Your first paragraph is based off assumptions that all leftist have wet dreams about, but we wouldn't mind either.
Your second paragraph is the result of an AG who wasn't doing anything, thus was asked for his resignation.
Ummm, all your links are garbage, some are straight up old to help reinforce a narrative NOT there with broadstroke techniques.
Example: Graham says holy hell if sessions is fired, link dated to 2017. Fast forward to this year...
"Trump should replace Sessions..."
Secondly, those TWO former AG? What of it? Former Bush officials, they just gave an opinion and nothing more.
Actually, from that very link you sourced...
"Mukasey and Gonzales, who both questioned Whitaker's standing as a non-confirmed appointee, disagreed over whether the acting attorney general should
recuse himself from overseeing the Mueller inquiry.
"I don't think he should recuse," Mukasey said. "These are past statements. The question is whether he is suited for the job." Et al.
I don't think he should recuse"
All in all, this thread is another hit piece that attempts to get the reader engage on some wild Nixon ride based off old ass links and assumptions,
clearly none of it proves any angle you have presented.
For the critical and aspiring reader, this is a great way to sharpen your skills and see past the BS, lies and slander. I urge all to take whatever
statements were linked and challenge them, its all easy as you only have to read beyond the titles Leftist and leftist OPs never seem to do.
Here, you'll see how this thread mimics liberal media to the tee.
Anyways, another one for the garbage bin.