So it turns out that Sessions talked about the campaign in his meetings with the Russian ambassador, something that he denied having done (having initially denied that the meetings even happened).
Says Anonymous Source #217. So it must be true!
Funny how often these sources say something and the administration has to backpedal or, more often I guess, someone gets sent out to lie about it and the next day Trump says "Yeah, it's true so what?"
No. What's funny is how often the sources and their claims turn out to be completely bogus, requiring the newspapers who ran with them to have to print retractions. And how often when the statement is actually correct, it's correct about something that isn't actually a contradiction at all (see the whole bit about Sessions and what he actually said above). Citing "unnamed sources" that point out that Sessions had a conversation with the Russian ambassador, while he said he "did not have communications with the Russians", presents the false impression of a lie by Sessions, when in actual fact the quote from Sessions is being taken out of context to an absurd degree.
Also funny how you try EVER so hard to cover for Sessions when, in reality, he was caught lying and was forced to recuse himself from the Russia investigation as a result. But you keep on making excuses, kiddo
And there you are repeating the same thing again, as though just repeating it makes it true. He was not "caught lying". I just wrote a post clearly explaining the entire thing, complete with quotes of what was said and the context of the conversation he said it in, and instead of even attempting to respond to that, you just repeat the allegation that he lied. It's almost like even you don't actually believe what you're saying, but you're hoping that maybe other people will, if you just repeat it enough times. The point I'm trying to make here is that this isn't working. If anything, the extreme reactions and over reactions going on right now by the Left is driving people to disbelieve anything they say. I've mentioned the whole "boy who cried wolf" aspect of this before. When you guys keep jumping on the flimsiest of claims and repeat loudly the most easily debunked allegations, all you're doing is teaching people that you'll say anything at all, no matter how untrue, in the pursuit of damaging Trump and the GOP. Which in turn teaches people to just immediately assume that what you're saying isn't true.
He recused himself because it was politically correct to do so. You can't read any sort of admission of guilt into that. It's the "right thing to do", even if you believe you can be impartial, to recuse yourself if there's sufficient belief by the public that you can't. Even when driven by false allegations, it doesn't matter. What's ironic is that he was doing what anyone in that situation should have done in an environment where most people would have assumed he wouldn't. But instead of praising him for doing that "right thing", you're using it as ammunition? How on earth does that make sense?
What''s amusing about this is the incredible double standard being used. I don't see you (or anyone on the Left) demanding that Mueller recuse himself as the investigator into "Russian Meddling", despite the fact that he's a close personal friend of the guy who was just fired by the guy he's investigating. He's at least as connected personally to the issue as Sessions was. And given the strange behavior of Comey himself. it's even more suspicious. We find ourselves again in a situation where the person leading the investigation can't possibly be trusted to be impartial, more or less guaranteeing distrust in the results of any such investigation.
A side point to all of this is something I've pointed out several times in the past on this forum. The GOP is usually quite willing to turn to folks on their own side and tell them to recuse themselves, step down, resign, etc, at almost the slightest hint of scandal, or suggestion that he or she can't fulfill their position. And not surprisingly, the Left sees this as a weakness, often intentionally fanning false allegations and/or exaggerating them so as to create a public perception that will trigger this reaction. But the Left seems to go into full "circle the wagons" mode when the same sorts of things happen. it's like your "side" doesn't care about right or wrong, just protecting the "side" itself. The very fact that you use the act of recusing himself as a negative shows how you innately believe that this is a negative to be avoided, perhaps at all costs.
This leads to the doubling down that I've mentioned so many times in the past. Things start to go sideways, but instead of cleaning house and moving on, you feel like you have to deny that anything is wrong. You refused to acknowledge the deep flaws of Clinton as a candidate, despite plenty of warning. The more problems that appeared, the more you guys denied it. And not just denied it, but went on the attack against whomever would dare suggest that maybe all the really really questionable things she did might actually be harmful for her election chances. No one's willing to call out the power structure. Everyone just follows in lockstep. Every question about Obama's actions could not possibly be legitimate and never triggered any sort of self reflection. Nope, just call those questioning his actions racists and move on. Question proposed super harmful cap and trade regulations? Climate Change deniers! Question the sanity of keeping separate bathroom facilities for men and women? Haters! It's all about pushing back at the other side on everything and never once even questioning what you're doing.
Sessions recused himself. Flynn resigned (ok, Trump fired him, but do you think a Democrat president would have done that, or circled the wagons and expected the media and pundits to fall in line behind him?). These are the actions of people who are doing the right things, for the right reasons. Your "side" doesn't. And it's becoming so obvious that even the most muddle brained masses can see it clearly. We've got clear examples of people working in the government right now, who are putting their party loyalty ahead of their oaths to their country (how many leaks are we at now?). That doesn't go in the other directions. I'm sure there were a ton of conservatives working in the federal government under Obama, and surely plenty of opportunities to leak embarrassing stuff if wanted. So why not? Why is it only folks on the Left willing to go that extra mile in the pursuit of their own partisanship?
The ultimate irony is the projection that goes right along with it. There were constant stories about how terrified folks on the Right must be with a liberal black president. And they were going to go crazy and do all sorts of horrible things. But we didn't see anything. For 8 years, there were no riots of angry white men, no subversive actions against Obama by people in his own government, no frenzy, no anger... nothing. But what we're seeing right now is the Left doing exactly what it claimed the Right would do. Again though, I'm not holding my breath on any significant amount of self reflection on this. Your side is consistent, if nothing else.