anne Laurie: Trump’s spokesperson, Maggie Haberman

    /fixed.

  53. 53.

    TenguPhule

    November 14, 2017 at 3:16 am

    @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.

  54. 54.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 3:19 am

    @David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch: And LBJ died 13 days later.

  55. 55.

    TS

    November 14, 2017 at 3:57 am

    @Omnes Omnibus: That about covers it – a government which criminalizes its political enemies is no democracy

  56. 56.

    NotMax

    November 14, 2017 at 4:34 am

    @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.

  57. 57.

    Aleta

    November 14, 2017 at 4:37 am

    Why is there smoke?

    When Mr. Nix’s (Cambridge Analytic) aapproach to WikiLeaks was reported by The Wall Street Journal last month, it wasn’t clear whether Cambridge was working for the Trump campaign at the time. Federal Election Commission records show the first payment by the campaign to Cambridge Analytica is dated July 29, 2016.
    New details about the timing of Cambridge Analytica’s Trump campaign work show that the firm’s effort to obtain the Clinton emails—which U.S. intelligence agencies later determined had been stolen by Russian intelligence and given to the Sweden-based WikiLeaks—came as the company was in the advanced stages of contract negotiations with the campaign and had already dispatched employees to help it.
    Mr. Nix first pitched Mr. Trump’s advisers on working with Cambridge Analytica in mid-May, after Steve Bannon —who went on to become White House chief strategist—introduced them, according to people familiar with the matter. In the first week of June, the company dispatched a small team to San Antonio, where Mr. Trump’s digital operation was based, according to people familiar with the company’s hiring.
    On June 13, 2016, after weeks of negotiations, the company shipped a contract to the campaign, according to emails reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. Mr. Nix and a Trump campaign representative signed the contract on June 23, a person familiar said. -from WSJ

    Because there’s fire.

  58. 58.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 5:14 am

    @Aleta: Burning down the house.

  59. 59.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    November 14, 2017 at 5:16 am

    It seems as though spelling errors now put you in moderation, I’m fucked.

  60. 60.

    Cermet

    November 14, 2017 at 5:47 am

    @piratedan: Exactly – this is a method to prevent the orange fart cloud from firing him to get someone else so they will remove Mueller.

  61. 61.

    Aleta

    November 14, 2017 at 6:00 am

    @?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

  62. 62.

    SFAW

    November 14, 2017 at 6:43 am

    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.

  63. 63.

    different-church-lady

    November 14, 2017 at 6:50 am

    @Cheryl Rofer:

    I hope that Wittes makes this into a blog post.

    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.

  64. 64.

    bystander

    November 14, 2017 at 7:31 am

    I could use a new indictment to cheer me up. Waiting for another opportunity to wear my Men Are Getting Arrested t-shirt again.

  65. 65.

    Jeffro

    November 14, 2017 at 7:45 am

    @Corner Stone: several? Like, 18-20?

  66. 66.

    randy khan

    November 14, 2017 at 7:46 am

    @jl:

    If they appointed a special counsel for Uranium One, it could be the shortest special counsel investigation ever.

  67. 67.

    SFAW

    November 14, 2017 at 7:50 am

    @randy khan:

    If they appointed a special counsel for Uranium One, it could be the shortest special counsel investigation ever.

    Given Congress, it’s half-life would be somewhere between that of Strontium-90 and infinity.

  68. 68.

    Enhanced Voting Techniques

    November 14, 2017 at 8:50 am

    @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.

  69. 69.

    SFAW

    November 14, 2017 at 8:55 am

    @SFAW:

    it’s half-life

    ITS, not it’s. What a maroon.

  70. 70.

    Matt McIrvin

    November 14, 2017 at 9:03 am

    @piratedan:

    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?

    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.

  71. 71.

    Matt McIrvin

    November 14, 2017 at 9:05 am

    @SFAW: Republicans will be investigating the Clintons’ remote descendants 500 years from now.

  72. 72.

    Uncle Cosmo

    November 14, 2017 at 10:01 am

    @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”

  73. 73.

    retr2327

    November 14, 2017 at 11:37 am

    @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.

  74. 74.

    Mart

    November 14, 2017 at 12:00 pm

    Day late but always like to note that per the NRC neither of the Uranium 1 mines in the USA are licensed for export

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - beckya57 - Copper Canyon, Mexico, April 2025
Image by beckya57 (7/31/25)

World Central Kitchen

Donate

Recent Comments

  • Princess on GOP Venality Open Thread: May Van Orden Be the First of Many Defections… (Jul 10, 2025 @ 6:03am)
  • Baud on Wednesday Night Open Thread (Jul 10, 2025 @ 6:02am)
  • Baud on GOP Venality Open Thread: May Van Orden Be the First of Many Defections… (Jul 10, 2025 @ 6:01am)
  • mappy! on GOP Venality Open Thread: May Van Orden Be the First of Many Defections… (Jul 10, 2025 @ 6:00am)
  • scribbler on On The Road – dmkingto – SF Bay Area Benches, round 2 (Jul 10, 2025 @ 5:55am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Feeling Defeated?  If We Give Up, It's Game Over

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!