Conquer Club

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Thursday he would recuse himself from overseeing the federal investigation into alleged Russian interference in the presidential election, citing the advice of his staff.

“I believe those recommendations are right and just,” he said. “Therefore I have recused myself from matters with the Trump campaign.”

The move comes less than 24 hours after The Washington Post revealed Sessions had spoken with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, on two separate occasions during the campaign. That appeared to contradict assertions made by Sessions to the Senate Judiciary Committee twice during the confirmation process.

saxitoxin wrote:Why on Earth would Sessions resign? You only resign if you're in danger of being removed. You seem to forget that we control every single gear and lever of every branch of government.

Sessions can talk with Russia, Sessions can have sex with a corpse on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial if he wants. There is no process that exists whereby 43% of the Congress can remove someone serving at the pleasure of the President.

Nancy Pelosi's braying is as irrelevant as Estonia's eastern border.

saxitoxin wrote:Why on Earth would Sessions resign? You only resign if you're in danger of being removed. You seem to forget that we control every single gear and lever of every branch of government.

Sessions can talk with Russia, Sessions can have sex with a corpse on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial if he wants. There is no process that exists whereby 43% of the Congress can remove someone serving at the pleasure of the President.

Nancy Pelosi's braying is as irrelevant as Estonia's eastern border.

thegreekdog wrote:I would look forward to Sessions's resignation if I thought his replacement would be any better. I don't look forward to having an overly conservative racist drug war czar replace the overly conservative racist drug war czar.

In any event, just because...

(1) Sessions does not appear to have actually lied. He answered the question (did you talk about the campaign with the Russians) honestly with a "no."
(2) Team Blue! Some 20+ years ago the Team Blue president lied under oath. When Team Blue starts demanding resignation and jail time for Sessions, I start wondering about hypocrisy.

“I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign, and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.”

Symmetry wrote:He's already had to recuse himself from matters regarding the Trump campaign and the Russians. He's basically admitted that he can't be impartial about this.

Symmetry wrote:And, of course, there's the Trump factor. He's another open wound on Trump's legitimacy.

Symmetry wrote:If you think that the Republicans in congress and the senate will tolerate 4 years of this stuff, I can only admire your optimism.

The US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, will reply in writing to Senate Democrats’ questions about his meetings with Russia’s ambassador last year, the justice department said on Friday, after a top Republican turned down Democrats’ request for a public hearing.

Nine Democratic senators wrote asking the Senate judiciary committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, to call Sessions before his panel to explain his failure until this week to disclose his contacts with the Russian ambassador during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Analysis Is Russia connection destined to be Trump administration's Watergate?
As more details emerge of meetings with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and TV hosts have a field day, the scandal seems unlikely to disappear soon

The letter came a day after Sessions removed himself from any investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the election.

Grassley replied that he had no plans for a hearing.

Instead, Sessions would submit written answers on Monday to questions in the letter, such as why he did not come forward sooner to detail his communications with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian envoy, justice department spokesman Peter Carr said.

On Thursday, Sessions said he met Kislyak in his Senate office two months before the election as well as at an event with other ambassadors at the Republican national convention.

During the Senate confirmation process to become attorney general, Sessions denied contact with Russian officials during the campaign. Sessions told reporters he had done nothing wrong by failing to disclose the contact with Kislyak.

saxitoxin wrote:Big deal. Holder recused himself from investigations, too - as recently as 2013. A recusal is a PR tactic so you don't have to deal with the media on topic XYZ, so you can say "I don't know, I'm recused from that matter" to every question you don't want to answer.

Symmetry wrote:Sessions is no longer willing to talk about his relations with Russia:

Jeff Sessions to answer Russia questions in writing

saxitoxin wrote:
the investigation won't be handled by an independent prosecutor but by Acting Deputy Attorney-General Dana Boente (the Trump team-player whom Trump picked to replace Sally Yates after he shit-canned her for insubordination). So good luck with the "investigation!" It will go exactly like we need it to go.

mookiemcgee wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:
the investigation won't be handled by an independent prosecutor but by Acting Deputy Attorney-General Dana Boente (the Trump team-player whom Trump picked to replace Sally Yates after he shit-canned her for insubordination). So good luck with the "investigation!" It will go exactly like we need it to go.

Are you sure about this? Genuine question, I thought I read the likelihood a special prosecutor would be named was very high.

riskllama wrote:that doesn't sound fair, just or smart.

Symmetry wrote:Roger Stone, one of Trump's campaign advisors under suspicion of having Russian contacts

- France was America's ally, then it became its enemy, then it became its ally again.
- Russia was America's enemy, now it will be America's ally.

Symmetry wrote:There's no real big deal about having Russian contacts, but lying about, or covering up, having Russian contacts is a big deal. Especially when there are allegations that the Trump campaign was aided by the Russian government.

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:There's no real big deal about having Russian contacts, but lying about, or covering up, having Russian contacts is a big deal. Especially when there are allegations that the Trump campaign was aided by the Russian government.

What's wrong with being aided by the Russian government? Clinton was aided by the Ukrainian government.

The only difference is our friends are winners who will now be rewarded. Clinton's friends are losers who will now be punished. There may not be a Ukraine in four years. But that's the risk you take when you choose to play at the high stakes table.

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:There's no real big deal about having Russian contacts, but lying about, or covering up, having Russian contacts is a big deal. Especially when there are allegations that the Trump campaign was aided by the Russian government.

What's wrong with being aided by the Russian government? Clinton was aided by the Ukrainian government.

The only difference is our friends are winners who will now be rewarded. Clinton's friends are losers who will now be punished. There may not be a Ukraine in four years. But that's the risk you take when you choose to play at the high stakes table.

Hmm- you've moved from "what's wrong with having Russian contacts" to "What's wrong with being aided by the Russian government?"

Are you saying that Trump's campaign was aided by Russia?

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:There's no real big deal about having Russian contacts, but lying about, or covering up, having Russian contacts is a big deal. Especially when there are allegations that the Trump campaign was aided by the Russian government.

What's wrong with being aided by the Russian government? Clinton was aided by the Ukrainian government.

The only difference is our friends are winners who will now be rewarded. Clinton's friends are losers who will now be punished. There may not be a Ukraine in four years. But that's the risk you take when you choose to play at the high stakes table.

Hmm- you've moved from "what's wrong with having Russian contacts" to "What's wrong with being aided by the Russian government?"

Are you saying that Trump's campaign was aided by Russia?

How would I know?

If they were, though, I'd have no problem with it.

I don't care how the sausage is made as long as we get breakfast.

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

Symmetry wrote:There's no real big deal about having Russian contacts, but lying about, or covering up, having Russian contacts is a big deal. Especially when there are allegations that the Trump campaign was aided by the Russian government.

What's wrong with being aided by the Russian government? Clinton was aided by the Ukrainian government.

The only difference is our friends are winners who will now be rewarded. Clinton's friends are losers who will now be punished. There may not be a Ukraine in four years. But that's the risk you take when you choose to play at the high stakes table.

Hmm- you've moved from "what's wrong with having Russian contacts" to "What's wrong with being aided by the Russian government?"

Are you saying that Trump's campaign was aided by Russia?

How would I know?

If they were, though, I'd have no problem with it.

I don't care how the sausage is made as long as we get breakfast.

So you would have no problem with an independent investigation?