Sessions earlier wrote a letter to his colleagues urging them to oppose Hamilton.

Steve Benen at The Washington Monthly points out that four years ago, Sessions was singing a different tune:

“I have stated over and over again on this floor that I would refuse to put an anonymous hold on a judge; that I would object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported; that I felt the Senate should do its duty. If we don’t like somebody the President nominates, vote him or her up or down. But don’t hold them in this anonymous unconscionable limbo.”

Yes, he called it “unconscionable.”

Update: In fact, that quote above, which I took from The Washington Monthly, was Sessions quoting Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), not Sessions speaking for himself.

However, Sessions himself said in 2003, referring to a filibuster of judicial nominations: “People on both sides of the aisle have understood it to be wrong. They have understood it to be in violation of the Constitution. . . . Mr. President, these nominees are entitled to an up-and-down vote. If a Member does not like them, he or she can vote against them. But it is time to move these nominees.”

Later that year on The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, Sessions complained that Democrats “blocked an up-or-down vote by carrying out the filibuster rule, and I think that’s a very, very grim thing. It should not occur.”

Echoing some of the themes running through my story posted today, Benen writes:

Is Gonzales really that confused about what he did that was “so fundamentally wrong”? I suppose he proved during multiple congressional hearings that his memory is similar to that of someone who’s suffered serious head trauma, but Gonzales’ list of scandals is hard to forget.

Just off the top of my head, there was the U.S. Attorney purge scandal, Gonzales signing torture memos, his conduct in John Ashcroft’s hospital room, his oversight of a Justice Department that was engaged in widespread employment discrimination, and his gutting of the DoJ’s Civil Rights Division. Gonzales was even investigated by the department’s Inspector General on allegations of perjury and obstruction.

On warrantless-searches, the Military Commissions Act, policy on detainees at Guantanamo Bay, and the Geneva Conventions, Gonzales was a disaster. On managing the Justice Department, he filled his staff with Pat Robertson acolytes, feigned ignorance while structural disasters unfolded, and showed shocking tolerance for corruption and politicization of a department that, for the benefit of the nation and the rule of law, needed to maintain independence.

Maybe it’s not so surprising after all that Gonzales still can’t find a publisher for his memoir.