… But all the things he said were innuendo. He doesn’t want anyone in the Attorney General’s office who is not a progressive. He did not draw blood. He had no facts to back up his attacks. It was just a regurgitation of Democrat talking points.
Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection correctly called Booker’s rant nothing but a publicity stunt. He has Presidential aspirations, you see, and he needs the face time.
You would think Booker might have had something to say that had not already been said by Democrats a hundred times already. He didn’t.
You would think Booker might have had some personal anecdote which would have given him insight others didn’t have. He didn’t. Indeed, the only personal anecdote was positive, how Booker had worked closely with Sessions to pass legislation granting the Congressional Gold Medal to recognize those who marched in Selma on the Raymond Pettis Bridge in the famous civil rights march.
Instead it was same old, same old. Literally nothing new, startling or historic. It was just time in the spotlight.”
Sad, really. The Congressional Black caucus was aligned against Sessions. They used terms like ‘Racist’ but presented no evidence of racism. The reason for their position is clear. Sessions is not a progressive Democrat like they all are. The CBC has no power, even less, now, since the election, but they still have the ability to shout, “Racist”, any time one of them gets in front of a microphone.