Poor Donald Trump! He thought he could have a day of decent news coverage following his reading off a teleprompter, but his Russia scandal snatched it away from him. First up in today’s roundup, Paul Krugman:
At this point it’s easier to list the Trump officials who haven’t been caught lying under oath than those who have. This is not an accident.
Critics of our political culture used to complain, with justification, about politicians’ addiction to spin — their inveterate habit of downplaying awkward facts and presenting their actions in a much better light than they deserved. But all indications are that the age of spin is over. It has been replaced by an era of raw, shameless dishonesty.
In part, of course, the pervasiveness of lies reflects the character of the man at the top: No president, or for that matter major U.S. political figure of any kind, has ever lied as freely and frequently as Donald Trump. But this isn’t just a Trump story. His ability to get away with it, at least so far, requires the support of many enablers: almost all of his party’s elected officials, a large bloc of voters and, all too often, much of the news media.
John Cassidy at The New Yorker:
Whatever happens to Sessions, attention will inevitably focus on Trump. Two days after his well-received address to a joint session of Congress, the President finds himself in another fine Russian mess. Sessions isn’t merely a White House aide or a Presidential adviser; during the campaign, he was arguably Trump’s most important political backer, and now he’s the top law-enforcement officer in the country. If Caesar’s wife had to be above suspicion, surely the same thing applies to the Attorney General.
Had the revelations about Sessions’s meetings with Kislyak come as a one-off thing, the White House could perhaps have tried to shrug them off. But they are part of a much bigger story, which is still evolving. The number of Trump associates who have been accused of having undisclosed contact with Russian agents, or who have reportedly been investigated by the F.B.I., now stands at six: Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager; Michael Cohen, his personal lawyer; Roger Stone, a longtime political associate; Carter Page, an oil-industry consultant who acted as one of his foreign-policy advisers; Flynn; and now Sessions.
Bridgette Dunlap at Rolling Stone:
But [recusal] won't solve the larger problem. Sessions' violation of his ethical obligations as a lawyer make him unfit to serve as attorney general. Some commentators are alleging that Sessions committed perjury, but because the crime entails intentional deception, an investigation would be necessary to convict him. Interviews with the staffers who prepared his testimony might indeed provide evidence that he lied – rather than merely forgot or misspoke – if, for example, they discussed his meetings with the Russians. But whether it can be proven Sessions committed perjury isn't the test – the rules of professional responsibility for lawyers set higher standards for their conduct.
Under the relevant rule on "maintaining the integrity of the profession" in Alabama, where Sessions is barred, "dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation" and other "conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice" constitute professional misconduct.
Paul Waldman:
There's an explanation out there somewhere for why so many people around Donald Trump have had contact with shadowy Russians. Up until now, the attitude of most Republicans on Capitol Hill has been: What's the problem? Russia, shmussia — we've got more important things to worry about. Inquiries and investigations and subpoenas? That stuff is for when there's a Democrat in the White House.
But with the revelation that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had at least two meetings with the Russian ambassador during the campaign — despite his denial during his confirmation hearing that he had ever done so — members of the president's party are suddenly asking themselves just how far they're willing to go to defend the administration on this question.
The Washington Post:
Mr. Sessions, who was President Trump’s first and most ardent supporter in the Senate, as well as a top national security adviser to the Trump campaign, was never in a position to serve as an impartial arbiter of any investigation involving Mr. Trump or his campaign. But until Thursday he refused to cede control over Justice Department investigations into contacts between the campaign and the Russian government. [...]
Mr. Sessions’s recusal is only a first necessary step. The second must be the appointment of a special counsel — an independent, nonpartisan actor who can both investigate and prosecute any criminal acts in relation to Russian interference, whether by Mr. Sessions or anyone else. That’s the only way an investigation can have credibility with the public. Simply shifting investigative authority to one of Mr. Sessions’s deputies, who report to him on all other matters, would do nothing to cure the underlying conflict.
On a final note, The Week’s Ryan Cooper implores Congress to do its job:
Only a congressional investigation can determine whether Sessions simply lied or purposefully conspired. It's time for Congress to serve and protect the Constitution of the United States. They must act. [...] This really is a major scandal. Sessions pretty obviously lied under oath about talking to the Russian ambassador. [...]
This is why Congress needs to start doing its constitutional duty for once. This is now the second top-level administration official to lie about contact with Russian officials. We don't need panic and conspiratorial nuttiness. But we do need a calm, detailed investigation into just what happened. Obviously Sessions cannot investigate himself, and he has already said he would recuse himself from any investigation "if necessary."
But given the political pressure already applied to the Department of Justice by President Trump, it would be wise to assume the whole department is suborned. Only Congress has the independence and political heft to investigate properly.