What else is new? In a fit of predictable hysteria, Democrat senator (writ small) “Schumer calls on Trump to pull attorney general pick over Mueller memo“
That Trump nominee, you see, wrote a reasoned article on what was known as publicly available information on the obstruction charges Mueller was considering vs Trump.
God forbid a reasoned individual should be Attorney General.
Andy McCarthy has a great in-depth analysis concerning that article William Barr wrote, saying “Barr, whom President Trump has nominated to be the next attorney general, was not prejudging the facts. He was addressing the law and Justice Department policy. With great persuasive force, the 19-page memo posits two contentions. First, based on what is publicly known, the special counsel’s theory of obstruction is legally flawed. Second, if a Justice Department investigation is going to be used to take down a democratically elected president, the social cohesion of our body politic demands that it be over a clear, very serious crime, not a novel and aggressive theory of prosecution.”
“Legally flawed” prosecution is a serious matter.
Likewise, to “take down a democratically elected president” is a serious matter.
When a nominee for Attorney General is not worthy of consideration because he/she is willing to address serious matters in a forthright, open manner, it’s silly season in DC.
Especially if we consider that, on a wide range of issues liberal Supreme Court Justices like Ginsberg has opined…should she recuse on abortion and gun-ownership rights?
Schumer is a blithering idiot – a symbolic image of New York elitists.
Weighing in on legal issues is what reasoning legal minds do, Chuck. Get over it.