DESPERATE MUCH? Media, Democrats Say Jeff Sessions Lied About Secret Russian Ties...
At the time of this story writing, Jeff Sessions has agreed to recuse himself from a Russian investigation. Becuase of all the brouhaha over what might actually be nothing, we're not sure yet. Why? Because the left went full panic with arms flailing. It's Thursday.
The left has made it clear they hate Jeff Sessions. Originally, it's because they claimed he was raaaaaaacist (see Desperate Liberals Brand Sessions as “RACIST!” and Senator Tim Scott Puts Racist Liberals to SHAME on Senate Floor). But that's so last month. Now? Apparently, he may be a Secret Russian Double Agent. Or something. The day is still young, it could be Sessions shot Kennedy. Oh wait, that's Ted Cruz's dad. It's tough keeping all these "scandals" straight anymore. Plus, it's good to wait 24-48 hours to see what parts of the media's Anti-Trump story they correct if they don't flat out take it back in its entirety. That is, after all, how "fake news" works. Until that time, let's get into it...
Then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) spoke twice last year with Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Justice Department officials said, encounters he did not disclose when asked about possible contacts between members of President Trump’s campaign and representatives of Moscow during Sessions’s confirmation hearing to become attorney general. The previously undisclosed discussions could fuel new congressional calls for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Russia’s alleged role in the 2016 presidential election.
Here's the point being lost in the media and the Democrats. Which, let's be honest, they're sleeping in the same beds.
When Sessions spoke with Kislyak in July and September, the senator was a senior member of the influential Armed Services Committee...
.@jeffpeguescbs reports DOJ Spox noted that as a member of the Armed Services Committee, last year:… https://t.co/nr83hkZ9Xm— Norah O'Donnell 🇺🇸 (@Norah O'Donnell 🇺🇸)1488456805.0
(Quick side note, take that #newsisback hashtag and stick it up your nose. Or any other bodily orifice of your choice...)
So, the committee asks him about his role as a Trump surrogate. He answers he didn't speak with Russian officials as a Trump surrogate. It should be obvious that a member of the Armed Services Committee, he talks to ambassadors and foreign leaders. This is basically arguing semantics.
But President Trump was getting high marks off of his speech the other day, so of course the media needed something to go after. Rather than waiting for Donald Trump to make a flub on his own (come on, it'll happen, he's already accused Ted Cruz's father of being part of the Kennedy assassination, for heaven's sake), they're so desperate to take out Trump, they're going after this.
The media bias is abundantly clear as well. Sessions as part of a committee talked to foreign officials. Okay. Yet the media is desperate to tie him to the Rooskies.
Hilary's top aide Huma Abedeen actually had SERIOUS ties to the Muslim Brotherhood & the media couldn't have cared less. No, there's no bias— Eric Metaxas (@Eric Metaxas)1488458208.0
Huma had ties to an actual terrorist organization. Media shrugged their shoulders. Sessions met with a Russian envoy as, what he says, was part of his job on a senate committee...
Reminds me of a common children's fable about a young boy telling fibs about a sheep-devouring canine. Ringing any bells? The boy wanted attention and lied about a wolf making unwanted cameos when in fact... there was no wolf. Well, one fine day the wolf did fulfill his contract as resident baddie, but since the boy had lied about the wolf so many times, when the wolf did show up, nobody listened. Why should they?
So here's my prediction. If there is a real scandal, if Trump or one of his cabinet members ever does sink into hot water, who will believe the media? Two months into the new term, the media and Democrats are reaching for anything, ANYTHING, to tie Trump to the Russians. With the new AG having met with a diplomat, a diplomat not the KGB, twice? It reeks of desperation. Because also slipped into The Washington Post article is this little nugget:
Current and former U.S. officials say they see Kislyak as a diplomat, not an intelligence operative. But they were not sure to what extent, if any, Kislyak was aware of or involved in the covert Russian election campaign.
I'm curious, is "covert Russian election campaign" the conspiracy theory that the Russians threw United States election for Trump? Or is WaPo referring to something else? They're not super clear on that.
One more little historical nugget for your enjoyment:
So in four years Russia moved from Obama's punchline to a serious threat, and now all the Trump people are double secret KGB agents.