Jeff Sessions, Trumps new AG and Former Campaign Advisor, lied about his Russian contacts

a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Re-read the OP, and the entire story.

He didn't lie about anything, he wasn't affiliated with the campaign, and he wasn't aware of anyone affiliated with the campaign in contact with "Russian Agents"...

This whole Russian witch hunt is beyond laughable.

The Democrats I remember always admired communism and the Soviet Union, now all of a sudden they hate Russia, it's really gone way too far, give it up.

originally posted by: carewemust
Not disclosing is not the same thing as LYING. If Sessions wasn't ASKED, there's no need of him disclosing every contact he had with officials of other nations.

He was asked twice...Once verbally during the confirmation hearing and once in written form...He denied any contact with Russian officials both times..

Democrats need to focus on 2018 and 2020. The months are ticking by...

Sovereignty first then we can get back to partisanship..

Is it wrong for a sitting US Senator to meet with an Ambassador, at the Capital? Obviously he wasn't trying to hide it. Maybe when he said he didn't meet with "the Russians", he assumed the question meant within the context of the Campaign or matters of intrigue and not simply routine Senate intelligence meetings?

Still though, he should have qualified/clarified it.

Read the Washington Post article about this subject. It directly quotes Al Frankin's question and Sessions' answer. He lied.

originally posted by: Signals
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Re-read the OP, and the entire story.

He didn't lie about anything, he wasn't affiliated with the campaign, and he wasn't aware of anyone affiliated with the campaign in contact with "Russian Agents"...

This whole Russian witch hunt is beyond laughable.

The Democrats I remember always admired communism and the Soviet Union, now all of a sudden they hate Russia, it's really gone way too far, give it up.

originally posted by: Signals
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Re-read the OP, and the entire story.

He didn't lie about anything, he wasn't affiliated with the campaign,

Yes he was...and even says the same in his answer when he lied. He called himself a Trump Surrogate.

and he wasn't aware of anyone affiliated with the campaign in contact with "Russian Agents"...

The man he had personal meetings with in his office, the ambassador in DC is Russia's top spy recruiter in the states..

But even if Sessions didn't know that...He said "Russians"...that he had no meetings or conversations with Russian Officials...The Chief Russian Ambassador in DC would qualify.

Either way

Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government

Sessions answer NO

Where did you come up with the "Russian Agents" lie?

a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Well that's a pretty reliable source, maybe I will....

Another witch hunt, just another attempt to slow down progress. Face it, the wacko liberal left have FAILED in their representation of America, and America is fed up with it.

They can "trump" up all the accusations they want, but it is time to move forward and rebuild this place, enough with the BS.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
Is it wrong for a sitting US Senator to meet with an Ambassador, at the Capital?

Yes..without reporting it..as a member of the Armed Services Committee..and giving no explanation as to what was discussed.

Obviously he wasn't trying to hide it.

The precise opposite...He told no one, even in confirmation hearings he outright denied having ANY CONTACT AT ALL WITH RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS IN 2016..until it was exposed by WAPO today..

No one else on the armed services committee said they met with the Russian Ambassador...and it sounds as if they were surprised Sessions did...

CNN and other journalist have been polling the 25 other Senators on the Armed Services Committee ...19 have responded tonight...No one met with the Russians..and many seemed surprised.

a reply to: Indigo5

Okay. The question has to be asked...then WHY wasn't this disclosed before the hearing was concluded? Obviously someone knew. Franken asked the question for a reason. And, we now know, all the Russian lines are tapped so the IC knew.

originally posted by: TheOneElectric
The dossier is coming true bullet point by bullet point.

This, well, this is the conspiracy of the century. We have an actual real life Manchurian president (allegedly)

I'm still concerned about that 19.5% of Rosneft

RE the Dossier..

This out also today

American allies, including the British and the Dutch, had provided information describing meetings in European cities between Russian officials — and others close to Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — and associates of President-elect Trump, according to three former American officials who requested anonymity in discussing classified intelligence.

www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: Indigo5

Is there a reason a U.S. Senator can't speak with a Russian Ambassador?

For all anyone knows they spoke about import taxes on vodka.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: Indigo5

Okay. The question has to be asked...then WHY wasn't this disclosed before the hearing was concluded? Obviously someone knew. Franken asked the question for a reason. And, we now know, all the Russian lines are tapped so the IC knew.

The dumb answer is a backlog in reviewing tapes..

Same answer as to why it took them so long to review the Flynn Conversations with the same man.

They likely uncovered these meetings while continuing the investigation on Flynn's contacts with him (Kislak)..They are still investigating everything for the ongoing FBI investigations into Russia and the election/Campaign. 3 different investigations (theoretically) by FBI and also independent investigations at CIA and NSA.

Also, when do Conspiracy theorists all of a sudden scream "There is nothing there" instead of "investigate to the fullest extent of the available resources"?


The plot thickens, and the Trump administration finds themselves...well...deep into it.

Jeff Sessions won't be going anywhere, he did nothing wrong.

A word of caution: Benjamin Wittes, editor in chief of the blog Lawfare, said on Twitter that there’s probably not enough for a perjury charge. He argued that there is enough ambiguity about whether Sessions, at his hearing, meant he had no communication with Russia as part of his work as a campaign surrogate versus his work as a senator. If he was speaking exclusively about his work on the behalf of the campaign, Sessions could argue that his work as a US senator was a separate matter.

“There was absolutely nothing misleading about his answer,” Sessions spokesperson Sarah Isgur Flores said. “Last year, the Senator had over 25 conversations with foreign ambassadors as a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, including the British, Korean, Japanese, Polish, Indian, Chinese, Canadian, Australian, German and Russian ambassadors. He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee.”

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Indigo5

Is there a reason a U.S. Senator can't speak with a Russian Ambassador?

For all anyone knows they spoke about import taxes on vodka.

The cover-up/false answers in confirmation hearings, plus telling no one about it...not any of his colleagues on the armed services committee although Sessions first claimed today he met with him "in his capacity as a Senator On the Armed Services Committee"..Which is a crappy answer by itself..Cuz he shouldn't be discussing Armed Services business with the Russians..But regardless, no one else on the Committee knows what the hell he is talking about.

a reply to: D8Tee


Nice of you to provide his spokespersons spin on it...as if it was a cogent argument..it is not.


It does not hold water...GOP will be asking him to recuse himself. Not just Dems.


Think of it this way....Loretta Lynch bumped into Bill Clinton on the tarmac between flight...She recused herself from the Clinton Indictment Decision


Session met with the Russians twice last year and didn't tell anyone and lied about it during confirmation hearings..


He can spin all he likes...but he needs to immediately recuse himself from the Russia investigation.

It is interesting, but from the Washington Post article, it seems like there were two meetings and they were routine for someone in his position. He still lied, though.

Isn't that something the right wingers said about Michael Flynn?

originally posted by: D8Tee
Jeff Sessions won't be going anywhere, he did nothing wrong.

A word of caution: Benjamin Wittes, editor in chief of the blog Lawfare, said on Twitter that there’s probably not enough for a perjury charge. He argued that there is enough ambiguity about whether Sessions, at his hearing, meant he had no communication with Russia as part of his work as a campaign surrogate versus his work as a senator. If he was speaking exclusively about his work on the behalf of the campaign, Sessions could argue that his work as a US senator was a separate matter.

“There was absolutely nothing misleading about his answer,” Sessions spokesperson Sarah Isgur Flores said. “Last year, the Senator had over 25 conversations with foreign ambassadors as a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, including the British, Korean, Japanese, Polish, Indian, Chinese, Canadian, Australian, German and Russian ambassadors. He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee.”

originally posted by: Signals
So what?

Sessions was a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, not a part of the Trump Campaign.

Stay strong Deplorables, they ain't done yet....

Yes. He was part of the Team Trump during the campaign... link

essions, who was sworn in as attorney general less than a week ago, was among the first of Trump’s high-profile endorsers and advised the campaign. White House strategist Steve Bannon told the Washington Post that Sessions was “the clearinghouse for policy and philosophy” in the Trump administration, describing Sessions as “the fiercest, most dedicated, and most loyal promoter in Congress of Trump’s agenda.”

I have a quote from Mr. Sessions

Jeff Sessions

Republican of Alabama

It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty that President William Jefferson Clinton perjured himself before a Federal grand jury and has persisted in a continuous pattern of lying and obstructing justice. The chief law-enforcement officer of the land, whose oath of office calls on him to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, crossed the line and failed to defend and protect the law and, in fact, attacked the law and the rights of a fellow citizen. Under our Constitution, equal justice requires that he forfeit his office. For these reasons, I felt compelled to vote to convict and remove the President from office. . .

It is crucial to our system of justice that we demand the truth. I fear that an acquittal of this President will weaken the legal system by providing an option for those who consider being less than truthful in court. Whereas the handling of the case against President Nixon clearly strengthened the nation's respect for law, justice and truth, the Clinton impeachment may unfortunately have the opposite result.

Here's what I think will happen: Trump will cut him loose ASAP, in an effort to stop any further bleed and to throw the Dems a bone, they were vehemently opposed to him anyway. Win/win. In Trump world at least. He cuts the dead weight of Sessions and it's all Session's own doing.

Of course the outlying issue is whether there is any other connection or a more direct connection to Trump himself.