Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III is a man out of time, a holdover from an age when some people believed that certain groups were exempt from the rule of law. He may be out of time in another way, too: His days as Attorney General might be numbered.
Thank you Richard for all you do!
"Senator Franken, I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign, and I didn’t have—not have communications with the Russians." - AG Sessions
As far as sessions omissions in testimony under oath, it appears he dissembled at the very least and failed to provide the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but. I think sessions is not an honest AG for all the people, but a trump shill, and any replacement by this extremist dung-head trump regime is likely to be as corrupt and destructive of the public interest, though perhaps not as racist. Any AG, prez or elected rep/official must not be allowed to lie under oath else our house of cards "democracy" has openly become some whole other thing.
As far as what Russia did or did not, that is another issue full of propaganda, lies, false info/claims and speculation, none of which can be believed - the Ukraine, the Crimea, Putin's agenda, alleged "hacking" "cyber-attacks" and electoral interference claims, all that is smoke and BS to bedazzle and divert attention from what is or is not happening elsewhere and by who - like trumps so-far hidden vast business ties - could we ever really get the truth with such a corrupted government and Fourth Estate/press? The intention is not to dazzle us with brilliance, but baffle us with BS!
Here is a transcript with several interesting aspects of what sessions said and how he is trained from Blumenthal who has his own highly questionable agenda/loyalties - do any of our so-called "leaders" and/or agencies act with integrity, truth, or for the Common Good? Or for hidden agenda's and self-interest?
"HARI SREENIVASAN: What about the attorney general’s defense that he was answering the question that he was asked and nothing more?
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL: Looking at the record, he was asked that question not just once, but several times during his testimony. He was asked that question not just once, but several times in writing.
And to say that he may have misunderstood the question, when, in fact, everybody knows he had to have been prepped for that question, it was an obvious and challenging question that had to be briefed to him, and he had to go through that preparation.
And remember also Jeff Sessions is a prosecutor, as I was United States attorney for Connecticut, the chief federal prosecutor, state attorney general of Connecticut. We know the importance of every word under oath. And so I find that explanation inadequate."
The bottom line for me is we are ruled by corrupt wealth, power and systemic piracy, and may never get an honest government or politicians - we are modern serfs; slaves that provide wealth and cover to corrupt people/institutions/war-machine that do not serve the Common Good, a sustainable future, our Mother Earth or anything but the vulture capitalist model of exploitation.................unless people rise by the millions to demand structural change we will be forced/led down the same road.
It's about Russia.
"A tragedy for American politics."
Jeffrey Beauregard Sessions III, is a tragedy for America.
He is a perfect example of the 'Peter Principal.'
Actually, it is about the current Trump-loving Russian capitalist gangster leadership. I have no quarrel with Russia - i.e. the Russian people.
Jefferson Beauregard Sessions. Jeffrey is good for a laugh though.
"the web of business relationships between Russia, Trump, and Trump associates"
And how about the web of business relationships between China and the Trump family, as reported by the BBC a few days ago?
Anyone who insists that Sessions must resign because he lied to Congress on whether he talked to a Russian but never said that Clapper must resign because he lied to Congress about the NSA spying on us all has no respect from me.
This rabid hatred of Russia is getting worse and worse and I am getting more and more concerned that the Neo-Cons will get the war they want with so called liberals and progressives cheering them on.
THIS IS ABOUT RUSSIA, damn it, it's about the Deep States desire to force Trump to go along with their agenda to destroy Russia's place in the world as a major power and establish once more the 90s wet dream of the United States of Amerika being the single hegemon of the world.
Obama, who disappointed me in so many respects, did earn my respect for his restraint in foreign policy.
Hilary, on the other hand, frightened me. Ever-eager to rattle sabers, sell arms, assassinate and invade, she was an old-school Cold Warrior.
And now, to cover the tracks of their own political ineptitude, as the author mentions, the Democrats are the lead cheerleaders for an aggressive stance against Russia, built upon the flimsiest of thus far, unsubstantiated finger pointing.
I don't trust the brutal autocrat, Putin. Jeff Sessions is a detestable, throwback bigot. But nor am I happy with the Cold War-era brinksmanship that's suddenly in fashion again because John Podesta went phishing and got caught. We hack them, they hack us--elections are open game, business as usual.
For Democrats now happy to jump in bed with McCain and Graham, two crazed weapon-sexuals who never met a the war they didn't want to start, the Russians are a handy excuse to deflect by talking tough.
It's not about Russia per se, it is about what a president and the people around him may be giving a foreign power in exchange for financial assistance, whether that be debt forgiveness or otherwise. Trump may be a completely honest broker, but he's not even doing the bare minimum to present himself that way. Nobody is stopping him from releasing his tax returns, like every other modern president, for example.
Prior to hacking being an issue, the president's financial problems, the need for him to seek financing from foreign interests, was well reported. That doesn't mean he's a bad guy, but the fact that his financial disclosures were a joke, that he refused to place his businesses in a blind trust, and that he didn't release any tax returns, ought to give anyone pause. I'm not even mentioning his actual business history, a problem in itself.
Thank you for these needed clarifications. The Russia spin flew wildly out of control, and it's useful to bring public attention back to the core issues.
On Trump releasing his tax returns to the public, this is not legally required. I had assumed that those returns were scrutinized before the GOP took Trump on as their candidate, though of course I don't know if this actually happened. One can argue that people do regard their tax returns as strictly personal business.
US businesses have been doing business with Russia (then, the Soviet Union) since Nixon's detente. Russia is an ally. Even though we've utterly turned our backs on our own poor, the US does provide abundant foreign aid, and not only to friendly nations. That's just how the business of government is run.
I don't trust Putin, either, but I do trust him more than Trump. Putin is an autocrat, but he is well-experienced, obviously quite intelligent, and has something that Trump lacks -- personal discipline and restraint. Trump intends to be an autocrat, and this is likely to end in disaster.
Not sure what you mean. On the tax return end, there's no requirement that I'm aware of that Trump would need to submit his returns to the RNC to participate in a primary. He's steadfastly refused to share them with anybody as far as I know. More to the point, just because he doesn't have to release them, doesn't mean he shouldn't. Given his business history, his weak financial disclosures, and that he didn't put his businesses in a blind trust, it seems to me the need for financial disclosure is even greater.
To add, if you are right and some RNC or other staff did review them, shouldn't that make you more concerned? That suggests they or he decided the risk of disclosure, whatever the reason, is greater than the risk of keeping his finances secret.
Russia supports right wing nationalist groups throughout Europe. No surprise they want Trump to win.
Like you, I end up 'trusting' Putin more than Trump.
Putin's skills at autocracy are sublime. He's writing his own chapter in the Autocrat's Handbook.
Trump, on the other hand, is Bannon's pull toy in a handy vacuum of American exasperation.
The NATO countries are allies, not Russia. Russia is considered an adversary. When George W. Bush was in his first term the relationship between the US was actually pretty good but for a number of reasons it has gone south. Of course we are not in any military war with Russia but there appears to be cyberwar going on. That may be where the conflicts are focused since Russia no longer has much of a military since it can't afford much of one. But cyberwar can be carried out relatively cheaply and Russia is taking full advantage of that. And when we say Russia we really mean basically Putin. It is a one man rule. The connections between Trump and Russia obviously need to be clarified. It could range from almost nothing to Trump actually being a Russian agent because he is being blackmailed by Putin. We also need to know with greater certainty whether Russia interfered in our election. We are imposing sanctions on Russia and it is hurting their economy and therefore the sanctions are a threat to Putin. The Republicans so far are protecting Trump from impartial investigations and are clearly putting their own political careers above the interest of the country. Apparently enough people no longer care about the country with regard to its values but only want to live in a country dominated by white people, even if it means living under a dictatorship. It seems for many people the only national value is being white (Jews excluded).
You might say the same of Stalin. Or Franco. Pinochet. Assad.
Odd comment. Why would you assume what you clearly do not know? Being president does not come with some guarantee of privacy. The opposite. For good reason.
People did say Clapper should resign. So why be on the side of those who failed to do so? Cut the Trumpist hyperbole.