Posted on 07/21/2017 4:33:40 PM PDT by springwater13
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
So did they discuss the Magnitsky Act?
Looks like it wasnt security form..it was financial disclosure form.reportedly updated 39 times since march
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.
Kislyak: So Senator Sessions, how is the campaign going?
Sessions: OK, but I’m here as a Senator.
Kislyak to his superior: Yes the subject of the campaign did come up in our conversation.
FLASH NEWS TO THE MEDIAPUKES...NO ONE GIVES A DAMN!! So shove it up your anus you bastards!! MUH RUSSIA..UGH!
Now l’m thinking this leak is to make sure Sessions stays recused. The LAST thing these bastards want is for Sessions to withdraw his recusal and fire Mueller. Following Trumps remarks the traitors in intelligence want to make sure Sessions stays recused.
"Our Intel community is in a state of treason"
Yep!
I agree with you regarding the intellectual dishonesty being displayed by the Washington Post. They obviously oppose the president on political and philosophical grounds and have allowed their opposition to become personal and, in many ways unhinged.
As bad as their motives and methods are, they are actually being used by someone with a much more sinister motive. The person who leaked this information did it for a purpose. While that person will have to be found before we learn the real purpose, we can reasonably make some assumptions. The nature of the information would indicate a high level involvement and to risk a long prison sentence, there must be a commensurate reward. Reward could be in many forms but given the nature of the information and circumstances existent, the most obvious would be self protection.
This is a time for rational thought, not knee jerk reaction. We have created a powerful monster with our intelligence services and it is dividing and controlling us more and more each day. We have almost reached the point where one carefully structured leak can disrupt our whole political process.
-- This is a time for rational thought, not knee jerk reaction. We have created a powerful monster with our intelligence services and it is dividing and controlling us more and more each day. We have almost reached the point where one carefully structured leak can disrupt our whole political process. --
I think the country is lost. The public is not capable of critical thought, the institutions are corrupt to the core. At some point the natural resources or the wealth redistribution are going to fail in a not insignificant way, at which point all hell is going to break loose.
I've read the good book. The ending includes a bit of excitement and pain. It's human destiny. We are baked to fail on earth.
The only rational thing to do is to force the Washington Post reporter(s) to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. National security requires it.
That's what I've been saying. There would be swampthings run amuck and no one short of Loretta Lynch could get confirmed.
“Our Intel community is in a state of treason”
They didn’t get that way in a day. This would seem to be a deeply entrenched problem.
The mishap of their apple cart tipping over has caused them to lose their minds. They require a lot of sunshine and disinfectant.
>The mishap of their apple cart tipping over has caused them to lose their minds. They require a lot of sunshine and disinfectant.
Political spies can’t be tolerated by any state. They’re going to need to be disband. Give the NSA and CIA stuff over to the Military. Reboot the FBI with new staff and a new ethos.
I wholeheartedly agree. They have crossed the line into sedition. This is deliberate opposition to the will of the people and letter of the Constitution.
The WashPost line - “the Russians are bad”.
The new WashPost line - “the Russians are good - if they say what we want to hear”.
So when exactly is it, according to the WashPost, that you’re suppose to take the word of a Russian as truthful? Answer - when it pleases the political agenda of the WashPost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.