Read this carefully. "Russia's ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters..."
First, this is based on a communication between one Russian in Washington and another Russian in Russia who both were fully aware that their conversation was being intercepted. Was it disinformation or fact?
Second, if this is based on an electronic intercept, there is a paper trail showing who has access to it and when. There is almost no chance the White House had access and it and it is probably too early in the process for the Special Counsel to have it. It most likely came from someone in the last administration or someone currently in one of the intelligence agencies.
The important question is why it was released now in a manor creating the impression that AG Sessions lied or withheld information. The obvious answer is to bolster the growing negative narrative about Mr. Sessions and facilitate his resignation or removal from office.
Why? What would motivate someone to leak classified information which is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Is it to foster good government? Is it to help President Trump get rid of an ineffective Attorney General who he could remove if he wanted to? Is it a special counsel who wants to remove an Attorney General who has no authority over them? Or is it someone who has something to fear from Mr. Sessions remaining in office?
These are interesting times. There are people in high positions who have had a free hand for at least the last eight years and possibly the sixteen years before that. I know there are many who look on AG Sessions with contempt for being a straight arrow or for not throwing the rules out and getting down and dirty. If I was a high level individual who had violated the law and betrayed the trust of my position, the last person in the world I would want in the office of Attorney General would be that meek and mild boy scout, Jeff Sessions. He will not trade insults with you, but if he gets you, you will stay got.
So did they discuss the Magnitsky Act?
Russia's ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow ...That "campaign-related matters" is WaPo speaking, not the ambassador. Define "campaign-related matters." According to WaPo, that is anything that deals with policy. Sessions was a Senator at the time. He discussed policy routinely, usually in the nature of stating US policy, or listening to the foreigner's arguments for change in policy.
WaPo is being intellectually dishonest with the definition of "campaign-related." Situation normal, our entire government is intellectually dishonest an manipulative; as is the press. It is very difficult, I think literally impossible, to win an argument with an intellectually and fundamentally dishonest opponent.