Why is Jeff Sessions hiding the Uranium One informant?

[endicom]

American Thinker
Daniel John Sobieski
Oct. 21, 2017

Perhaps as startling as the revelation that the FBI was investigating the Hillary Clinton/Russia/Uranium One collusion  and that key figures like Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe knew about it and said nothing, is the refusal by Attorney General Jeff Sessions to remove the non-disclosure agreement gag order on the FBI informant who arguably could put Bill and Hillary Clinton and a few others in federal prison.

It was said the Jeff Sessions recused himself from all things Russian because of election campaign conflicts but is it really because he thought it would insulate him from having to divulge what he knew about Uranium One and the people who at the very least knew about the deal, some who approved the deal, including past and present members of the FBI, the DOJ, and Special Counsel Robert Miller’s team? Is Jeff Sessions part of the Uranium One cover-up? If not, then he needs to explain why he is thus far refusing Sen. Chuck Grassley’s request to lift the gag order imposed by the Obama administration as part of the Uranium One cover-up:

More... http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/10/why_is_jeff_sessions_hiding_uranium_one_informant.html

[endicom]

Speculation aside, the question should be answered.

[Bigun]

Speculation aside, the question should be answered.

Damned right it should! And sooner rather than later!

[endicom]

Swamp thing
You make my heart sing
You make everything gravy
Swamp thing

Swamp thing, I think I love you
But I want to know for sure
Come on and hold me tight
I love you

[libertybele]

Yes Sessions IS part of the cover up!!!  Fire him.

[endicom]

Yes Sessions IS part of the cover up!!!  Fire him.

To be replaced by....

I doubt that Trump knew Sessions from Adam. He was probably assured that Sessions is a solid guy with a track record as AG and all of that stuff. I don't know that Sessions is the stiff he now appears to be but if he is then who should be his replacement?

[libertybele]

To be replaced by....

I doubt that Trump knew Sessions from Adam. He was probably assured that Sessions is a solid guy with a track record as AG and all of that stuff. I don't know that Sessions is the stiff he now appears to be but if he is then who should be his replacement?

Trump knew Sessions ... Sessions endorsed him even though at first he was sticking up for Cruz on the campaign trail regarding illegal immigration.

As much as we need Cruz in the Senate and the GOP can't afford for TX to turn blue, he would make an awesome AG.  He has the experience, knowledge and I believe him to still be out of the DC swamp.  If Trump were to nominate him heads would spin and 'they' would do everything they could to stop the nomination. 

Big question to me right now ... will Trump allow the cover-up or will he demand justice for the American people?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Yes Sessions IS part of the cover up!!!  Fire him.

He may be protecting Rosenstein.

[endicom]

Big question to me right now ... will Trump allow the cover-up or will he demand justice for the American people?

How much can he do? If he replaced Sessions today then that would be with someone needing to come up to speed on the investigation. Who is there to bring that replacement up to speed other than the usual suspects?

It's possible that Trump and Sessions are counting on the investigation turning on the elephant-in-the-room Dems.

[Right_in_Virginia]

How much can he do? If he replaced Sessions today then that would be with someone needing to come up to speed on the investigation. Who is there to bring that replacement up to speed other than the usual suspects?

Can the President remove the non-disclosure agreement?

If not, or if it's not politically reasonable, wouldn't a subpoena from the committee compel the individual to testify and render the non-disclosure moot?  (Assuming they know his/her name)

[endicom]

Can the President remove the non-disclosure agreement?

If not, or if it's not politically reasonable, wouldn't a subpoena from the committee compel the individual to testify and render the non-disclosure moot?  (Assuming they know his/her name)

To the first, I don't know but think it's up to the AG.

To the second, a subpoena should be compelling enough but who enforces it? Maybe the Sergeant-at-Arms but I can't tell.


 

[libertybele]

How much can he do? If he replaced Sessions today then that would be with someone needing to come up to speed on the investigation. Who is there to bring that replacement up to speed other than the usual suspects?

It's possible that Trump and Sessions are counting on the investigation turning on the elephant-in-the-room Dems.

This question has come up before; who could Trump appoint that he could trust and would be up to speed?  Ted Cruz.  He's got the background, he's got the experience.  IMHO he would make an excellent AG!!

[libertybele]

Can the President remove the non-disclosure agreement?

If not, or if it's not politically reasonable, wouldn't a subpoena from the committee compel the individual to testify and render the non-disclosure moot?  (Assuming they know his/her name)

I don't know all the answers RIV ... I do know that Trump can fire Sessions, Rosenstein and on down.  He can then appoint a new AG; only problem is the left and right are both guilty as sin and it's going to be difficult for Trump to get any worthwhile nomination through. 

Thinking ahead here ... but if this is let to lie and Trump is unsuccessful in taking care of this, he may very well by looking at impeachment ... not because he's done anything wrong, but, because they can!

[the_doc]

He may be protecting Rosenstein.

If he is protecting anyone, he should be fired--unless Trump is instructing him to protect someone, in which case Sessions should resign (and explain his reason!).

I'm sick and tired of these reputedly "good guys."  Almost all of them are swamp denizens.

[libertybele]

If he is protecting anyone, he should be fired--unless Trump is instructing him to protect someone, in which case Sessions should resign (and explain his reason!).

I'm sick and tired of these reputedly "good guys."  Almost all of them are swamp denizens.

The question still remains ... why did Sessions appoint Rosenstein? Why did Sessions allow the appointment of Mueller?  There is no way he didn't know of their backgrounds.  This really all falls into his lap ... which side is he truly on?

[endicom]

I don't know all the answers RIV ... I do know that Trump can fire Sessions, Rosenstein and on down.

If I have it right then Trump can fire Sessions but not on down.

[libertybele]

If I have it right then Trump can fire Sessions but not on down.

I believe that he can legally fire both Sessions and Rosenstein and Mueller. 

https://www.lawfareblog.com/if-trump-fires-mueller-or-orders-his-firing

[endicom]

I believe that he can legally fire both Sessions and Rosenstein and Mueller. 

https://www.lawfareblog.com/if-trump-fires-mueller-or-orders-his-firing

That left me up in the air on the matter. I guess we'll know in time.

[Right_in_Virginia]

If he is protecting anyone, he should be fired--unless Trump is instructing him to protect someone, in which case Sessions should resign (and explain his reason!).

I'm sick and tired of these reputedly "good guys."  Almost all of them are swamp denizens.

I agree ... and I doubt the President is telling Sessions to protect Rosenstein ... or anyone.

I simply do not understand Sessions --- and I'm starting to think the worst about him.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The question still remains ... why did Sessions appoint Rosenstein? Why did Sessions allow the appointment of Mueller?  There is no way he didn't know of their backgrounds.  This really all falls into his lap ... which side is he truly on?

Great question @libertybele --- and I'm getting a very queasy feeling about Jeff Sessions.

[bigheadfred]

If he can fire Sessions why can't he appoint the next to go as Sessions replacement---and then fire them?

[libertybele]

Great question @libertybele --- and I'm getting a very queasy feeling about Jeff Sessions.

Me too. Unfortunately, he was Trump's pick.  Trump himself made the comment soon after he was nominated that he wasn't going to prosecute Hillary.

This issue is staring us in right in the face with an opportunity for Trump and his administration to prosecute Hillary, Bill, Bammy, Holder, Lynch, Rosenstein, Mueller, Comey ... and I'm sure others.

I know it's only been a couple of days that this has been brought to the surface but the silence from the MSM is to me indicative of what's going to happen.  Nothing. I hope I am wrong.

[libertybele]

If he can fire Sessions why can't he appoint the next to go as Sessions replacement---and then fire them?

Trump can fire both Sessions and Rosenstein and he can appoint Sessions replacement, but the Senate has to approve the nomination. 

Trump not firing Sessions, either means he feels that Sessions will prosecute those that are involved, or he's decided to let things lie.  As more time passes, obviously we'll know, one way or the other.