greenmountaineer wrote:
In order to ensure justice, as much as that can be done, anyone with any interest in such a case, and being in a position to investigate it, must recuse themselves from dealing with it. Jeff had worked in the campaign, and so had an interest in it. It later turned out that he had also had meetings with Russians. If he had not recused himself, it would have really looked bad.
We had a case like this in Vermont history. Due to navigational errors in the 17th century, both New York and New Hampshire thought they owned the territory. The Royal governor of New Hampshire started granting land in the area around 1765 or so. When it finally got to court about 1770, the judge was given 30,000 acres of land by the New York authorities just before the trial. He should have recused himself, and had he been as honorable a man as Jeff Sessions, he would have. But he was a royal judge and found for New York, with the result that folks who had bought land from New Hampshire in good faith, were told that they must buy it again
In order to ensure justice, as much as that can b... (
show quote)
I understand what you're saying.. And I had no problem with Sessions recusing himself...I was just interested in the particulars.....
Would have been a difficult decision for anyone...