Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

(8,203 posts)

13. He is still trying to prevent the need for recusal - his original

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:50 PM

Mar 2017

response - indeed trouble..All he had to do was say he would recuse himself..

.NOW - as you say, quite an odd response....

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

16 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Jeff Sessions - responds to Senate Judiciary today - digging deeper [View all] asiliveandbreathe Mar 2017 OP

What an attempt at obfuscation! randome Mar 2017 #2

That's correct - and now the issue is the question??? oh dear - asiliveandbreathe Mar 2017 #4

You ask a good question ProudLib72 Mar 2017 #3

Reading a comment at link - they suggest it is not under oath.. asiliveandbreathe Mar 2017 #8

Then the only thing this paper is good for ProudLib72 Mar 2017 #15

By all means - however, see comment here #9 - asiliveandbreathe Mar 2017 #16

Sessions is not real bright. trof Mar 2017 #6

He sold his soul... kentuck Mar 2017 #7

Thank you so much....PT.... asiliveandbreathe Mar 2017 #11

Totally agree - perhaps if he was to sample some right now - asiliveandbreathe Mar 2017 #14

He is still trying to prevent the need for recusal - his original asiliveandbreathe Mar 2017 #13