As often seems the case in Washington, the controversy surrounding the meetings of then Senator Jeff Sessions with the Russian Ambassador has quickly descended into a feeding frenzy. When interviewed shortly after the disclosure, I stated that Attorney General Sessions should recuse himself and clarify his testimony. Late this afternoon, Sessions promised to do precisely that. However, the over-hearted rhetoric has continued with calls for Sessions to resign or even be criminally charged. People are getting ahead of their skis on this issue, particularly in claiming that this is the same type of controversy that led to the criminal charges against former Attorney General Richard G. Kleindienst.
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) have insisted that Sessions should resign. I do not see the basis for such a resignation anymore than I saw the compelling case for a perjury charge. Here is the exchange where Senator Al Franken raises the issue of continual campaign communications between surrogates and the Russians. Sessions said that he responded to the breaking news over collusion on the campaign:
That is not the model of clarity and certainly not the stuff that a perjury case is made of. Here is the language of the perjury provision:
18 U.S. Code § 1621 – Perjury generally
(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;
is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States.
Sessions had staffers present in the Senate meeting (the other encounter followed a speech at the Republican Convention) and has stated that the meeting was at the Russian’s request and concerned foreign policy disputes.
Of course, there are other charges like misleading Congress and “misleading” is defined broadly under federal law:
the term “misleading conduct” means—
(A) knowingly making a false statement;
(B) intentionally omitting information from a statement and thereby causing a portion of such statement to be misleading, or intentionally concealing a material fact, and thereby creating a false impression by such statement;
(C) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a writing or recording that is false, forged, altered, or otherwise lacking in authenticity;
(D) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a sample, specimen, map, photograph, boundary mark, or other object that is misleading in a material respect; or
(E) knowingly using a trick, scheme, or device with intent to mislead;
Nevertheless, there is still a requirement of intentional conduct. Here Sessions is saying that he responded to the news controversy about campaign interests.
Some have suggested that this is, at a minimum, a failure to give full and accurate testimony to the Senate, the basis for the misdemeanor charge against Richard G. Kleindienst. In his confirmation hearing, Kleindienst was asked about whether anyone had spoken to him about the antitrust case against International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation (I.T.T.). He said that he had not. Later Leon Jaworski revealed a phone call in which Nixon told Kleindiesnt to drop the I.T.T. case. Kleindienst insisted that he had not though the question was open ended but rather confirmed to a certain period.
The Kleindienst charge came out of a broader Watergate investigation and directly related to an attempt of the President to scuttle the case against I.T.T. Ironically, Sessions responded to the most serious aspect of the question over campaign coordination or communications with the Russians. In this circumstance, Sessions answered the specific allegation in the media as opposed to whether he met with any Russian. I think he would have been wise to say that he occasionally meets with diplomats, including Russians, as part of his Senatorial functions. Yet, as shown by the tweet by Sen. Claire McCaskill in denying any meetings with the Russian Ambassador (but later recalling two such meetings, it is easy to err in such comments. I do not believe that Sen. McCaskill was trying to mislead and I have not reason to assume the contrary with regard to then Sen. Sessions.
Various attorneys general have faced such allegations of perjury. For example, former attorney general Eric Holder was accused by critics of possible perjury when he told Congress that he was not involved in the prosecution of a journalist for the publication of classier information. However, it was later revealed that he signed the warrant naming journalist James Rosen as a potential co-conspirator. The Justice Department parsed the words of what “prosecution” meant in the question and some experts questioned the basis for such a charge.
In the end, no perjury case has been made against Sessions. Should he have answered for broadly, yes. Should he have corrected the record earlier, yes. I have also felt that recusal was the clearly advisable course weeks ago and before this latest controversy. However, that does not make this a criminal matter. A recusal and clarifying letter will address the prior errors.
On a more tactical note, the White House should be concerned about another clumsy response to a controversy. Last night, the allegation was wrongly denounced as pure partisan attack. It was clearly more than that. Now, less than 24 hours later, an official recusal has been made and a letter of clarification will be issued. The White House needs to “up its game” dramatically. The White House continues to stumble through these controversies rather than take control. It sometimes seems that when the White House should be moving deliberately, it moves too fast — and when it should be proceeding with dispatch, it seems to move too slowly. There is clearly a period for any staff to reach its rhythm but this is bleeding the Administration from missteps that should have been avoided.
162 thoughts on “Sessions Recuses Himself From Any Russian Investigation”
Another entropy increasing thread.
Here is a left leaning group that defends Sessions – or at least puts on a guest “Whistle blower” that does so.
The Democrats are playing a foolish and very dangerous game here. My thoughts above on the Deep State apply more than ever. This is just part of an attempt to box Trump’s foreign policy choices in to what the establishment, particularly the MIC, has decided on vis-a-vis Russia.
As I recall, the GOP brought and impeached Clinton for perjury about a legal, consensual, sex act in private when he said he did not have sex with Lewinsky. Folks of my age, recall that when I was young, we considered having sex to mean intercourse. Thus I am sure Clinton would have been glad to take the offer Turley suggests by clarifying his testimony. Of course, we all can see that one standard is for Clinton, and another for Trump and his minions. It is obvious that having a closed meeting with the Russian ambassador in his office is rather more important than Clinton’s transgression especially when Sessions was a big part of Trump’s campaign at the time. Then we have the excuse for Trump having an illegal foundation, and violating the law with self dealing, and illegal campaign contributions, that Trump’s LAWYERS were to blame and not Trump himself. INCREDIBLE! Then we have Turley denouncing Obama for not proceeding legally against those who condoned torture, but then says he will take Trump’s WORD that he will not resort to it if somebody says it is against the law! He wanted to be fair to Trump and forgetting the fact that Trump’s word has been proven worthless by his contractors, associates and his own tweets.
Then Turley denounced Clinton for LEGALLY taking an outlandish salary to be spokesman for an ACCREDITED, degree granting university, yet not a word about Trump’s bogus U that he had to shell out $25 million that he took hundreds of suckers for. So just what part of being fair to Trump and taking his word is a reasonable idea?
It becomes farcical when Turley compares McCaskill’s tweet with sworn testimony. If we are to take that as a standard, Trump needs to be impeached for multiple counts of perjury. I guess most on this site will excuse any crime Trump or his folks will commit and denounce those who point out such crimes. So Trump was right about y’all. He said he could shoot a person on 5th Ave. and not lose a single vote. So much for the rule of law.
The Fascinating part about Facts, they get in the way of alternating Fact.
Truth Trumps Trump.
No, Clinton perjured himself and suborned perjury because his party passed, and he signed into law, the Violence Against Women Act that made an accused sexual predator’s on-the- job behavior fair game in any sexual harassment lawsuit. It amused me when people like you kept saying back then, “But everybody lies about sex.”
Of course everybody who is guilty of sexual harassment lies about sex. That’s what the suit is about. If Bill Clinton was being prosecuted or sued for influence peddling, then he’d have to lie about influence peddling. But Paula Jones was suing Clinton for sexual advances that were not consensual on her part. So he had to lie about how he was diddling a White House intern in the Oval office. Because he had a pattern of doing exactly what he was accused of.
And that’s a crime. He should have been prosecuted for it instead of merely disbarred and being forced to settle with Paula Jones.
In other words, you recall wrong.
“I was a surrogate”….”I did NOT meet with any Russians” Now we find that he DID meet with Russians. Sounds to me like a lie under oath. I guess it’s ok for an attorney operating as attorney general to lie under oath and be defended by other attorneys.
btw, ” in the prosecution of a journalist for the publication of classier information.” What’s classier information?
Watch the video from Real News Network where a one time FBI agent who is now a whistle blower defends Sessions. See my comment below for link. Sessions was acting in his capacity as a senator receiving the Russian ambassador (perfectly legal and reasonable) and there is no indication that anything about Trump or Trump’s intentions vis-a-vis Russia was ever brought up. Thus Sessions answer to Franken was honest, there was no communication with any Russian that fit Franken’s question.
If that is true, this is essentially a witch hunt kerfuffle and professor Turley is being generous, if anything, to the Democrats. And that does not mean I’m a fan of Sessions (which I most definitely am not). The interview is short and well worth the watch.
I’m out of league here. Too much brain power on diyaspl!
SÃ¥ koselig Ã¥ avslutte med litt godt:) Hos oss ble pÃ¥sken avsluttet med trim – siden det hadde vÃ¦rt lite av det disse dagene, hihi:)God hverdag igjen!
Russian Ambassador Met with Obama Officials in White House SIX Times During Hillary Clinton Uranium Sale to Russia
This is part of a well orchestrated campaign, mostly by the Deep State, to box Trump and his administration in to the previous administration’s foreign policy with regards to Russia/China, Iran, Syria and the Middle East in general.
It appears to be working in part (boots on the ground in Syria) but it is very difficult to say what direction Trump would choose in individual cases such as Syria if he had a totally free hand. There are rumors that Trump will continue detente with Russia regardless, but if that is true, he needs to realize that his moves in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East may seriously complicate such efforts.
Another issue Trump faces, is a reasonable desire, or instinct to be as secretive as the previous administration. Without “clearing the swamp” of misinformation that the Deep State has been feeding us via the Main Stream Media, it will be very difficult for Trump to avoid future such scandals in his administration. It isn’t enough to simply keep repeating that HIllary and the media are lying. That may be true, but It has to make more sense than that to be believable in the broader context.
Also, Trump is caught up in his own trap of “be tough” ideology and/or campaign promises which makes him vulnerable to adopting extremely costly and counterproductive stances with countries in the Middle East such as Iran that could actually (and wants to) provide considerable help in dealing with ISIS.
So while the effort to nail Sessions is indeed a “feeding frenzy”, and an unfair and deeply hostile one at that, it is anything but random (see what poo sticks to the wall). The whole Russia and Putin as anti-Christ propaganda charade will continue, and actually deepen, to bedevil his administration and many of his own authoritarian inclinations (whether from himself personally or from his entourage that he generously hired as a means of clearing out the DC swamp, I assume, so he could keep a close eye on it).
Incomplete last sentence:
…and many of his own authoritarian inclinations (…), will bedevil and undercut his own foreign policy intentions.
Putin now bills himself as the ultimate white christian nationalist and supports those candidates world wide. You can include Marie LePen and Trump in that group.
What are you trying to say? That the Deep State and Obama are saving the world by forcing Trump and Marine Le Pen (not Marie LePen) to continue to bring us to the brink of WWIII with the second largest nuclear power on earth? You seem to be stuck as much in your own tribal mythologies as some of those you take issue with.
BTW, any links or support for your lame assertion, Putin now bills himself as the ultimate white christian nationalist?
And while you are at it, what is wrong with Putin supporting those who do not want to push us to the brink of a nuclear holocaust? You are saying that’s a bad thing???
Apparently you didn’t take my comment about “echo chambers” to heart. Just keep readin’ what makes you feel good.
Politico is not Breitbart, Hannity, or Infowars. Just because Trump does not like them, it does not mean they are not capable of good reporting at times.
Politico is absolutely rank in it’s willingness to carry water for the establishment. This article is inflammatory drivel based largely on opinion comments by Pat Buchanan, that bête noire of neoliberal Democrats (sometimes referred to as Vichy Democrats) and other similar luminaries that have NADA to do with Russia other than insinuation, and a loan to Marine Le Pen by a Russian Bank.
What of it? Obviously Putin wants to encourage closer ties with Europe so while there is zero evidence of Putin’s involvement in the bank’s decision to make a loan to Le Pen, and while Putin wanting to lead some sort of White Christian Movement remains utterly in the deranged conspiracy theories column (exactly the sort of thing Politico specializes in), Putin being in favor of sympathetic Western political movements makes perfectly reasonable healthy common sense.
Putin is aligned with the nationalistic Russian Orthodox Church. It helps him retain a high approval rating even while the Russian economy is in the tank.
Perhaps. Putin is no saint nor do I maintain anywhere that he is. That said, over the last five years, he has come out looking eminently reasonable by comparison to the sneaky, underhanded efforts of the Obama administration, particularly including HIllary Clinton’s contributions to the Ukraine coup, to encircle Russia militarily as part of a provocation campaign and to wage economic war with it by sanctions and other means. It has been established over and over that Russia poses no serious threat to the United States or even to our European allies, nor does it intend to.
So if Trump is investigated there will be a nuclear war? With that line of thinking merely asking for his tax returns constitutes a major threat.
Wow, it’s really a shame you can’t put any of these things together. I guess that is what has been endemic to the Democratic party as of late.
Seriously? Your comment is so utterly beside the point that it is either in bad faith, or you are just too deeply stuck in your tribal trench to see anything happening on the outside. You do not have to be a Trump fan to recognize the insanity of escalating tensions with Russia.
I do see that Sweden is instituting conscription because they are afraid of a Russian invasion. Maybe you are stuck in the tribe of Putin, Bannon, Gorka, Trump and LePen. The ties are there and so is the goal and it is not a worthy one. BTW, Trump’s EPA seems set on frying the earth so no concern on your part?
I think Trump’s EPA cut backs as well as his views on global warming to be insanity. The EPA cuts alone will make us “All Flint Michigan” and clean drinking water is only the tip of the ice berg.
You are not paying attention. I just said one doesn’t have to be a fan of Trump to keep their eyes open to what is going on.
The EPA cuts alone will make us “All Flint Michigan” and clean drinking water is only the tip of the ice berg.
Strange as it may seem to you, there was potable water in this country prior to 1970.
Spoiler Alert: This is no longer 1970. Population has increased. Industrial and commercial usage as well. Water shortages are ubiquitous and the EPA does a reasonable job with a very modest budget in protecting what potable water sources we have left.
I imagine you, like Trump, see water shortage as an opportunity for additional rent extraction so protecting it as a commonly owned resource by the American people goes contrary to the grain.
I imagine you, like Trump, see water shortage as an opportunity for additional rent extraction… ->
I imagine you, like Trump, see water shortage as an opportunity for additional rent extraction by private enterprise, …
How about we investigate Obama?
from the article: “In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.”
I suspect if Trump had any real intention of cleaning the swamp (other than draining it right into his cabinet picks 🙂 ), he would have already set up investigations of Obama on multiple fronts. Obama provides a singularly rich and fertile field for them.
The real story is the silent coup being orchestrated by Obama and his team. And now Sessions has recused himself from investigating any of it. Big mistake. Remember how Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton in a gross ethical breach yet NEVER recused herself? Eric Holder never recused himself – and now he is working with Obama to destroy Trump. The real coordinated attack on our democracy and our election is coming not from Russia, but from Obama and the Democrats.
Why would the Obama administration loosen the NSA rules just weeks before leaving office? Why would the Obama Justice department go to the FISA court twice to try and get wiretaps on Trump and his team? and then coordinate the leaking of information to the media – which is a felony? If Republicans do not fight this tooth and nail, they will prove once again what weak cowards and the wimps they are.
If Republicans do not fight this tooth and nail, they will prove once again what weak cowards and the wimps they are.
I think you might be sadly surprised to learn just how many Republicans are behind this soft coup along with their Democrat counterparts. It isn’t about D’s or R’s, it’s about MIC, about banks, about transnational investors and so on, which want to maintain sanctions against Russia as an investment in future spoils.
Completely agree with you. This is one story that our intrepid reporters will NOT investigate.
Leaving explicit mention of Obama out of the above comment was inadvertent. It should be noted that Obama and his administration are very willing (and well paid) players in the interests of the Deep State so while the two are not exactly the same, my use of the Deep State above assumes involvement Obama’s entire administration. Also, while the Deep State is difficult to define in it’s entirety, it includes the MIC as well as the usual corporate and finance Oligarchs or as some would have it, the American aristocracy..
Thanks for the addition.
Right. I think Obama, Clinton and the MSM are essentially the front end interface to the Deep State (or that part of our government that seems to be beyond election and the Democratic process). I also suspect that Trump’s 50+ billion give away to the MIC, is an attempt at pacification, perhaps as a bid to keep his Russian de-escallation policy, perhaps simply because he’d rather not have his knuckles broken..
Brooklin, you and slohrss claim to have such superior knowledge of what is really going on. As one who likes to get a diverse source of information, can you share your sources or links supporting your claim that there is this Deep State trying to start a war with Russia, and that Russia is not a threat to the US?
Your snide comment, such superios knowledge, indicates an unusually open mind, snort. I suggest you use your own superior devices to do your own research. Hint: try a search engine.
I didn’t intend to be “snide,” only frank. You claim to know and I was just curious where you get your info.
Top three sources that came up in my search of “Deep state setting up war with Russia”: zerohedge, rawstory, and infowars. Does that sound about right? I only briefly looked, but the articles I read didn’t provide much factual support in my opinion.
I didn’t intend to be “snide,” only frank.
Nonsense. Being frank is not the same as being sarcastic and “such superior knowledge” was sarcastic. And without merit. Nowhere did I, or Slohrss29 for that matter, claim superior, or infallible, or any kind of extraordinary knowledge. That wasn’t frankness, it was empty sarcasm and deserves to be pointed out.
As to your search, I wouldn’t bother. It doesn’t seem you have any intention of finding out anything you don’t already believe. If I’m mistaken, have at it and good luck.
Also, if you have any intention whatsoever of being frank, please feel free to argue any of my points or so called “superior knowledge.” That’s what comments are for. I have no intention of doing your homework for you.
Here, I think you have a valid point. Trump is going to be his own worst enemy in many ways. As I said above, “and many of his [Trump’s] own authoritarian inclinations[…], will bedevil and undercut his own foreign policy intentions.
What exactly do you see are his foreign policy intentions?
He hasn’t really done anything except lip service.
Trump said he would “bomb the hell out of them” during the campaign and now he is. I see no divergence.
I tried to reply but my comment keeps disappearing. In short, the article you link to above, points out that Trump didn’t just promise to bomb the hell out of them, but did indeed promise peaceful resolutions to many international issues (even if he didn’t mean it).
We are getting into the weeds here.
You are correct, Brooklin Bridge.
Quoting a comment about bombing ISIS is in no way an assessment of “foreign policy intentions”.
– More specifically, Trump said he would “bomb the hell out of ISIS”.
We were already doing that when he made that statement as a candidate.
Quoting that statement as an answer to a question about the nature of Trump’s “foreign policy intentions” does not answer the question (juris posed to you).
It is unknown, at this point, what foreign policy postures Trump will take on different issues.
“Foreign policy intentions” can not be adequately summarized by one quote about airstrikes against ISIS.
Sessions is a pathetic pathological liar. Much like dumb DT. Not sure why Sessions initially lied while under oath at his confirmation hearing? – his smug look whilst lying to Franken does speak volumes about his total lack of character. Or maybe why Sessions did not amend his testimony after the fact?
Either way Sessions’ open dishonesty is clear evidence he is not qualified to continue being AG. And as long as he is AG, not one American should believe his recusal from the Putin/Trump corruption investigation will actually be adhered to.
btw – With Kushner now also seemingly involved, is there one dumb DT staffer that isn’t a Putin pawn? or hasn’t lied about their involvement?
Yeah, Putin pawns. You people have bought into this Russian vampire thing way too much. Do you avoid the streets at nighttime because they may be out there? Just Democrats holding the entire Earth hostage for their temper tantrum. Fine bunch they are.
Surely there is something of substance to catch Sessions on, like using your office to promote your very profitable non-profit.
Pay to play is pay to play no matter who does it.
I agree with you. Too bad nothing happened through all the big years of the Clinton fiascos. And get back to me on something with substance. Remember, you Democrats own all of this, everything bad that happens that goes forward. You were facing the worst team in history, yet you had no honor, no courage to do the right thing when it really counted, and now you own all of this. It’s all yours.
The Clintons have been investigated for years and Bill faced impeachment proceedings and was disbarred. Both Clinton and Trump were being investigated by the FBI during the election process. Might be a good idea that parties do not chose people with major legal problems as their nominees.
That’s the point of the DNC email hack – it exposed how the party was actively working to sabotage Sanders and give the nomination to Hillary. It exposed the corruption of the DNC. This was a gift to the electorate because our own ‘watchdog’ press would never have exposed it.
…..While the media works overtime to dig up and expose anything about Trump or Republicans. Please don’t tell me that you can’t see how the media by and large protected Obama for eight years?
Yeah, DC and the elite media have exempted Obama and his “impartial” AG’s for eight years…..how about Hillary Clinton’s lying on record, the Benghazi lies, the Uranium One deal, how about Eric Holder’s contempt of Congress charge, spying on reporters, gun running to Mexican drug cartels, Loretta Lynch’s spontaneous meeting w Bill Clinton on the tarmac in the midst of active FBI investigation, or any of the other ‘scandal-free’ eight years of Obama…..the Republicans and the MSM were mostly quiet during all of this…..
If you actually follow that link you get from Greenwald himself:
1) Trump presidency is dangerous.
2) CIA/DeepState abuse of spy powers to subvert elected Govt is dangerous.
One can cogently believe both
I think the Russian thing is way overblown. They may have hacked Demo emails, but so what, the Demos self destructed with their Hillary or bust campaign. They busted. But Sessions lied in front of the Senate and IMHO, willfully. What does he mean with little comment “…and I’m unable to comment on it.”? He knew exactly what the question was, he knew exactly what he did, he lied. And this is the man that will put other people in jail for telling a similar lie and also for using a weed to help with pain management. Yea, Sessions is a fine specimen of a human being ready to lead the top law enforcement agency in the country. NOT!
Hillary Clinton is a pathological liar, Bill Clinton is a pathological liar, Nancy Pelosi is a pathological liar, Chucky Schumer is a pathological liar, Barack Obama is a liar and a fraud…..and on and on we could go. Sessions has more integrity in his little finger than any of these Democrat sleezeballs.
Meant to include “pathetic and evil” Democrat sleezeballs”
There will be no criminal prosecution of Mr. Sessions arising out of his testimony at the confirmation hearing because there is no evidentiary basis for a perjury charge. His recusal is appropriate, however, although it should not have been necessary to consult staff attorneys to understand its wisdom.
And I left out Eric Holder and a few others. Sorry to have slighted you Eric but there are so many juticy targets of opportunity and Obama in their stirring things up guess what ……the real question is are their any pre signed pardons we don’ tknow about like ones with names of Kerry? for example. There may not be any left to run against unless you go to the Mayor’s of Ponema Minnesota or O’Brien Oregon.
I heard someone suggest that Trump should unseal all of Obama’s sealed records and show the people exactly who Obama is. Pull back the curtain of fraud and deceit and expose him – in response to all the sabotaging and illegal leaking of classified info that Obama’s intel people are doing to Trump.
Oh I so wish that would happen. I wonder if Trump has that power? O paid a truckload of money to cover his past – would love to see what’s in there.
It’s not only the correct thing to do it moves him out of the way and keeps the focus on the ‘sources.’ Meantime he’s freed up to supervise the for still ongoing investigations of the Clintons not to mention the IRS investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
The airplane meeting with the former AG, the bag lady investigations, and a host of other items among them the leak investigations and that includes leaks ging back into the previous administrations.
Especially I hope those who say ‘our democracy thus shining the light of self confession on thieir marxist leninist roots. Then there are all those staffers who took the fifth but didn’t get the promised pardons, we’ll see how fast they race to be the first to turn states’ evidence. When you think about there are so many opportunities for swamp draining.
Former colleagues like Gowdy who held excellent investigations and bang we’re back to Hillarious again.
Fittingly this time the ter WitchHunt will have a real meaning. i wonder in the end how many of those involved will be sliding thier money into Curacao
Given two more Constitutionally minded judges on the SCOTUS Bench
Whoo boy by golly you betcha !!!
-In a pinch, Sessions may belatedly explain that he and the Russian ambassador only discussed their grandchildren.
It is a witch hunt and Scarborough is a bought and paid for monkey like all the rest on electromagnetic spectrum pollution MSNBC.
Trump watches Joe and Mika every morning.
True but I wouldn’t leave out that Schumer whose also known as Israel’s personal Senator and Pelosi who led a congressional junket tour into Tibet and left praising Communist China were doing and have done far more ‘as is their job’ than what they are accusing Sessions of doing ‘as was his job’ It follows if he should resign then they should lead the way
As for Franken he’s not much for foreign travel but doesn’t mind going on in country junkets paid for by publishing companies to promote his own books while on congressional time. As a member of the committee charged witih promoting commerce for US Business and labor he promoted his own and did notning for the rest of the labor force.
Only took a minimum effort google and the rest of the internet opened their (Schumer, Franken, Pelosi’s) legs .
Be careful what you ask for your own failings might be the first present received ha ha ha.
Score Pelosi works on behalf of the Communist Chinese
Schumer works for Israel
Franken works for…..Franken.
Not that the first two are necessarily a bad idea but Sessions supposed horrible crime pales in insignificance. and so does that of Pence. in comparison. The left is running out of steam and being abandoned by their own people big time now! It’s what they deserve.
I have gone from being a Democrat to absolutely despising the Democrats
You and a lot of other people.
Comments are closed.