Sessions lied about communications with Russians

[UncleMark]

Sessions discussed Trump campaign-related matters with Russian ambassador, U.S. intelligence intercepts show

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...704692-6e44-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html

Russia’s ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with Jeff Sessions during the 2016 presidential race, contrary to public assertions by the embattled attorney general, according to current and former U.S. officials.

Ambassador Sergey Kislyak’s accounts of two conversations with Sessions — then a top foreign policy adviser to Republican candidate Donald Trump — were intercepted by U.S. spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials both in the United States and in Russia. Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak and then said that the meetings were not about the Trump campaign.​

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Sessions discussed Trump campaign-related matters with Russian ambassador, U.S. intelligence intercepts show

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...704692-6e44-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html

Russia’s ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with Jeff Sessions during the 2016 presidential race, contrary to public assertions by the embattled attorney general, according to current and former U.S. officials.

Ambassador Sergey Kislyak’s accounts of two conversations with Sessions — then a top foreign policy adviser to Republican candidate Donald Trump — were intercepted by U.S. spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials both in the United States and in Russia. Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak and then said that the meetings were not about the Trump campaign.​

He gone.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

Sessions discussed Trump campaign-related matters with Russian ambassador, U.S. intelligence intercepts show

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...704692-6e44-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html

Russia’s ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with Jeff Sessions during the 2016 presidential race, contrary to public assertions by the embattled attorney general, according to current and former U.S. officials.

Ambassador Sergey Kislyak’s accounts of two conversations with Sessions — then a top foreign policy adviser to Republican candidate Donald Trump — were intercepted by U.S. spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials both in the United States and in Russia. Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak and then said that the meetings were not about the Trump campaign.​

A felony, but don't tell one of our resident Trumpettes.

 

[Bill4411]

How convenient for Trump since he wanted him gone anyway. Jeff should have taken Trump's hint to resign when he was interviewed by the New York Times.

 

[UncleMark]

How convenient for Trump since he wanted him gone anyway. Jeff should have taken Trump's hint to resign when he was interviewed by the New York Times.

I wonder if Trump knew this was coming.

 

[toastedbread]

Sessions discussed Trump campaign-related matters with Russian ambassador, U.S. intelligence intercepts show

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...704692-6e44-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html

Russia’s ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with Jeff Sessions during the 2016 presidential race, contrary to public assertions by the embattled attorney general, according to current and former U.S. officials.

Ambassador Sergey Kislyak’s accounts of two conversations with Sessions — then a top foreign policy adviser to Republican candidate Donald Trump — were intercepted by U.S. spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials both in the United States and in Russia. Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak and then said that the meetings were not about the Trump campaign.​

I've been saying for a while now that there are multiple Republican Russian moles in Congress, possibly some Democrat ones too.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...r-aide-fired-after-russia-revelations/534288/

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/3...bachers-request-to-travel-to-russia-last-year

Having said all this, we really have no idea if what Kisylak said on the calls is true? May it have been a russian ploy itself, knowing the calls are listened to? Not unprecedented

 

[meridian]

I wonder if Trump knew this was coming.

Thinking ahead is not his forte.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Having said all this, we really have no idea if what Kisylak said on the calls is true? May it have been a russian ploy itself, knowing the calls are listened to? Not unprecedented

Very real possibility, but the (coincidental?) timing of this tells me Sessions is about to be out.

 

[toastedbread]

Very real possibility, but the (coincidental?) timing of this tells me Sessions is about to be out.

Perhaps Putin dropped this to Trump during their meeting?

 

[Bill4411]

I've been saying for a while now that there are multiple Republican Russian moles in Congress, possibly some Democrat ones too.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...r-aide-fired-after-russia-revelations/534288/

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/3...bachers-request-to-travel-to-russia-last-year

Having said all this, we really have no idea if what Kisylak said on the calls is true? May it have been a russian ploy itself, knowing the calls are listened to? Not unprecedented

It would be a slick way for Trump to get rid of the man who isn't resigning.

 

[toastedbread]

It would be a slick way for Trump to get rid of the man who isn't resigning.

I will say that Sessions and Tillerson appear to be the only 2 people in this administration who are actually "working".

 

[sglowrider]

I wonder if Trump knew this was coming.

Wouldnt surprise me if Trump (or surrogate) leaked this to ensure that Sessions is out -- a day after Sessions said that he wont resign. Coincidence?

 

[Bill4411]

Wouldnt surprise me if Trump (or surrogate) leaked this to ensure that Sessions is out -- a day after Sessions said that he wont resign. Coincidence?

Yup and then you can get an AG that will fire that pest Mueller who wants to look into your finances.

 

[toastedbread]

Yup and then you can get an AG that will fire that pest Mueller who wants to look into your finances.

I can't believe we are in a place where I'm actually rooting for Jeff Sessions. That's solely based on the level of Trump's depravity. Sessions is an angel.

 

[toastedbread]

If Trump actually leaked this, it's a very bad sign for the path we are headed. Start the timer on the Mueller firing.

Anyhow who is willing to throw their first public and most loyal supporter under the bus has zero limits. It's a very scary sign that Trump will fight to the better end, and that may mean a power play.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

If Trump actually leaked this, it's a very bad sign for the path we are headed. Start the timer on the Mueller firing.

Anyhow who is willing to throw their first public and most loyal supporter under the bus has zero limits. It's a very scary sign that Trump will fight to the better end, and that may mean a power play.

I have said this before, and it's worth repeating. I firmly believe that there is no way for Trump to get away with firing Mueller. Mueller has too much support in Congress from both parties. I think there will be enough bipartisan support for reappointment of Mueller at the head of an investigation under the auspices of the Congressional investigatory power. There may even be enough support to override a potential veto on a law reinstating the independent counsel. I have my problems with the spinelessness of many in Congress, as does everyone, but I do not believe this is a path Trump can tread. If he were a popular establishment Republican with a lot of allies, maybe. But not Trump.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

Wouldnt surprise me if Trump (or surrogate) leaked this to ensure that Sessions is out -- a day after Sessions said that he wont resign. Coincidence?

Trump won't work with someone he doesn't have dirt on. That's why Comey had to go. Legally speaking, there's no dirt on Comey. Maybe Comey didn't handle this or that exactly right, but he didn't break the law.

 

[toastedbread]

I have said this before, and it's worth repeating. I firmly believe that there is no way for Trump to get away with firing Mueller. Mueller has too much support in Congress from both parties. I think there will be enough bipartisan support for reappointment of Mueller at the head of an investigation under the auspices of the Congressional investigatory power. There may even be enough support to override a potential veto on a law reinstating the independent counsel. I have my problems with the spinelessness of many in Congress, as does everyone, but I do not believe this is a path Trump can tread. If he were a popular establishment Republican with a lot of allies, maybe. But not Trump.

I prefer we not get to the point where that's at risk. (i.e. relying on Congress to save our republic)

I've seen no indication that Republican house members will stand up to Trump. In fact, I've seen mostly the opposite. Heck, many of their constituents are full-on Trumpers. The Senate "spine" is as soft as jello.

If you are counting on the Congress to stand up to Trump, prepare yourself to be thoroughly disappointed.

Edit: Off-topic, but is it true that Mueller was in fact interviewing to be FBI director, the day prior to taking this lead investigator role? If that's accurate it does look bad.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

I prefer we not get to the point where that's at risk. (i.e. relying on Congress to save our republic)

I've seen no indication that Republican house members will stand up to Trump. In fact, I've seen mostly the opposite. Heck, many of their constituents are full-on Trumpers. The Senate "spine" is as soft as jello.

If you are counting on the Congress to stand up to Trump, prepare yourself to be thoroughly disappointed.

Edit: Off-topic, but is it true that Mueller was in fact interviewing to be FBI director, the day prior to taking this lead investigator role? If that's accurate it does look bad.

Yeah, I'm not holding my breath on that one. I'll be happy to be wrong.

 

[UncleMark]

If you are counting on the Congress to stand up to Trump, prepare yourself to be thoroughly disappointed.

I hope Goat is right, but I'm afraid you might be. How many times did/have we said "Trump won't survive this"?

Edit: Off-topic, but is it true that Mueller was in fact interviewing to be FBI director, the day prior to taking this lead investigator role? If that's accurate it does look bad.

He prolly said to himself "Hell, I don't want to work for this bastiid, I want to prosecute him."

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I prefer we not get to the point where that's at risk. (i.e. relying on Congress to save our republic)

I've seen no indication that Republican house members will stand up to Trump. In fact, I've seen mostly the opposite. Heck, many of their constituents are full-on Trumpers. The Senate "spine" is as soft as jello.

If you are counting on the Congress to stand up to Trump, prepare yourself to be thoroughly disappointed.

NB: This kind of constitutional crisis is one reason so many political scientists think that a commonwealth-style constitutional monarchy or semi-presidential republic are superior to a full presidential republic. We don't have a separate head of state to act as a neutral arbiter in the case that the head of government tries to subvert democratic rule. See the actions of the Governor General in Canada (1926) and Australia (1975), and especially the repudiation of the coup attempt by Juan Carlos in Spain (1981), as examples of the benefits of having such a neutral arbiter.

Edit: Off-topic, but is it true that Mueller was in fact interviewing to be FBI director, the day prior to taking this lead investigator role? If that's accurate it does look bad.

I have no reason to doubt it, but I also don't think it looks bad. A job like that isn't one you apply for. You are put on a short list and invited to come to the White House and discuss it. Any short list for FBI director is going to have Mueller on it, from any President of either party. There's no reason to assume Mueller really even wanted the job, much less that he'd hold any sort of bitterness over not getting it.

 

[UncleMark]

I have said this before, and it's worth repeating. I firmly believe that there is no way for Trump to get away with firing Mueller. Mueller has too much support in Congress from both parties.

I dunno, Goat. It's one thing to talk highly of the guy while he's quietly working under the radar and not making any waves. It's another to vote to sic him directly on the President of your own party. The House in particular would never vote to reinstate Mueller in defiance of a Trump firing.

The one saving grace we might have is Burr in the Senate. He seems to be a man of integrity who is willing to let the Intel Committee's investigative process play out.

I wasn't kidding the other night when I said that if I was Mueller, I'd be imaging my team's work product daily and transferring it offsite. This can't be allowed to be buried.

 

[toastedbread]

much less that he'd hold any sort of bitterness over not getting it.

I don't think he's bitter, but I do find it a bit odd that one day he is interviewing with the President, and the next day taking a position to investigate his campaign/administration.

 

[toastedbread]

I dunno, Goat. It's one thing to talk highly of the guy while he's quietly working under the radar and not making any waves. It's another to vote to sic him directly on the President of your own party. The House in particular would never vote to reinstate Mueller in defiance of a Trump firing.

The one saving grace we might have is Burr in the Senate. He seems to be a man of integrity who is willing to let the Intel Committee's investigative process play out.

I wasn't kidding the other night when I said that if I was Mueller, I'd be imaging my team's work product daily and transferring it offsite. This can't be allowed to be buried.

If I was Mueller, I'd be most concerned for my personal safety. I sure hope he is receiving protection, and the same for any key witnesses.

 

[UncleMark]

I don't think he's bitter, but I do find it a bit odd that one day he is interviewing with the President, and the next day taking a position to investigate his campaign/administration.

Most likely it was made known after the interview that Trump wasn't going to appoint him (probably wouldn't sign the loyalty pledge) so Rosenstein was free to appoint Mueller to the special counsel post.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I dunno, Goat. It's one thing to talk highly of the guy while he's quietly working under the radar and not making any waves. It's another to vote to sic him directly on the President of your own party.

It's true that we can't judge their integrity until it's really and truly put to the test, but there's a level of institutional rivalry between the various branches, even among people of the same party. And it's not like we'd need a whole lot of Republicans to support such a move, because every single Democrat would support it, either out of integrity or out of pure politics. I'm still confident Congress would not take such a move sitting down, but we'll never know unless Trump makes the play.

 

[toastedbread]

It's true that we can't judge their integrity until it's really and truly put to the test, but there's a level of institutional rivalry between the various branches, even among people of the same party. And it's not like we'd need a whole lot of Republicans to support such a move, because every single Democrat would support it, either out of integrity or out of pure politics. I'm still confident Congress would not take such a move sitting down, but we'll never know unless Trump makes the play.

Btw, what happens if the President is impeached and refuses to step aside? Who arrests him?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Btw, what happens if the President is impeached and refuses to step aside? Who arrests him?

If the President is impeached and found guilty, Pence will be sworn in immediately (although that's probably technically an unnecessary formality*), and he would then be in charge of the executive branch. If Trump tried to keep issuing orders, he'd be ignored, and if he refused to leave the White House, Pence could have him escorted out, presumably by the Secret Service Uniformed Division, which is the uniformed police force in charge of physical security of the White House itself.

*Edit for legal pedants: I shouldn't have said it like that. I should have said that the 25th Amendment can arguably be construed to read that the VP would immediately become President upon the removal of the President, and would therefore have the authority to act in such capacity before taking the oath, and even if that were not technically true, he'd at least be Acting President in the short time between conviction and the oath, and therefore have the same authority (much in the tradition of "The king is dead; long live the king!").

 

[Ewezrfan1]

A felony, but don't tell one of our resident Trumpettes.

What about the special counsel and his process of uncovering facts scares you so much? Why do you not think Mueller should be allowed to do the job he was appointed to do?

 

[sglowrider]

I can't believe we are in a place where I'm actually rooting for Jeff Sessions. That's solely based on the level of Trump's depravity. Sessions is an angel.

Its amazing is it? The bar is so low that the guy isnt half as bad as his boss and we are rooting for him.

How the mighty (aka USA) has fallen.

 

[sglowrider]

 

[bawlmer]

It's true that we can't judge their integrity until it's really and truly put to the test, but there's a level of institutional rivalry between the various branches, even among people of the same party. And it's not like we'd need a whole lot of Republicans to support such a move, because every single Democrat would support it, either out of integrity or out of pure politics. I'm still confident Congress would not take such a move sitting down, but we'll never know unless Trump makes the play.

And going after Sessions this week will undercut Trump's GOP Senate support, at least privately. He may not have been a cherished member, but Sessions was one of them. If his presidency comes down to a few votes, that's the kind of mistake from Trump that can tip the scale against him down the road.

 

[sglowrider]

And going after Sessions this week will undercut Trump's GOP Senate support, at least privately. He may not have been a cherished member, but Sessions was one of them. If his presidency comes down to a few votes, that's the kind of mistake from Trump that can tip the scale against him down the road.

I hope it's more like country before party than this argument when the moment arises.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

I hope it's more like country before party than this argument when the moment arises.

Nah. The Rs are too power hungry to worry about something like the country.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Donnie on a twitter tantrum this morning. Not a happy camper! Pardons, leaks, failing NYT, ( who he just did his rambling , partially nonsensical interview with) and more.

 

[BCCHoosier]

Donnie on a twitter tantrum this morning. Not a happy camper! Pardons, leaks, failing NYT, ( who he just did his rambling , partially nonsensical interview with) and more.

I've never seen such diahrea of the keyboard. He is all over the place this morning. He must be taking his new communications director's support of tweeting to heart. What a nutcase.

 

[sglowrider]

I've never seen such diahrea of the keyboard. He is all over the place this morning. He must be taking his new communications director's support of tweeting to heart. What a nutcase.

Yeah, he's crumbling. Even by Trump's standards, today's tweets are even more unhinged.

10 tweets in 2 hours ranting and raving. Must be a record for him.

There is a very different tone to these than the ones back in January.

He has never been held accountable for anything before, ever in his life; his daddy's money has seen to that.
Now he finds that in the job he thought would make him king -- but instead he has less freedom to do what the hell he likes than he has ever had before.

I am not sure which will come first, one of the traitors that are involved turning on him to the feds, or donny having a mental collapse.

 

[Optimist13]

You have to be a skilled liar to work for Donald

 

[sglowrider]

Donnie on a twitter tantrum this morning. Not a happy camper! Pardons, leaks, failing NYT, ( who he just did his rambling , partially nonsensical interview with) and more.

Why did he support Hillary then and not one of the dozen or so other Republicans?

How can you be this insecure at 71y.o? Holy Cow.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

Yeah, he's crumbling. Even by Trump's standards, today's tweets are even more unhinged.

10 tweets in 2 hours ranting and raving. Must be a record for him.

There is a very different tone to these than the ones back in January.

He has never been held accountable for anything before, ever in his life; his daddy's money has seen to that.
Now he finds that in the job he thought would make him king -- but instead he has less freedom to do what the hell he likes than he has ever had before.

I am not sure which will come first, one of the traitors that are involved turning on him to the feds, or donny having a mental collapse.

He's so selfish it wouldn't surprise me if he resigns and forgets to pardon Jr and his other minions. I don't know if I'd count on Pence giving pardons. I think pardoning Nixon had a great deal to do with Ford losing to Carter. Pence has the charisma of a door knob and has to know he'd have a hard time elected even without pardoning Trump.