For all the rehashing of the Trump-Flynn-Russia menagerie I believe the most significant event was Ms. Yates’ explanation for why she chose not to defend Trump’s EO.
It has, and again today, been made abundantly clear that the original Travel Ban met the legal test sufficient to warrant backing by the DOJ. Yet, despite her well-scripted and rehearsed sermon-on-the-banal, it is abundantly clear that her actions were personal if not right out of Encyclopedia-Obama.
More specifically and to the point; it is not the AG’s function to adjudicate the discretion of the Policy-Making Apparatus any more than it is the privilege of an AG to camouflage their personal opposition by anticipating the arguments of a yet to be named or known Plaintiff.
The Court System is the appropriate domain for the trier-of-facts; apparently, Ms. Yates has unilaterally decided that political-vice is now and hereafter to be senior to the rule of law.
Curtis C. Greco, Founder