US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8154

On July 22 2017 08:45 Danglars wrote:

In which reporters leap over denials of campaign strategy to arrive at denials of policy conversations in wiggle room "campaign-related." It just refuses to end.

On July 22 2017 08:45 Danglars wrote:

In which reporters leap over denials of campaign strategy to arrive at denials of policy conversations in wiggle room "campaign-related." It just refuses to end.

On July 22 2017 08:38 Danglars wrote:

Got racial offender statistics?





The pump fake so fast everybody misses it. The HPSCI will continue investigating; Susan Rice has been subpoena'd and will testify soon. So will Samantha Power. The fallout from that will be the senator's big chance to prove he's not full of shit.

Less than a month into his new job, White House press secretary Sean Spicer needed to keep his food and drink cold. He wanted a mini-fridge.

He dispatched a top aide to a nearby executive office building where junior research employees are crammed into a room, surviving on Lean Cuisine frozen lunches. Mr. Spicer wants your icebox, the aide said, according to people familiar with the incident. They refused to give it up.

So Mr. Spicer waited until sundown—after his young staffers had left—to take matters into his own hands. He was spotted by a fellow White House official lugging the icebox down the White House driveway after 8 p.m.

On July 22 2017 08:45 Danglars wrote:

In which reporters leap over denials of campaign strategy to arrive at denials of policy conversations in wiggle room "campaign-related." It just refuses to end.

On July 22 2017 09:14 Introvert wrote:


This was the first thing that came to my mind. The story is so vague... did Sessions say "yeah, our strategy is to call her 'Crooked Hillary and talk about her emails, did you have a plan?" Or was it "if we win, this is our most likely view if US-Russia relations"? Pull a Comey and leak some transcripts.

On July 22 2017 09:24 Gorsameth wrote:

It doesn't matter how innocent the meeting was (which is unlikely considering all the other evidence) when he lied about it not happening under oath.

On July 22 2017 09:29 Doodsmack wrote:
Since the wapo story is behind a paywall, does it go into any specifics beyond "campaign related"?

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.

One U.S. official said that Sessions — who testified that he has no recollection of an April encounter — has provided “misleading” statements that are “contradicted by other evidence.” A former official said that the intelligence indicates that Sessions and Kislyak had “substantive” discussions on matters including Trump’s positions on Russia-related issues and prospects for U.S.-Russia relations in a Trump administration.

Sessions has said repeatedly that he never discussed campaign-related issues with Russian officials and that it was only in his capacity as a U.S. senator that he met with Kislyak.

“I never had meetings with Russian operatives or Russian intermediaries about the Trump campaign,” Sessions said in March when he announced that he would recuse himself from matters relating to the FBI probe of Russian interference in the election and any connections to the Trump campaign.

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.

One U.S. official said that Sessions — who testified that he has no recollection of an April encounter — has provided “misleading” statements that are “contradicted by other evidence.” A former official said that the intelligence indicates that Sessions and Kislyak had “substantive” discussions on matters including Trump’s positions on Russia-related issues and prospects for U.S.-Russia relations in a Trump administration.

Sessions has said repeatedly that he never discussed campaign-related issues with Russian officials and that it was only in his capacity as a U.S. senator that he met with Kislyak.

“I never had meetings with Russian operatives or Russian intermediaries about the Trump campaign,” Sessions said in March when he announced that he would recuse himself from matters relating to the FBI probe of Russian interference in the election and any connections to the Trump campaign.

Sessions’s role in removing Comey as FBI director angered many at the bureau and set in motion events that led to the appointment of former FBI director Robert S. Mueller III as a special counsel overseeing the Russia probe.

Trump’s harsh words toward the attorney general fueled speculation this week that Sessions would be fired or would resign. So far, he has resisted resigning, saying that he intends to stay in the job “as long as that is appropriate.”



Matt Zapotosky and Julie Tate contributed to this report.

On July 22 2017 09:29 Introvert wrote:


But that is part of the question. "Campaign related" and "policy discussions" are two separate things.

And let's not pretend that perjury is the important part here. The Democrats will take it if they can get it, obviously, but we're still in collusion hunting mode. If he perjured himself he'll have to resign, but it's not the end game.

On July 22 2017 09:33 Gorsameth wrote:

That feeling when a member of a political campaign talks to a foreign dignitary about policy under his campaigns future government isn't not 'Campaign related'...

Taxpayers in Kentucky must pay more than $220,000 in attorney fees for the couples who sued Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis for refusing to issue marriage licenses to avoid having to give them to same-sex couples.

In July 2015, four couples — two same-sex and two opposite-sex — represented by the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit against Davis.

"Davis represented the Commonwealth of Kentucky when she refused to issue marriage licenses to legally eligible couples. The buck stops there," U.S. District Judge David Bunning wrote Friday.

Bunning said the county and Davis herself were not responsible for paying the $222,695 in attorneys' fees.

Kentucky Public Radio's Ryland Barton explains to our Newscast unit, "The court said the state should be held responsible because Kentucky officials had the right to take action against Davis, but didn't."

On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states. But Davis, citing her religious beliefs, refused to comply, even spending a brief stint in jail for contempt of court. Bunning was the judge who ordered Davis jailed for five days.

The case grabbed national headlines. Davis met with Republican candidates for president and even with the pope.

By December 2015, Gov. Matthew Bevin ordered that Kentucky marriage licenses need not be printed with the name of the county clerk who issued them. That appeared to settle the issue for Davis, who proceeded to issue marriage licenses without her name.

Davis' attorney says his client will appeal Friday's ruling, according to The Association Press.

"The judge ruled Davis lost the case. Attorney Mat Staver said they did not lose. He said the case was dismissed as moot after the state legislature changed the law in 2016 to remove the names of county clerks from marriage licenses."

William Sharp, legal director of the ACLU of Kentucky, said in a statement, "We are pleased with today's ruling, and we hope this serves as a reminder to Kentucky officials that willful violations of individuals' civil liberties, such as what occurred here, will not only be challenged but will also prove costly."

The Lexington Herald Ledger reports that the state has not decided whether it will appeal.

On July 22 2017 08:52 GreenHorizons wrote:



lol. Of all the related causes, I can count on you to lean on "racial offender statistics". Conceding for the moment that those statistics would show what you presume (higher offending rates among Black people) do you acknowledge that it's not a great representation of the actual rate of crime?

Like if you looked at who and where cocaine arrests are made and tried to use that to make assumptions about it's criminal users you would be drastically off.

On July 22 2017 09:14 Introvert wrote:


This was the first thing that came to my mind. The story is so vague... did Sessions say "yeah, our strategy is to call her 'Crooked Hillary and talk about her emails, did you have a plan?" Or was it "if we win, this is our most likely view if US-Russia relations"? Pull a Comey and leak some transcripts.

On July 22 2017 08:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:


Right, nothing where he was under oath and thus committed perjury.