The ONLY reason it's not being called a lie is because he's not a Democrat and the GOP is in control. That's the only reason.

he's not completely off the hook yet. I'm not going to get wrapped around the axle about it.

Dem Senators are calling for more hearings. Get him back under oath in front of the Justice Committee. Turn the screws.

he's been pretty much discredited for now, unless he resigns. Repubs typically are a bit too smug and arrogant to do that, so I expect more shit to hit the fan.

he was impeached by the House, but not convicted by the Senate.

to me that he jumped to a conclusion in his own mind that Franken was asking him about an existing charge against the Con, and that's what he answered. I don't believe he perjured himself. Maybe he was too nervous answering Dems questions, who knows. I'm now questioning how the hell he made it through law school & passed the bar! He's really looking stupid right now.

Sen. Franken's question included the phrase "in the course of this campaign". He didn't ask something simple like "Did you meet with anyone representing the interests of the Russian government?".

If he had then Sessions' answer would have been wrong. Because the question included the qualifier "in the course of this campaign" he has an out. As long as Sessions sticks to his story that the meetings were in keeping with his responsibilities as Senator, not as a member of the campaign, he is safe. Unless of course someone else in the meeting says it was about the campaign, but I think there is very little hope of that.


It was a long, drawn out, almost rambling question. It should have been shorter and more to the point.








His recusal is what we needed out of this, and we got it.

to do with the campaign. He was asked if he talked to him during the tiime of the campaign. He added that he never talked to him himself.

It was phrased as "in the course of the campaign" not at the time of the campaign. There is a difference.

Unfortunately, that loophole exists. Sessions has an out.

He went to Cleveland as a campaign member, not a senator. He used campaign funds, not Senate funds to go to Cleveland.

I am not jumping to any conclusions about it yet.


Unless we can prove that the conversation included something about the campaign, we can't prove anything.


It is an "all or nothing" situation. If we can prove he was talking about the campaign to the Russian Ambassador then misleading Congress will be the least of his problems. If we can't, he will skate.