Wow! A Clinton deflection, never seen that before! Well done.

3/2/2017 10:29:38 AM

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

I'm sure a hack thinks this is biased and GatewayPundit is legit though.

3/2/2017 11:09:33 AM

Quote :

"Reminds me of the time Hillary sold 20% of our Uranium to Russia"

Freaking hack trying to push a narrative. What does Hillary have to do with it? Get over Hillary you hacks.

(lol, the hack gets his "facts" straight from Trump http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/trump-claims--falsely--that-clinton-gave-russia-20-of-us-uranium.html... i know, fake news, fakes news. hacks)

[Edited on March 2, 2017 at 11:12 AM. Reason : ]

3/2/2017 11:09:55 AM

Quote :

"Sessions HAD to know that. Be honest and more of us would look on a lot of the Russian contacts as just coincidence, instead the entire administration is just in flat out denial mode, as if they think that will work at this point."

EXACTLY. If there is nothing to this Russia story, why the hell is every single Trump associate LYING about this stuff??

I mean we should all hope that none of the Russia stuff is true, for the sake of our country. But at this point I am highly confident there are some serious problems given all of the lying.

And it is lying, it's not misleading. Everyone knows the context, everyone knows how important this is and every single time someone is asked they lie about it. Then a day or two later we get a news story proving they lied and then it's like "well I didn't think that counted."

It's utterly ridiculous. The GOP should be encouraging this investigation to move forward as clearly and quickly as possible if they are so confident there are no issues.

[Edited on March 2, 2017 at 11:51 AM. Reason : a]

3/2/2017 11:47:55 AM

Quote :

"http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/ I'm sure a hack thinks this is biased and GatewayPundit is legit though."

I've never posted a GatewayPundit link.

Snopes is biased. The writer of that article is a leftist. Kim Lacapria is a complete leftist hack.

And despite their intentions, that article makes the Clinton foundation look even shadier than I thought.

3/2/2017 12:04:28 PM

lol, hack

3/2/2017 12:11:41 PM

It's worth noting that Richard Burr, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, was a Trump campaign adviser and that Devin Nunes, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, was on the Trump transition team.

3/2/2017 12:12:21 PM

No matter what happens from here Sessions is compromised in terms of credibility. The Trump regime of course already out of credibility.

[Edited on March 2, 2017 at 12:29 PM. Reason : .]

3/2/2017 12:28:25 PM

Democrats don't have votes to impeech anyone and nobody is resigning so

Reminds me of when someone recently said to Congress: what difference does it make?

3/2/2017 12:30:38 PM

^For now, that's correct. Don't forget how long the Nixon investigation took, though. We still have a long way to go.

3/2/2017 12:31:37 PM

Quote :

"No matter what happens from here Sessions is compromised in terms of credibility. The Trump regime of course already out of credibility."

Wait, when people with negative credibility attack the credibility of something, doesn't that actually raise the credibility? #RussiaIsFakeNews

3/2/2017 1:19:15 PM

Your trolling quality has really gone downhill over the past couple weeks.

3/2/2017 1:29:36 PM

Quote :

"nobody is resigning so "

You could have said the same about Flynn and been right, until he did

If you think you're this good at predicting the future you're in the wrong line of work beatsunc

3/2/2017 1:36:07 PM

^^ he's shook

3/2/2017 1:41:38 PM

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/schiff-doj-235615

Quote :

"The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday accused FBI Director James Comey of withholding crucial information about its probe into Russian interference in the election and raised the prospect of subpoenaing the agency. “I would say at this point we know less than a fraction of what the FBI knows,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) told reporters after a briefing with Comey. “I appreciate we had a long briefing and testimony from the director today, but in order for us to do our investigation in a thorough and credible way, we’re gonna need the FBI to fully cooperate, to be willing to tell us the length and breadth of any counterintelligence investigations they are conducting,” Schiff said. “At this point, the director was not willing to do that.”"

This is getting out of hand. Either the fix is in, Comey doesn't trust members of the Cmte to not leak, or Comey thinks spilling the beans will screw up the investigation somehow (or more likely, will screw up counterintelligence efforts against Russia).

That puts this in a totally unprecedented place. Whom has oversight of the FBI if the FBI feels it doesn't even need to give congress basic info on its investigation? I damn sure don't trust Comey's instincts.

3/2/2017 2:51:09 PM

^second source - http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/fbi/322049-top-dem-fbi-head-withholding-russia-info

I'd like to see if this end sup in WashPo/Times/WSJ/CNN/etc.

3/2/2017 2:59:05 PM

It's pretty weird how Trump was so quick to alienate himself from Flynn and let him fall on his sword, while he's backing up Sessions and saying his job is safe right now.

This whole thing is so absurd.

3/2/2017 3:04:37 PM

^haha he did the exact same thing with Flynn. give it a few days.

BTW, you should never believe a single thing the Russian government says, but this had me laughing out loud:

Quote :

"Asked to respond to the characterization of Kislyak as a spy, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, "Nobody has heard a single statement from US intelligence agencies' representatives regarding our ambassador. Again, these are some depersonalized assumptions of the media that are constantly trying to blow this situation out of proportion." Peskov also insisted that Russia has never interfered in the domestic affairs of another country and has no plans ever to do so."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/02/politics/russia-kislyak-spy-claim-sessions/index.html

3/2/2017 3:11:30 PM

So far the media has forced Mike Flynn to "resign" and Jeff Sessions to recuse (even though the latter said it was weeks in process and just so happened to be completed today- coincidence I'm sure).

"Fake news" obviously.

3/2/2017 4:31:39 PM

i missed the press conference, was there anything else in it or just him recusing himself from the russia investigation?

3/2/2017 4:43:29 PM

and now this:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/02/us/politics/kushner-flynn-sessions-russia.html

3/2/2017 5:22:17 PM

Quote :

"The Trump Tower meeting lasted 20 minutes, and Mr. Kushner has not met since with Mr. Kislyak, Ms. Hicks said. When first asked in January about Mr. Flynn’s contacts with Mr. Kislyak, the White House said that there had been only a text message and phone call between the men at the end of December, and that both came before the United States imposed sanctions. That was quickly contradicted by news reports. Mr. Flynn’s story then began changing, and the White House eventually acknowledged the two men had discussed the sanctions and how the two countries could move past the acrimony once Mr. Trump was in office."

3/2/2017 5:44:17 PM

At least it will be cool to tell our kids about how we watched this story from the beginning

3/2/2017 6:13:07 PM

Kislyak looks too much like the bad guy from Lethal Weapon 2 for this not to be suspicious.

3/2/2017 8:24:24 PM

Quote :

" you should never believe a single thing the Russian government says, but this had me laughing out loud:"

fixed it

[Edited on March 2, 2017 at 9:29 PM. Reason : p]

3/2/2017 9:28:51 PM

^Proves itself every day, especially as of late, doesn't it, haha.

3/2/2017 10:20:45 PM

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837722869106880517

lol

3/3/2017 2:10:18 PM

Quote :

"No matter what happens from here Sessions is compromised in terms of credibility. The Trump regime of course already out of credibility."

Sure, in the sense that when you accuse someone of something, that sticks, but the correction appears on page 57 and no one sees it.

There is no scandal or evidence of a scandal with Sessions as far as I can tell. Let's follow this:

1) Franken says there have been accusations of Trump campaign surrogates speaking with Russian ambassadors.
2) Sessions responds that as a surrogate, he hasn't seen any communication like that
3) Media finds out that Sessions has met with Russian ambassadors (and several other ambassadors) as a function of his seat on the Armed Services Committee
4) Media goes insane, and publishes articles like this:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/01/politics/jeff-sessions-russian-ambassador-meetings/

How far into the article do you have to go to find out that the meetings were already known about, and done as official Senatorial meetings? This is the worst kind of "gotcha" politics.

3/3/2017 2:13:35 PM

why was he the only member of said committee to meet with the ambassador?

and why did he meet with him when he met with him?

3/3/2017 2:35:30 PM

I wonder how many pages this #FakeNews Thread will get to before the leftists give up their narrative. It's gonna be a long 4 years

3/3/2017 2:41:53 PM

The comments on that Twitter post are fun.

3/3/2017 2:42:09 PM

Quote :

"as a function of his seat on the Armed Services Committee"

That is actually in dispute. For instance, the funds used to pay for his trip to the RNC when he met with Russians came out of his re-election campaign, not funds set aside for official Senate business. He also (allegedly) implied to individuals there that he was present as a representative of the Trump campaign, for which he was a national security advisor.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-sessions-used-political-funds-for-republican-convention-expenses-1488509301

It's paywalled, but relevant quotes:

Quote :

"The Trump administration says Attorney General Jeff Sessions was acting as a then-U.S. senator when he talked to Russia’s ambassador at an event during last year’s Republican National Convention in Cleveland, but Mr. Sessions paid for convention travel expenses out of his own political funds and he spoke about Donald Trump’s campaign at the event, according to a person at the event and campaign-finance records."

Quote :

"At the time Mr. Sessions met the Russian ambassador at the convention, he had been serving as chairman of Mr. Trump’s National Security Advisory Committee for more than four months."

Quote :

"Campaign-finance-disclosure records show Mr. Sessions’ re-election campaign account was used for travel expenses in Cleveland at the same time the Republican National Convention was held in July, rather than using official funds that would pay for travel by him or other members of the Senate Armed Services Committee."

Quote :

"Larry Noble, general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan advocacy group, said Mr. Sessions likely used his campaign account, rather than official Senate funds, because as a senior adviser to the Trump campaign it would have been difficult to argue that he wasn’t attending the convention for any political purpose. “If he was truly there solely as a member of the Armed Services Committee, then he could’ve used his legislative account,” Mr. Noble said."

There's also this: http://thehill.com/homenews/news/321948-armed-services-committee-dem-our-members-dont-meet-with-russian-ambassadors

Take that one with a grain of salt, though.

3/3/2017 2:53:30 PM

I'm not claiming to know what exactly they spoke about, but I don't we can just assume that the content was good or bad. Senators speak with foreign ambassadors somewhat regularly.

About the tweet...

3/3/2017 3:34:34 PM

^yea that's why i said take that one with a grain of salt but I've heard from other people that in particular, senators on that committee do not meet with foreign ambassadors/reps/etc, especially from countries like Russia

3/3/2017 3:38:38 PM

especially on their own, which is why Sessions is getting called on it

that and the timing of the meeting

[Edited on March 3, 2017 at 4:03 PM. Reason : .]

3/3/2017 3:51:56 PM

If republicans would investigate these connections in exchange for also investigating the democrat connections most people would be fine with that. Do it.

[Edited on March 3, 2017 at 8:53 PM. Reason : They wouldn't though ]

3/3/2017 8:52:48 PM

^ that's an acceptable political compromise but it's stupid to investigate publicly announced and generally transparent meetings not affiliated with an active election .

Sessions lied in a confirmation hearing and has already come out and said they did discuss the campaign (and why wouldn't they if sessions is on the team??) during the meeting with the ambassador. If I'm a senator, then anything else sessions says to them from now on has zero credibility. He needs to step down.

3/3/2017 10:34:00 PM

Quote :

"senators on that committee do not meet with foreign ambassadors/reps/etc, especially from countries like Russia"

Quote :

"especially on their own, which is why Sessions is getting called on it"

Quote :

"Sessions said his meeting with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak was part of his duties as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee -- not as a surrogate for President Donald Trump’s campaign. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., another Senate Armed Services Committee member, suggested that was a weak response. "I’ve been on the Armed Services Com for 10 years. No call or meeting w/Russian ambassador. Ever. Ambassadors call members of Foreign (Relations Committee)," she tweeted March 2. It turns out that McCaskill was wrong about her own record. She had a meeting and a call with the Russian ambassador in 2013 and 2015, respectively."

Quote :

""It’s certainly not abnormal for a member of Congress to have a conversation with an ambassador," said Mieke Eoyang, a former foreign-policy aide to the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and now vice president of the national security program for the centrist group Third Way. Meetings between ambassadors and members of Congress happen periodically, said former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind., who chaired the House Foreign Affairs Committee from 1993 to 1995 and who later served as vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/mar/02/four-questions-about-when-senators-meet-ambassador/

Quote :

"Sessions lied in a confirmation hearing and has already come out and said they did discuss the campaign (and why wouldn't they if sessions is on the team??) during the meeting with the ambassador."

Did he lie though? Where did he admit to discussing the campaign? You people need to link this shit. IIRC it comes down to if he was actually a surrogate of the campaign at the time of the meetings. What was his official role at the time?

[Edited on March 4, 2017 at 12:41 AM. Reason : I dislike this guy as much as you people, but lettuce try to keep remotely objective heads here.]

3/4/2017 12:39:22 AM

He told Tucker Carlson he talked to the Russian ambassador about the campaign but not in a "significant way".

Of course when it comes to a campaign and a quid pro quo what's "significant" is a matter of interpretation.

Whether he "lied" depends on if you mean legally lied or just regular lied. By the normal social definition of lying, he lied. Whether he lied in a legal sense requires an inquiry.

His intention to mislead the senate about the Trump campaigns dealings with Russia though is obvious. Congress shouldn't take this lightly.

https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/homenews/administration/322139-sessions-sad-thing-to-be-attacked-over-meetings-with-russian-envoy%3Famp

I do believe sessions when he says he wasn't orchestrating secret Russian plans. But what's the point of senate confirmation hearings if you can just say anything and it doesn't matter? He said what he said with the specific purpose of preventing more questions about trump and Russia even though it was misleading. If the attorney general would defend people in Trumps campaign having covert and possibly illegal contact with Russia, what else is he willing to do for Trump?

He needs to step down.

[Edited on March 4, 2017 at 12:55 AM. Reason : https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/homenews/administration/322139-sessions-sad-thing-to-be-attac]

3/4/2017 12:50:44 AM

Mccaskill and shumer have already agreed to formal inquiries about their meeting with Russia, if trump lets his team face the same interviews-- doubt this will happen.

The problem has never been contacting Russia or Russians, it's been the unusual amount of people who work for trump having deep ties to Russian intelligence agents, then sessions lying to prevent further questioning about those ties.

3/4/2017 1:00:11 AM

Quote :

"He needs to step down"

No. You want him to step down.

Quote :

"Whether he lied in a legal sense requires an inquiry"

Well that is what we're talking about here right?

Quote :

"It's been the unusual amount of people who work for trump having deep ties to Russian intelligence agents, "

Sure, but that's another issue.

3/4/2017 1:17:03 AM

^ it's the same issue. Those were the people Sessions was defending.

And of course I "want" him to step down, there's no rules about this. Flynn didn't have to step down but he burned his credibility. Sessions had little credibility to begin with and has none now.

3/4/2017 1:22:12 AM

Quote :

"IIRC it comes down to if he was actually a surrogate of the campaign at the time of the meetings. What was his official role at the time?"

he literally copped to being a surrogate of the campaign during his conformation hearing

Quote :

""I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it," Sessions told Franken during his hearing. This information directly contradicts the Washington Post's report that he had spoken with the Russian ambassador twice."

Quote :

"Sure, but that's another issue."

it's the exact same issue

[Edited on March 4, 2017 at 2:22 AM. Reason : .]

3/4/2017 2:16:30 AM

i flipped on NPR yesterday afternoon and their take was if couple things are true that we have no evidence of this is a big deal. ok

3/4/2017 7:09:31 AM

Quote :

" Did he lie though? Where did he admit to discussing the campaign? You people need to link this shit. IIRC it comes down to if he was actually a surrogate of the campaign at the time of the meetings. What was his official role at the time?"

he straight up told franken under oath that he had not talked to the russians, he lied. the question was not qualified to be about the campaign, he offered up that he had not talked to the russians.

[Edited on March 4, 2017 at 7:23 AM. Reason : .]

3/4/2017 7:22:35 AM

I think others have pointed this out already, but if ALL the Sessions shenanigans had happened in a vacuum, then I'd most likely be calling this a nothingburger too. But look at the trend:

Not necessarily in order:

Flynn straight lied to us and allegedly half the administration already. About Russian contact. Fact.
Carter page is now changing his story from flat denial to having met with Russian ambassador. So he's basically a liar too.
Cohen (lawyer guy) - changed his story multiple times about the Ukraine Peace Plan.
Kushner - apparently met with Russian ambassador too.
And yet
Sean Spicer a week and a half ago: "no Russian contact, ever. Period." That's a lie, although it seems like a strong chance the administration just doesn't tell spicer the facts.
Reince Prebus, Mike Pence, other surrogates a couple weeks ago: "no russian contact". Again, it seems they don't have a clue, but they were out flat denying anyways.
POTUS a week and a half ago: multiple times "no russian contact" when he either knew that was false (most likely) or couldn't possibly be sure it was true, but flat denied ALL contact anyway.

And on top of all that we have Sessions misleading and then needing to go back and correct his story. You can legalese yourself all day about how what Sessions said may have been "technically true" but the trend is clear that parts of the Trump campaign CLEARLY intend to mislead and obfuscate their Russian contact stories. That should bother everyone (including congressional republicans).


The flat denials when clearly multiple people should have known at least some contact did occur (even if the meetings were all above the board) really bothers me. There is either zero "honest" communication in the whitehouse or they are all straight lying.
Over 20 instances of flat denying contact:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/02/trump-teams-many-many-denials-contacts-russia/98625780/

[Edited on March 4, 2017 at 8:09 AM. Reason : I'm highly suspicious of you]

3/4/2017 8:00:29 AM

^There was also the outright denial that Trump or anyone in his camp had anything to do with softening the RNC platform's stance on Ukraine/Russia. That's now turned into tacit admission from his advisors that the idea came straight from him.

3/4/2017 8:52:05 AM

So if pattern follows Trump's tweets this morning will be followed by a bombshell.

Perhaps audio?

3/4/2017 8:57:20 AM

The softened Ukraine position came immediately after his campaign met with the Russians

3/4/2017 9:22:51 AM

Quote :

"seems like a strong chance the administration just doesn't tell spicer the facts"

I actually try hard to give Spicer the benefit of the doubt. From what I understand he's a good dude. But wouldn't you quit by now if this is how your bosses handled shit?

Maybe it's hard to just quit a job that high profile, haha. I hope I would, though.

Another summary: http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/04/politics/donald-trump-russia-what-we-know/index.html

[Edited on March 4, 2017 at 10:10 AM. Reason : a]

3/4/2017 9:54:51 AM