why did attorney general recuse himself from russia investigation

See more

Who replaced Attorney General Sessions?

Jeff SessionsPresidentDonald TrumpDeputyDana Boente (acting) Rod RosensteinPreceded byLoretta LynchSucceeded byWilliam Barr33 more rows

Who was AG after Jeff Sessions?

Matthew WhitakerPreceded byJeff SessionsSucceeded byWilliam BarrChief of Staff to the United States Attorney GeneralIn office September 22, 2017 – November 7, 201822 more rows

How long was Whitaker AG?

Whitaker served as Acting Attorney General from November 2018 to February 2019. Prior to becoming Acting Attorney General, Mr. Whitaker served as Chief of Staff to Attorney General Jeff Sessions. He was appointed as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa on June 15, 2004 by President George W.

How much does the Attorney General of the United States make?

Attorney General is a Level I position in the Executive Schedule, thus earning a salary of US$221,400, as of January 2021.

Who was attorney general before Barr?

Donald B. AyerWilliam Pelham Barr (born May 23, 1950) is an American attorney who served as the 77th and 85th United States attorney general in the administrations of Presidents George H. W. Bush and Donald Trump....William BarrPresidentGeorge H. W. BushPreceded byDonald B. AyerSucceeded byGeorge J. Terwilliger III31 more rows

Who is the current US Attorney General?

Merrick GarlandUnited States / Attorney generalMerrick Brian Garland is an American lawyer and jurist serving as the 86th United States attorney general beginning in March 2021. He served as a circuit judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 1997 to 2021. Wikipedia

Is Pete Sessions related to Jeff Sessions?

Pete Sessions is not related to former Senator and Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

How old is Donaldtrump?

76 years (June 14, 1946)Donald Trump / Age

Why did Sessions recuse himself?

Sessions says that he recused himself, on the advice of career ethics experts at the Justice Department, because he thought this was required by the federal regulation controlling “Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship” ( 28 CFR Sec. 45.2 ). But judging from the public testimony that former FBI director James Comey has given about the investigation into Russia’s election-meddling, the regulation did not mandate recusal.

Why are search warrants not required to ignore crime B?

This commonsense principle is similar to the one holding that if agents are executing a search warrant that authorizes them to look for crime A (say, guns with obliterated serial numbers), and in the course of carrying out the lawful search they find evidence of crime B (say, bags of heroin), they are not required to ignore crime B just because it’s not the one they were investigating.

Should an attorney general recuse himself from a counterintelligence investigation?

It is thus easy to see how recusal is supposed to work. Presumptively, an attorney general should not have to recuse himself from a counterintelligence investigation. After all, counterintelligence is not lawyer work; it is about gathering and evaluating intelligence — that’s the FBI’s expertise, not the prosecutors’. Thus, counterintelligence investigations ordinarily do not have a prosecutor assigned.

Is the Russia probe a counterintelligence investigation?

Just last week, in his written and oral testimony, former FBI director James Comey reiterated that the Russia probe is a counterintelligence investigation. As Comey elaborated, a counterintelligence investigation is an effort “to understand the technical and human methods that hostile foreign powers are using to influence the United States or to steal our secrets,” in order to “disrupt” those activities. Again, the point is to gather intelligence about a foreign power, not investigate with an eye toward a prosecution of criminal suspects.

Can an attorney general be disqualified for counterintelligence?

But barring that highly unusual situation, counterintelligence investigations should not trigger disqualification or recusal of an attorney general unless and until the investigation turns up incriminating evidence that could form the basis for a criminal investigation — and a possible prosecution. If that happens, the attorney general (or any other Justice Department official in a recusal situation) not only should but must apply the disqualification rule, and should recuse himself if the criminal investigation involves the kind of conflict of interest — based on a personal or political relationship — set forth in the regulation.

Was Jeff Sessions' recusal from Russia a mistake?

I have argued that Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s recusal from the so-called Russia investigation was a mistake. The attorney general’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday afternoon bolstered this conclusion.

Did the Russia investigation turn up evidence?

Based on what has been reported, the Russia investigation has turned up potentially incriminating evidence involving Michael Flynn, President Trump’s original national-security adviser. There is apparently a federal grand jury considering relevant evidence in Virginia. Applying what I have outlined above, Attorney General Sessions would certainly have had to recuse himself from the criminal investigation of Flynn, with whom he had a political relationship in the Trump campaign and the formation of Trump’s administration.