SilverSurfer, crap, your logic there is as bad as Trump's in more than not that i've seen cases .. you should have read at least the first article before you replied .. you should have read some .. i helped you here
Carlson lost .. "Sessions's first national exposure was, surely, mortifying for the would-be federal judge. It was 1986, and the then-39-year-old US attorney for the Southern District of Alabama was a Reagan nominee to the federal bench. Sessions had good reason to believe he'd be rubber-stamped through to a judgeship – some 200 of the Gipper's judges had already been heavily sprinkled throughout the federal judicial system. But Sessions stopped up the works. The young lawyer became only the second man in 50 years to be rejected by the Senate judiciary committee.
Also, if you were honest about more you would know that i have posted many times decrying racism in Australia .. the opposite of what i've seen of shat Sessions has done.
SilverSurfer -- no, it patently and undeniably doesn't -- if he supported racist politics/parties/politicians there and parroted their references and talking points and policies, then, but only then, he properly could/should be held at least to some extent complicit -- but he doesn't, and he never has -- consistently strongly to the contrary