Uh-oh, Jeff

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ testimony that he opposed a proposal for President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign team to meet with Russians has been contradicted by three people who told Reuters they have spoken about the matter to investigators with Special Counsel Robert Mueller or congressional committees.

[...]

Although the accounts they provided to Reuters differed in certain respects, all three, who declined to be identified, said Sessions had expressed no objections to Papadopoulos’ idea.

[...]

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, said Sessions’ words might be too vague to form the basis of a perjury case because there could be different interpretations of what he meant.

“If you’re talking about false statements, prosecutors look for something that is concrete and clear,” he said.

Other legal experts said, however, that repeated misstatements by Sessions could enable prosecutors to build a perjury case against him.

[...]

“Proving there was intent to lie is a heavy burden for the prosecution. But now you have multiple places where Sessions has arguably made false statements,” said Bennett Gershman, a Pace University law professor.

  Reuters

Maybe he'll either now have to make a deal with Mueller or with Trump for a pardon, which would include stepping down, no doubt.

Sessions testified before Congress in November 2017 that he “pushed back” against the proposal made by former campaign adviser George Papadopoulos at a March 31, 2016 campaign meeting. Then a senator from Alabama, Sessions chaired the meeting as head of the Trump campaign’s foreign policy team.

[...]

Sessions has since also been interviewed by Mueller.

Oh, wow. So maybe he's already made a deal with Mueller.

However, another meeting attendee, J.D. Gordon, who was the Trump campaign’s director of national security, told media outlets including Reuters in November that Sessions strongly opposed Papadopoulos’ proposal and said no one should speak of it again.

Don't speak of it again? Nothing suspicious in that. Has J.D. been interviewed by Mueller?

Reuters was unable to determine whether Mueller is probing discrepancies in accounts of the March 2016 meeting.

I have no doubt at all that he is. My guess would be that if Sessions didn't make clear comments agreeing about collaborating with the Russians at that meeting, or if he said something dismissive, like, "OK, let's move on...," it would be because, while Papadopolous might have been ignorant of the legal ramifications, Sessions likely would not have been, and would have wanted to be vague in that setting.

I'm starting to be concerned that a complete version of this whole shitbag story won't be laid out in a definitive book until after I'm dead, but I do hope we'll at least get an outline of who did what, with whom, and for what purpose when Mueller's investigation is finally completed.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.