Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) came to President Donald Trump’s defense on Thursday.
In an interview in the New York Times Wednesday, Trump told the paper he would not have hired Jeff Sessions as attorney general if he knew that Sessions would ultimately recuse himself from the Department of Justice’s Russia investigation.
“You know, I think the President has a point, because the thing here is if everybody is going to recuse themselves just for incidental contact, I think you don’t get really good governance,” Paul said in an interview on “Fox and Friends,” the President’s favored morning news show. “I believe that Jeff Sessions’ contact with the Russians was incidental. In the usual duties of being in Senate, and it being incidental, he should have stayed in the fray and been more supportive of the President.”
Paul went on to rail against Sessions for his actions enforcing asset forfeiture policy, which he says gives the attorney general the power to disproportionately take property from minority and low-income people.
“I think we shouldn’t take people’s property without conviction. This is something I believe very strongly in, and I’m disappointed that Sessions is going after a lot of poor minorities to take their property without due process,” he said.
F*ck… i have to agree with Rand on 2 points.
First, Sessions shouldn’t have recused himself, (he should have resigned, and prosecuted for lying under oath)
Second, seizing assets should only be possible after a conviction.
Along about Oct 2018, Little Randy is going to really regret that the above is in the historical record.
Rand Paul hasn’t been right about almost anything, so why now should we expect him to be ethical. Kentucky is a economically poor state and voters there have a peculiar knack of voting in people who are also intellectually and ethically bankrupt.
The new Republican party identity begins to solidify: Weak on the rule of law; weak on national security.
I absolutely agree – but, of course, that was not Rand’s reasoning.