Jeff Sessions: fair and balanced article in Vanity Fair
Early today I wrote in a comment about Sessions’ testimony to Congress:
We all know that the innuendo behind the question was that the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, and Sessions answered “no” to the innuendo. No “perjury” here.
An article in Vanity Fair by T.A. Frank agrees with me.
Frank explains that, after a long spiel from Al Franken about how CNN has documents that allegedly say that “There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump’s surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government,” Franken than asks what Sessions would do as AG.
Sessions responds that he doesn’t know about any of that stuff and that he “didn’t have—did not have communications with the Russians”
It’s obvious that Sessions meant that he didn’t talk to the Russians about Trump’s campaign, in response to Franken’s extremely long-winded question which really was designed to create innuendo that Trump was involved with the Russians in a nefarious manner and not to elicit any information from Sessions that Franken actually cared about.
If Franken had asked Sessions “have you ever talked to any Russian official for any reason during the last year,” then he might have remembered talking to the Russisan ambassador, although he may have still forgotten, because the Russian ambassador seems to be like this jovial uncle who’s always hanging out at Washington events and chatting it up with everybody. We saw today that TWO Democrats said they never talked to the ambassador, and then people from conservative news sites/blog turned up evidence that they lied.