Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,615
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 2, 2017 17:33:36 GMT -5
Exclusive: Two other Trump advisers also spoke with Russian envoy during GOP conventionAttorney General Jeff Sessions is not the only member of President Trump’s campaign who spoke to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak at a diplomacy conference connected to the Republican National Convention in July. At least two more members of the Trump campaign’s national security officials also spoke with Kislyak at the event, and several more Trump national security advisers were in attendance. It's unknown what the Trump campaign officials who spoke with the ambassador – J.D. Gordon and Carter Page – discussed with him. Those who took part in the events in Cleveland said it is not unusual for presidential campaign teams to interact with diplomats. However, the newly-revealed communications further contradict months of repeated denials by Trump officials that his campaign had contact with officials representing the Russian government. The Justice Department’s acknowledgement Wednesday that Sessions spoke with Kislyak twice in 2016 has led to calls for him to recuse himself from investigations into the Trump team’s contact with Russia. By Thursday afternoon, Sessions said he would recuse himself. Multiple attendees at the Global Partners in Diplomacy event in Cleveland said the contacts between diplomats and political officials are not unusual. The program schedule and social media photographs shows ambassadors from dozens of countries attended, alongside many of the original national security advisors to Trump’s campaign. Complete article here: Exclusive: Two other Trump advisers also spoke with Russian envoy during GOP convention
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Mar 2, 2017 17:51:58 GMT -5
Exclusive: Two other Trump advisers also spoke with Russian envoy during GOP conventionAttorney General Jeff Sessions is not the only member of President Trump’s campaign who spoke to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak at a diplomacy conference connected to the Republican National Convention in July. At least two more members of the Trump campaign’s national security officials also spoke with Kislyak at the event, and several more Trump national security advisers were in attendance. It's unknown what the Trump campaign officials who spoke with the ambassador – J.D. Gordon and Carter Page – discussed with him. Those who took part in the events in Cleveland said it is not unusual for presidential campaign teams to interact with diplomats. However, the newly-revealed communications further contradict months of repeated denials by Trump officials that his campaign had contact with officials representing the Russian government. The Justice Department’s acknowledgement Wednesday that Sessions spoke with Kislyak twice in 2016 has led to calls for him to recuse himself from investigations into the Trump team’s contact with Russia. By Thursday afternoon, Sessions said he would recuse himself. Multiple attendees at the Global Partners in Diplomacy event in Cleveland said the contacts between diplomats and political officials are not unusual. The program schedule and social media photographs shows ambassadors from dozens of countries attended, alongside many of the original national security advisors to Trump’s campaign. Complete article here: Exclusive: Two other Trump advisers also spoke with Russian envoy during GOP convention This. If it was all so innocent and above board, why deny for months?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 2, 2017 18:24:42 GMT -5
From what I read, he met with more than 20 foreign ambassadors during the previous months. It's quite possible he forgot or overlooked it. Also, if you read the transcript of his hearing and go back to the beginning of the line of questioning, the context is clearly established to be meetings for campaign activities. His testimony is true in that context. I see no reason why he'd purposely withhold testimony about two routine meetings with the ambassador if he indeed remembered them and felt they were relevant to the question. Hence the only question in my mind is: was it a big enough oversight to disqualify him? Gut feeling: no. Given the issue of context, it's not a big enough error to have him thrown out. But he should make a formal statement and apologize for not being clearer. ETA: I recommend that everyone here read the transcript going back to the beginning (not just the excerpt) and come to your own conclusions about the context of the questions. ZH has a copy posted here. I am curiouse...these people , especially the ones wo have been around awhile don't keep office journels...who they see..possible short notes on what was discussed..if had lunch or entertained in office no notes..no expenses noted..no nothing...? If I had to guess, I'd say less than 1% of what goes on behind closed doors in government ever makes it into any kind of report. It simply isn't necessary or practical to record that kind of information. But if Congress wants to subpoena Mr. Sessions' notes and hunt for "Tuesday: met with Russians; gave them access codes to DNC servers", I suppose I see no harm in that. I think the Democrats have earned a witch hunt or two of their own after putting up with the GOP's nine Benghazi inquiries.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 2, 2017 18:35:51 GMT -5
I'm sorry, anti-Trumpers. The more I read it the more I side with Mr. Sessions on this one. This wasn't a lie. I know you want the guy turfed but this ain't going to do it. deminmaine : This is an example of what I'm talking about with newspapers no longer being great. To get the whole truth, you have to go to sources outside the MSM. The WaPo is just interested in crucifying the guy, not fair reporting. I disagree. This is an example of the Wash Post having the first byte that was posted up on the internet. Within two hours (or less) another story was posted giving further context and background to it. By tomorrow my local paper will have a wire service report that fills in all of the details- accurately. You want to bet? Point me to such an article when it comes out. I'm assuming your local paper has an online edition. If they publish the full relevant transcript and provide any evidence/commentary whatsoever in defense of Mr. Sessions, I'll hug a snow leopard. Comments about Sessions denying his guilt or Republicans standing by him don't count. The only thing they lend credence to is the belief that the man is corrupt and Republicans don't care.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 14:59:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2017 18:41:28 GMT -5
I disagree. This is an example of the Wash Post having the first byte that was posted up on the internet. Within two hours (or less) another story was posted giving further context and background to it. By tomorrow my local paper will have a wire service report that fills in all of the details- accurately. You want to bet? Point me to such an article when it comes out. I'm assuming your local paper has an online edition. If they publish the full relevant transcript and provide any evidence/commentary whatsoever in defense of Mr. Sessions, I'll hug a snow leopard. Comments about Sessions denying his guilt or Republicans standing by him don't count. The only thing they lend credence to is the belief that the man is corrupt and Republicans don't care. May be off topic but I hit 3/5 lotto numbers the other day, and the other two were two off each........ 10 mil........ I would have seriously sent you a nice fruit basket had I won.
|
|
dezailoooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 28, 2016 13:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 13,630
|
Post by dezailoooooo on Mar 2, 2017 20:15:47 GMT -5
I am curiouse...these people , especially the ones wo have been around awhile don't keep office journels...who they see..possible short notes on what was discussed..if had lunch or entertained in office no notes..no expenses noted..no nothing...? If I had to guess, I'd say less than 1% of what goes on behind closed doors in government ever makes it into any kind of report. It simply isn't necessary or practical to record that kind of information. But if Congress wants to subpoena Mr. Sessions' notes and hunt for "Tuesday: met with Russians; gave them access codes to DNC servers", I suppose I see no harm in that. I think the Democrats have earned a witch hunt or two of their own after putting up with the GOP's nine Benghazi inquiries. "It simply isn't necessary or practical to record that kind of informati office managers...secretarys...takes a minute or , am sure all have a appointment book...who , what day, what time....believe they all day but probably don't want to use it...possible better to look like a idiot.."I don't recall sir...don't remember.."
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 2, 2017 21:38:21 GMT -5
Look, the bottom line is you don't know why Sessions talked with the Russian ambassador, or what was said, or anything of the context. That's ok, because no one knows at this point.
So you fill in the gaps in your knowledge with speculation that confirms your bias against Trump.
I'd like to acquaint you with a term called confirmation bias.
en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/confirmation_bias
In summary, it's a tendency (i.e. human nature) to search for and interpret information in such a way as to confirm one's pre existing beliefs, and at the same time give less weight to information that contradicts one's beliefs.
We all do it, it's something that you have to be on alert for when processing information. Physician, heal thyself.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,420
|
Post by NastyWoman on Mar 2, 2017 21:51:37 GMT -5
That's what I mean, he lied and he didn't have a reason to lie. If I was Trump I would be pissed Sessions created a scandal where there wasn't one. We can only hope that he didn't have a reason. However, since he DID lie about speaking to the Russians during his confirmation hearings, I see no reason to believe him when he tells us what the discussion subjects were.
To quote a saying by a much venerated previous POTUS "Trust but verify". Funny thing about that quote though → it is a translation of a Russian proverb → rather apropos don't you think
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 3, 2017 0:21:13 GMT -5
You want to bet? Point me to such an article when it comes out. I'm assuming your local paper has an online edition. If they publish the full relevant transcript and provide any evidence/commentary whatsoever in defense of Mr. Sessions, I'll hug a snow leopard. Comments about Sessions denying his guilt or Republicans standing by him don't count. The only thing they lend credence to is the belief that the man is corrupt and Republicans don't care. Want to bet? I already told you I saw such an article online, within two hours of the first blurb I saw this morning. It is a bet you would lose Virgil! I would love to see it. Consider it a goodwill gesture to help restore my faith in the MSM.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Mar 3, 2017 8:39:48 GMT -5
This is all just a distraction, red meat for the liberal base who still don't want to face the reality that they lost the election and why they lost it. It's easier to perpetuate the myth that the Russians fixed the election and that their political enimies colluded in the whole affair.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Mar 3, 2017 8:42:33 GMT -5
Why did Sessions s meet with 25 Ambassadors as part of the Armed Services Committee in 2016? And which ones did he meet with? The other 26 Senators said they met with no Ambassadors. Why did Sessions? Was he hoping for Secretary of State or something?
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 21,402
|
Post by giramomma on Mar 3, 2017 9:36:53 GMT -5
This is all just a distraction, red meat for the liberal base who still don't want to face the reality that they lost the election and why they lost it. It's easier to perpetuate the myth that the Russians fixed the election and that their political enimies colluded in the whole affair. How common is it though, for a president elect's son-in-law to meet with dignitaries of countries that are not close allies of the US, though? I'm a liberal, but perhaps, not your base, because I'm socially liberal and tend to support more fiscal conservatism. So, I'm doing a what if..If Any of the George bushes were president elects, and it came to light that Jeb was meeting with other foreign dignitaries, I'd want to know why. I'll even make a democratic analogy, too, if that works for you. If president-elect Kennedy's family were conversing with dignitaries from countries that had a cool relationship with the US, I'd want to know why. And who knows, Trump team and Russian folks absolutely could be talking about how to bring manufacturing to the Rust belt, or exchanging recipes, or negotiating a deal for a new Hotel/Apartment building/golf course/reality tv show for Trump. But, I think we (the people) are owed some sort of explanation. Completely trying to circumvent the truth...well...I don't know. What bothers me more is that the presidency is largely a family business. Then again, maybe I wasn't paying attention all that hard. Chelsea had a bit of college under her belt while her dad was president. It doesn't sound like she was asked to meet with foreign ambassadors while her dad was president. And if she had, wouldn't that strike you as a little odd? And wouldn't you be curious to know what they talked about? Jimmy Carter's eldest son was close to or in his early 30's when Carter was elected...I'm wondering what sort of meetings Carter's first son had with ambassadors from other countries while his dad was a president elect. I'm still young enough to not remember this time..If they did have meetings, don't you think that the country should know, in general terms, what was discussed.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 3, 2017 9:59:29 GMT -5
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Mar 3, 2017 10:08:46 GMT -5
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Mar 3, 2017 10:10:12 GMT -5
Fine, whatever, it's clear you guys have made up your mind about Trump and co's guilt. Nothing I say or evidence to the contrary will dissuade you from clinging to your beliefs and suspicions. Confirmation bias as it's finest.
In the end, time will tell.
|
|
dezailoooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 28, 2016 13:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 13,630
|
Post by dezailoooooo on Mar 3, 2017 10:13:17 GMT -5
This is all just a distraction, red meat for the liberal base who still don't want to face the reality that they lost the election and why they lost it. It's easier to perpetuate the myth that the Russians fixed the election and that their political enimies colluded in the whole affair. I am as liberal...ok middle to the left..person on these boards...I know the Donald won the election....if I forget then I am reminded most every Saturday night when our new POTUS is critiqued on the weekly news show..SNL...that the Russians under direction of their PM Putin conducted a form[act] of war against us does p me off....also P me off that for partison reason , so many of my fellow Americans won't condemn this happening and lap up their leaders explanation..."no biggie..i'll take care of it..trust me"
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Mar 3, 2017 10:16:09 GMT -5
This is all just a distraction, red meat for the liberal base who still don't want to face the reality that they lost the election and why they lost it. It's easier to perpetuate the myth that the Russians fixed the election and that their political enimies colluded in the whole affair.
I know Trump won. I get hit. Hillary sucked as a candidate.
The Russians didn't fix the election. I think they tried to meddle, but saying they fixed it is giving them too much credit.
By why, why, why is everyone lying about having spoke with the Russians? If you did, just admit it. The cover is worse than the crime.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Mar 3, 2017 10:18:11 GMT -5
AOL?
At least he could use gmail.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Mar 3, 2017 10:19:16 GMT -5
Fine, whatever, it's clear you guys have made up your mind about Trump and co's guilt. Nothing I say or evidence to the contrary will dissuade you from clinging to your beliefs and suspicions. Confirmation bias as it's finest.
In the end, time will tell. No, I want there to be an investigation by an independent party so I can determine if they are guilty of anything.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Mar 3, 2017 10:25:28 GMT -5
AOL?
At least he could use gmail.
I know, that jumped out at me too. Admittedly I'm still using a yahoo account that is around 15 years old but it's never been hacked, to the best of my knowledge. I don't know that I have room to be critical on his choice of email provider...
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 21,402
|
Post by giramomma on Mar 3, 2017 10:26:21 GMT -5
Fine, whatever, it's clear you guys have made up your mind about Trump and co's guilt. Nothing I say or evidence to the contrary will dissuade you from clinging to your beliefs and suspicions. Confirmation bias as it's finest.
In the end, time will tell. So, you are OK with the president elect's son in law doing work on behalf a president elect? You are OK with hearing potential half-truths based on technicalities? Or is it you assumption that everyone in politics lies/omits the truth/is not completely forthright with information..so lies/omissions/half-truths don't matter anymore. If Trump and his family have been working behind the scenes to forge a different relationship with Russia, do you think the American people are entitled to know that? Or do you think because Trump is president, he knows best and therefore we need to know and question nothing?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Mar 3, 2017 10:29:39 GMT -5
He was asked if he had contact with Russia in the context of the Trump campaign. He said no. Sessions wasn't asked if he'd contact with Russia in the course of his duties as a Senator. The press is taking something out of context in order to push a story, the same way they did with Clinton and her "deplorables" comment. I think Russia's recent activities should be investigated. However, a lot of what they find will never be revealed for security reasons and I think this particular issue is a red herring. WSJ is now reporting campaign funds were used by sessions to pay for the trip.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,971
|
Post by bean29 on Mar 3, 2017 10:29:40 GMT -5
Jeff Sessions would not have "forgotten" that he spoke to any Russian dignitary. He is older than me, and I grew up with the Cold War full tilt. You don't forget that you had a meeting with representatives of an "Enemy" government. If it was so routine and innocent, then he should have admitted it. Why the need to cover it up and lie under oath.
I also have a big problem with the Republican Congress refusing to look at Trump's Tax returns.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,615
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 3, 2017 10:33:36 GMT -5
He was asked if he had contact with Russia in the context of the Trump campaign. He said no. Sessions wasn't asked if he'd contact with Russia in the course of his duties as a Senator. The press is taking something out of context in order to push a story, the same way they did with Clinton and her "deplorables" comment. I think Russia's recent activities should be investigated. However, a lot of what they find will never be revealed for security reasons and I think this particular issue is a red herring. WSJ is now reporting campaign funds were used by sessions to pay for the trip. Sessions used campaign funds for travel that included Russian meeting: reports
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,087
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Mar 3, 2017 10:56:25 GMT -5
He was asked if he had contact with Russia in the context of the Trump campaign. He said no. Sessions wasn't asked if he'd contact with Russia in the course of his duties as a Senator. The press is taking something out of context in order to push a story, the same way they did with Clinton and her "deplorables" comment. I think Russia's recent activities should be investigated. However, a lot of what they find will never be revealed for security reasons and I think this particular issue is a red herring. WSJ is now reporting campaign funds were used by sessions to pay for the trip. do you think this will push the focus from recuse to resign?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 3, 2017 11:02:26 GMT -5
They do have the transcript in there. I'm surprised. Notice the comments section, though. I'm not the only one.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 3, 2017 11:06:19 GMT -5
I read the article and I'm not seeing anything particularly damning. It said that Sessions used his own campaign funds to travel to the Republican National Convention, where one of the people he spoke to was the Russian Ambassador. The Russian Ambassador presumably spoke to a lot of people at the RNC. The article states Sessions was not reimbursed by Trump's campaign for the trip, which would be in line with his statement that he didn't speak to Sislyak in connection with the Trump campaign. Am I missing something? No. Just a complete set of facts, if you're reading "The Hill". Although maybe Demin is right: they'll eventually get around to publishing everything a day or two from now.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Mar 3, 2017 11:07:31 GMT -5
WSJ is now reporting campaign funds were used by sessions to pay for the trip. do you think this will push the focus from recuse to resign? I have no idea. I don't think he should resign right now. I think the investigation should continue, though.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 3, 2017 11:55:12 GMT -5
I've been delaying reading about hot topics for a few days because so many retractions are going out. My SIL is a reporter and thinking about leaving the industry because the pressure to put out articles now-now-now is incredible. At one point she had a number of articles she had to put out per hour while on shift. I wish I could say the MSM are the only ones who do it, but the alt right sites are even worse. Funny how both sides, in their haste, only ever manage to cram in the bits of the story they like in the first release. It might be deliberate. Put out a half-story, get people spreading it, crying foul over it, committing to it, then publish the full details once everybody has taken sides and are loathe to amend their opinions. Not only does the originator stir up the passions of their readership, they get to bask in publicity--both good and bad--as the story unfolds. It's interesting: AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP had a theory that the race baiting industry (Sharpton et al.) deliberately chooses to protest the deaths of black shooting victims whose shootings are the most justifiable. He theorized the industry MO was to release a half-story, get everybody as upset as possible and committed to a side, and then simply bask in the publicity as the full facts came out and the issue became less black and white (no pun intended). Basically, the same strategy I'm hypothesizing here vis a vis the media.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 3, 2017 12:35:09 GMT -5
IMO you are overthinking it. They are responding to the market pressure of getting the story first. "The Hill" maybe. Where was the market pressure in the case of the WaPo? They were the ones who broke the story, and it's been almost a month since A.G. Sessions gave his testimony. If their not releasing the full piece along with timeline and full transcript was an issue of needing the extra day, I'm pretty sure they could have taken the extra day. But... who knows. Maybe they got wind of it two days ago along with other outfits and it was a race to the finish line. I think it's something we should watch from now on.
|
|