First Member of Chumph Cartel Goes to Jail

With the profligate racism of the Chumph Cartel, I don’t imagine any of them convicted and jailed is going to do too much better than your run of the mill white wing child molester…

Dutch attorney gets 30 days in first sentence for Mueller probe

Alex van der Zwaan had admitted to lying to investigators.

Special counsel Robert Mueller obtained the first sentence in his high-profile investigation Tuesday, as a Dutch attorney who admitted to lying to investigators was ordered into federal custody for 30 days.

Former Skadden Arps associate Alex van der Zwaan, 33, pleaded guilty in February to lying to FBI agents about his contacts with former Trump campaign official Rick Gates and Konstantin Kilimnik, a suspected Russian intelligence operative who worked closely with Gates and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Lawyers for van der Zwaan had asked U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson to give him a fine and pleaded with the court to let him return to his London home by August, when his wife is due to give birth.

However, the judge said some time in jail was appropriate given his offense and the fact that he is an attorney.

“We’re not talking about a traffic ticket,” she said. “This was lying to a federal officer in the course of a criminal investigation.”

In addition to the 30-day sentence, Jackson also gave van der Zwaan a $20,000 fine and two months of probation, but she said she would permit him to reclaim his passport and leave the country as soon as his month in custody is completed. It’s not immediately clear where or in what type of facility he will serve the 30 days.

Van der Zwaan was drawn into the saga in 2012 as his law firm prepared to release a report commissioned by Manafort and Gates for Ukraine’s Justice Ministry in a bid to defend then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who had jailed one of his most prominent political opponents, former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.

Manafort and Gates’ work on behalf of Yanukovych’s political party has drawn Mueller’s scrutiny. Gates has pleaded guilty to lying to investigators, and Manafort is awaiting trial.

 

How Jared Kushner Committed Perjury and His Newspaper Colluded With Russian Spies

Probably slated for the third round of Mueller indictments (After the Flynn family), Chumph son-in-law Jared Kushner is being investigated for back door deals with Wikileaks and Putin’s KGB.

Kushner perjured himself in testimony before Congress, declaring the he, and non of the Chumph staff ever had contact with Wikileaks or the Russians,

That’s bald faced lie.

How Jared Kushner’s Newspaper Became a Favorite Outlet for WikiLeaks Election Hacks

The New York Observer, owned by Trump’s son-in-law, was a friendly outlet for the 2016 Russian hackers.

In the fall of 2014, Julian Assange, the embattled head of WikiLeaks, was meeting with a steady stream of supportive journalists in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he had taken refuge to avoid extradition to Sweden on sexual assault charges. Among those seeking an audience with Assange was a freelancer working for the New York Observer, the newspaper owned and published by President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and key advisor, Jared Kushner.

Ken Kurson, the newspaper’s editor in chief — along with a freelance writer he’d hired — helped arrange a “no-holds-barred” interview with Assange that October.

“My editor Ken Kurson (kkurson@observer.com) and I are very interested in an interview with Julian Assange. This would be a cover story.… We will be in London the first week of October,” wrote Jacques Hyzagi, a freelance reporter for the Observer, to a press consultant who arranged interviews for WikiLeaks.

Kurson, when contacted by Foreign Policy, said he did not attend that meeting and has never communicated with Assange; he insists that the profile was Hyzagi’s idea. “We ran an interview pitched to us by a freelancer,” he wrote in an email.

“I have never communicated in any way with Julian Assange and this sort of fact-free, evidenceless charge is analogous to pizzagate and other totally ludicrous conspiracies,” he added.

Hyzagi did not respond to multiple requests for an interview.

Yet a series of exchanges between Hyzagi and the WikiLeaks representative indicated that a meeting involving Kurson and Assange was in the works; at one point Leonardo DiCaprio was invited to tag along, according to emails obtained by FP. (DiCaprio did not end up attending.)

After that, the plan was to travel to Moscow to meet with Edward Snowden, the former U.S. National Security Agency contractor. Snowden’s team declined a request for an interview from Hyzagi, according to Ben Wizner, Snowden’s attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union.

Hyzagi’s meeting with Assange resulted in a friendly feature in the Observer and kicked off a long-running series of laudatory articles about the WikiLeaks founder — many of those stories including exclusive details about the Australian transparency advocate. Later, the Observer also became a favored outlet of Guccifer 2.0, a suspected Russian hacker, who along with WikiLeaks released troves of emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC). WikiLeaks tweeted some of the Observer’s coverage, including stories expressing doubt that the Russians had meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Kushner has long denied any collusion with the Russian government, which is suspected of targeting the 2016 election, but his newspaper proved a favored conduit for hacks, which the U.S. intelligence community says were carried out on Kremlin orders. The Observer was not the only outlet that received exclusive access to Guccifer 2.0 documents — or those from other outlets such as DC Leaks, widely believed to be part of the same campaign — but it was the only one owned by someone who was part of the Trump campaign.

“This would be of significant interest to law enforcement and investigators,” John Sipher, a former CIA officer who worked in Russia, wrote in an email to FP.

 

 

 

Jeff Davis’s Day Gets Worse…

Ouch!

“Did you lie then, or are you lying now”?

 

Jefferson Davis’ Bad Day in the House

Uncle Jeff Davis Sessions did not have a good day in the House this morning –

About his selective memory loss and continued Perjury –

On his selective memory and invention of a black “terrorist” group to investigate –

On Hillary Investigation –

And yesterday –

 

Is Jefferson Davis Sessions the Next to be Indicted…Perjury!

Looks like ol’ Jefferson Davis is looking at Perjury charges…

Sessions flat out lied.

That is a crime.

BUSTED: Evidence mounts that Jeff Sessions perjured himself under Al Franken questioning

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is suddenly facing an active dilemma.

A guilty plea signed last month by one of his former Trump campaign underlings revealed this week shows he likely perjured himself during his confirmation hearing — and he doesn’t have a good option to wriggle out of it.

Sessions told Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) at the January hearing that he was “not aware” of evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government during the campaign, according to the New Republic.

He walked back those claims last month during another Senate hearing, telling Franken he “conducted no improper discussions with Russians at any time regarding the campaign or any other item facing this country.”

But court filings, and a new CNN report, show he was aware of evidence that at least one campaign associate was in contact with Russia.

George Papadopoulos, who served on the foreign policy advisory committee that Sessions oversaw, pleaded guilty Oct. 5 to lying to FBI agents in January and February.

The guilty plea Papadopoulos signed shows the campaign adviser communicated with Russians promising stolen campaign information on Hillary Clinton, and he tried repeatedly to set up meetings between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Papadopoulos told other committee members, and Trump himself, about his contacts with Russia during a March 31, 2016, meeting — and proposed arranging for the Republican candidate to meet with Russian president Vladimir Putin.

According to a CNN report Wednesday, Trump “didn’t say yes and he didn’t say no.”

But Sessions, then an Alabama senator and chairman of his national security team, shut down the proposal, according to one person present for the meeting and confirmed by another source.

The guilty plea shows Papadopoulos continued trying to arrange a meeting between campaign officials and Russia until at least August 2016.

J.D. Gordon, a former Pentagon spokesman and Trump campaign national security adviser who attended the meeting, told CNN that Papadopoulos “obviously went to great lengths to go around me and Sen. Sessions.”

There’s no evidence at this point to contradict Gordon’s claim — but the new revelations still leave Sessions in a position where he’s damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t.

“The good news for Sessions is that he can plausibly claim to have opposed any Russian collusion,” writes the New Republic‘s Jeet Heer. “The bad news is that, in making those claims, he opens himself up to charges of perjury.”

 

It is Time to Remove Sessions

It is time for Congress to take up the issue of the removal of Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The legal basis for doing so is comprehensive –

1. Jeff Sessions perjured himself in testimony about his Russian meetings before Congress
2. There is is direct evidence of multiple meetings between Sessions and Trump’s Russian ally on at least 2 occasions, and possibly 3-4. None of these meetings as Sessions has claimed (again – perjury) had anything to do with his role as Senator
3. Sessions stonewalled Congress using the legally non-existent justification of his non-existent Executive Privilege in testimony this week. For the Attorney General to use an unconstitutional and illegal tactic to cover up in testimony is another form of perjury
4. Sessions was part of the Chumph’s team decision to fire Comey, violating his statement of “recusal” from the Trump-Russia collusion investigation

Democrats should make Sessions removal an absolute priority, and should be using any method necessary to short circuit Sessions dismantling og Civil Rights and along with it Voting Rights.

The Sessions is doing his best to protect his white supremacist and KKK favorites.

Trump administration quietly rolls back civil rights efforts across federal government

or decades, the Department of Justice has used court-enforced agreements to protect civil rights, successfully desegregating school systems, reforming police departments, ensuring access for the disabled and defending the religious.

Now, under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the DOJ appears to be turning away from this storied tool, called consent decrees. Top officials in the DOJ civil rights division have issued verbal instructions through the ranks to seek settlements without consent decrees — which would result in no continuing court oversight.

The move is just one part of a move by the Trump administration to limit federal civil rights enforcement. Other departments have scaled back the power of their internal divisions that monitor such abuses. In a previously unreported development, the Education Department last week reversed an Obama-era reform that broadened the agency’s approach to protecting rights of students. The Labor Department and the Environmental Protection Agency have also announced sweeping cuts to their enforcement.

“At best, this administration believes that civil rights enforcement is superfluous and can be easily cut. At worst, it really is part of a systematic agenda to roll back civil rights,” said Vanita Gupta, the former acting head of the DOJ’s civil rights division under President Barack Obama.

Consent decrees have not been abandoned entirely by the DOJ, a person with knowledge of the instructions said. Instead, there is a presumption against their use — attorneys should default to using settlements without court oversight unless there is an unavoidable reason for a consent decree. The instructions came from the civil rights division’s office of acting Assistant Attorney General Tom Wheeler and Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Gore. There is no written policy guidance.

Devin O’Malley, a spokesperson for the DOJ, declined to comment for this story.

Consent decrees can be a powerful tool, and spell out specific steps that must be taken to remedy the harm. These are agreed to by both parties and signed off on by a judge, whom the parties can appear before again if the terms are not being met. Though critics say the DOJ sometimes does not enforce consent decrees well enough, they are more powerful than settlements that aren’t overseen by a judge and have no built-in enforcement mechanism.

Such settlements have “far fewer teeth to ensure adequate enforcement,” Gupta said.

Consent decrees often require agencies or municipalities to take expensive steps toward reform. Local leaders and agency heads then can point to the binding court authority when requesting budget increases to ensure reforms. Without consent decrees, many localities or government departments would simply never make such comprehensive changes, said William Yeomans, who spent 26 years at the DOJ, mostly in the civil rights division.

“They are key to civil rights enforcement,” he said. “That’s why Sessions and his ilk don’t like them.”…

On March 31, Sessions ordered a sweeping review of all consent decrees with troubled police departments nationwide to ensure they were in line with the Trump administration’s law-and-order goals. Days before, the DOJ had asked a judge to postpone a hearing on a consent decree with the Baltimore Police Department that had been arranged during the last days of the Obama administration. The judge denied that request, and the consent decree has moved forward.

The DOJ has already come under fire from critics for altering its approach to voting rights cases. After nearly six years of litigation over Texas’ voter ID law — which Obama DOJ attorneys said was written to intentionally discriminate against minority voters and had such a discriminatory effect — the Trump DOJ abruptly withdrew its intent claims in late February….More…

 

 

 

Jeff Sessions Busted Again on Secret Meetings With Russian Spies

After testifying that he hadn’t met with the Russians to the Senate Confirmation Committee…Turns out Jeff lied.

After being caught the first time, and supposedly putting everything on the table…Turns out there was at least one more secret meeting he lied about.

That is perjury, which speaks directly to his ability to hold a position of trust as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the US.

Time to look at removing this lying asshole.

BUSTED: Jeff Sessions had third undisclosed meeting with Russian ambassador

 

 

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is now said to have had a third undisclosed meeting with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

During his confirmation proceedings, Sessions testified under oath that he “did not have any communications with the Russians.”

Yet now CNN is reporting there was a third undisclosed meeting that occurred on April 27, 2016 at the famed Mayflower Hotel only blocks from the White House in Washington, DC.

Close Trump confidante and son-in-law Jared Kushner is also facing investigative scrutiny for his undisclosed contacts with Ambassador Kislyak, who is rumored to be the top Russian spy in America.

The FBI is also said to be investigating the Attorney General’s undisclosed meetings with Kislyak. From CNN –

Congressional investigators are examining whether Attorney General Jeff Sessions had an additional private meeting with Russia’s ambassador during the presidential campaign, according to Republican and Democratic Hill sources and intelligence officials briefed on the investigation.

Investigators on the Hill are requesting additional information, including schedules from Sessions, a source with knowledge tells CNN. They are focusing on whether such a meeting took place April 27, 2016, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC, where then-candidate Donald Trump was delivering his first major foreign policy address. Prior to the speech, then-Sen. Sessions and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak attended a small VIP reception with organizers, diplomats and others.

 

Articles of Impeachment for the Chumph

Here is a draft of what Articles of Impeachment for Trump would look like (so far).

The assumption in this set is that the result of the investigation into the Chumph’s collusion with Russia on the election hasn’t been released yet, so further criminal charges are not added. There is also a secondary investigation into the Chumph’s money laundering activities with the Russian Mob which has not reached conclusions.

Articles of Impeachment for Donald J. Trump

A first draft of an impeachment bill for the president.

The framers of our Constitution likely never imagined a President like Donald J. Trump. And yet, they inserted impeachment provisions into the original text of the Constitution, some 230 years ago, to empower Congress to act in case a rube, tyrant, or criminal came to occupy the nation’s highest office.

It’s not crystal clear which Trump might be, but the president’s latest outrageous actions—the reported passing of highly classified intelligence to Russian diplomats in the Oval Office—should awake Republicans and Democrats in Congress to the dangers posed by Trump to the nation in case that wasn’t already obvious. His conduct now goes far beyond mere offense or incitement to constitute actual damage to U.S. national security, the very definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors” contemplated by the men who crafted the Constitution’s impeachment clauses. With this latest act, the time has come to commence the slow, deliberate process of demonstrating that Trump needs to be removed from office so he can harm the nation no more. A broad congressional inquiry should begin immediately, to inform drafters who will prepare articles of impeachment for consideration by the House and Senate. While Republican control of Congress means that such proceedings won’t occur anytime soon, it’s clear that they are warranted. We don’t yet know for certain what precisely such an investigation would yield, but there is enough public information already available to roughly map out what such articles of impeachment might—and probably should—look like.

Historically, impeachment articles have focused on broad violations of constitutional duty and specific discrete acts like clashing with Congress over Reconstruction, commanding the Watergate break-in, or testimonial perjury. In Trump’s case, there is ample evidence for both the more general violations and the more specific abuses, much of them admitted by the president through his own indelicate tweets (including admissions Tuesday morning regarding the passing of classified information to the Russians).

So what might an impeachment bill against President Trump include?

The Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton impeachment bills used common language to put their specific violations in context. Any Trump articles of impeachment should also include such language at the start of each article:

In his conduct while president of the United States, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of president of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has engaged in conduct that resulted in misuse and abuse of his high office:

Beyond this preamble, the Trump impeachment bill might include, but not be limited to, the following articles:

Article 1: Compromising the integrity of the presidency through continuing violation of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause. From his first day in office, Trump’s continuing stake in Trump Organization businesses has violated the clause of the Constitution proscribing federal officials from receiving foreign payments. The true and full extent of Trump’s conflicts of interest remains unknown. For his part, Trump has transferred day-to-day control over these interests to his adult children and the management of the Trump Organization. However, he remains the ultimate beneficiary for these businesses, so the fundamental conflict of interest remains. These foreign business ties violate both the letter and spirit of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, and arguably provide the clearest basis for impeachment based on the facts and law.

Article 2: Violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the duties of his office by disregarding U.S. interests and pursuing the interests of a hostile foreign power, to wit, Russia. L’affaire Russia began during Trump’s campaign for the presidency, during which several top aides reportedly had contacts with Russia and its intelligence service. His campaign manager also had reportedly worked either directly or indirectly for the Kremlin. These contacts continued, famously, into the presidential transition, when the president’s chosen national security adviser, Michael Flynn, had his ill-fated contacts with Russia. Beyond these contacts, Trump has substantively acted in myriad ways that benefit Russia, including dangerous diplomacy that has reportedly frayed relationships with our allies and allegedly put allied intelligence assets at risk. By offering classified information to the Russians, it was reported that Trump risked the intelligence assets of a Middle Eastern ally that already warned American officials that it would stop sharing such information with America if that information was shared too widely. In risking that relationship, Trump has opened up the possibility for the loss of that information stream for combatting terrorism, and potentially put American lives at risk from the loss of intelligence that could inform officials about future attacks on Americans at home and abroad.

Article 3: Impairment and obstruction of inquiries by the Justice Department and Congress into the extent of the Trump administration’s conflicts of interests and Russia ties. The Trump administration has systematically impeded, avoided, or obstructed the machinery of justice to obscure its business relationships, its Russia ties, and the forces acting within the Trump White House to animate policy. The most egregious and visible examples have been Trump’s firings of Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey. [Update, 6:18 p.m.: The New York Times reported on Tuesday afternoon on an even more egregious case of apparent obstruction of justice, wherein Trump allegedly directly asked Comey to end the FBI’s investigation of Michael Flynn.] Each termination had what appeared to be a lawful pretext; subsequent statements or admissions have indicated each had more to do with obstructing justice than holding leaders accountable. Alongside these sackings, the Trump administration has also worked to starve Justice Department inquiries of resources and refocus investigators on suspected leaks instead of the White House’s own Russia intrigues. The Trump administration also interfered with congressional inquiries through attempting to block witnesses like Yates from appearing or selective leaking of classified information to House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, compromising Nunes so badly he had to recuse himself from the matter.

Article 4: Undermining of the American judicial system through felonious intimidation of potential witnesses. In his desire to continue Comey’s public humiliation, and ensure Comey remained silent about Trump’s possible sins, the president threatened Comey on Twitter with disclosure of “tapes” of their conversations. This follows a pattern of Trump roughly treating witnesses and litigation adversaries that stretches back for decades before his presidency. Since taking office, Trump has also used the bully pulpit of his office to threaten intelligence officials for purported leaks and badger former Yates before her congressional testimony. In addition to falling beneath the dignity of the presidency, these verbal assaults also constitute obstruction of justice, prohibited by federal statutes on witness intimidation, retaliation against a witness, and obstruction of federal proceedings. These attacks don’t just harm the individuals who are targeted; they assault and undermine the rule of law. As such, they constitute further grounds for impeachment of Trump and his removal from the presidency.

Article 5: Undermining of his office and the Constitution through repeated assaults on the integrity of the federal judiciary and its officers. During the presidential campaign, Trump publicly attacked federal district Judge Gonzalo Curiel on the basis of his ethnicity, saying Curiel had been “extremely hostile to (Trump),” and that the judge had ruled against Trump because of his “Mexican heritage.” Since taking office, Trump has continued his unpresidential assaults on the federal judiciary, particularly after repeatedly losing court battles over his travel bans. At one point, he described a member of the bench as a “so-called judge,” undermining the premise of an independent judiciary. These statements also undermined both the dignity and power of the presidency, and threaten the rule of law by attacking the integrity of the federal judiciary.

Article 6: Demeaning the integrity of government and its public servants, particularly the military and intelligence agencies, in contravention of his constitutional duties to serve as chief executive and commander in chief of the armed forces. Trump swept into office with considerable disdain for the government and its military. Indeed, during his campaign, he insulted former prisoners of war, Purple Heart recipients, and Gold Star families; criticized the military for its performance in Iraq; and said today’s generals and admirals had been “reduced to rubble” during the Obama administration. Trump carried this disdain into the presidency, through his attacks on the “deep state” of military and intelligence officials that he believed to be obstructing his agenda. He also demeaned the military and its apolitical ethos through use of military fora and audiences as public spectacle—first to sign his immigration order in the Pentagon’s Hall of Heroes, and then to deliver rambling speeches at military and intelligence headquarters suggesting that pro-Trump elements in those agencies were grateful Trump had taken power. Trump has also continued to wage political war against his intelligence community, suggesting as recently as Tuesday morning that it was sabotaging his administration through leaking and other nefarious activities. In doing these things, Trump has undermined his constitutional office as president and commander in chief of the armed forces.

Article 7: Dereliction of his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the office of president by failing to timely appoint officers of the United States to administer the nation’s federal agencies. Shortly after taking office, Trump administration strategist Stephen Bannon articulated his plan for the “deconstruction of the administrative state.” During its first four months in office, the Trump administration’s neglect of governance illustrates how this strategy is to be executed: delay of political appointments, failure to reach budget agreements with Congress in a timely manner, and deliberate neglect of governance and government operations. These actions and failures risk the health, welfare, and security of the nation, and represent a dereliction of Trump’s constitutional duty to faithfully execute the office of the presidency.

 

Kamala Harris Calls for Grand Dragon Sessions Resignation

Former California Attorney General, now Senator Kamala Harris want Sessions’ head on a pike…Sessions is a criminal, having committed perjury at his Senate confirmation hearings.

Having Sessions as the head of the DOJ, is no different than appointing Al Capone as Sheriff. Second, Sessions is actively involved in covering up the Chumph’s criminal activity. And as such is a criminal co-conspirator.

Charge him, arrest him, try him, convict him…And hang him for treason with Putin’s Bitch and the rest of the Chumph scum/

Kamala Harris: Jeff Sessions must resign

Speaking to CNN”s Jake Tapper on Thursday afternoon, Senator Kamala Harris of California renewed Democratic calls for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to resign over the firing of FBI director James Comey.

“There is good reason to believe that he was not truthful when he testified before Congress,” Harris said, in reference to Sessions’s confirmation hearing, during which he said under oath that he had no communications with Russian officials during the 2016 presidential campaign.

It was subsequently reported that Sessions met on two occasions with Russian ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak. Sessions had recused himself in March from the inquiry into improper contacts between Donald Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin. Yet it was Sessions, along with deputy Rod Rosenstein, who recommended that Trump fire Comey—who was investigating the Trump-Russia ties. (Kislyak met with Trump on Wednesday, just hours after Comey was fired.)

The public nature of the Russia investigation infuriated Trump, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal:

The more James Comey showed up on television discussing the FBI’s investigation into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, the more the White House bristled, according to aides to President Donald Trump.

Harris, who has been an outspoken critic of Trump and is rumored to have presidential ambitions, told Tapper that Sessions’s complicity in the Comey firing “calls into question his objectivity, and his ability to keep his word.”

Her calls for Sessions to resign were seconded by her Democratic colleague Ron Wyden of Oregon.

 

 

The Empty Suit at Justice Has No Lawyers!

I guess the graduating class at KKK University Law School isn’t quite ready yet. After firing his entire staff of Prosecutors…Sessions hasn’t found anyone so far who will stoop to work with him. Geez…There have to be a few white-wing lowlifes from Jerry Fallwell U!

Seems in his haste to eliminate anyone who would move forward the investigation into Putin’s Bitch’s treason…Sessions wound up with and empty house.

An empty house for an empty suit…How apropos.

A month after dismissing federal prosecutors, Justice Department does not have any U.S. attorneys in place

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is making aggressive law enforcement a top priority, directing his federal prosecutors across the country to crack down on illegal immigrants and “use every tool” they have to go after violent criminals and drug traffickers.

But the attorney general does not have a single U.S. attorney in place to lead his tough-on-crime efforts across the country. Last month, Sessions abruptly told the dozens of remaining Obama administration U.S. attorneys to submit their resignations immediately — and none of them, or the 47 who had already left, have been replaced.

“We really need to work hard at that,” Sessions said when asked Tuesday about the vacancies as he opened a meeting with federal law enforcement officials. The 93 unfilled U.S. attorney positions are among the hundreds of critical Trump administration jobs that remain open.

Sessions is also without the heads of his top units, including the civil rights, criminal and national security divisions, as he tries to reshape the Justice Department.

U.S. attorneys, who prosecute federal crimes from state offices around the nation, are critical to implementing an attorney general’s law enforcement agenda. Both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations gradually eased out the previous administration’s U.S. attorneys while officials sought new ones.

Sessions said that until he has his replacements, career acting U.S. attorneys “respond pretty well to presidential leadership.”

But former Justice Department officials say that acting U.S. attorneys do not operate with the same authority when interacting with police chiefs and other law enforcement executives.

“It’s like trying to win a baseball game without your first-string players on the field,” said former assistant attorney general Ronald Weich, who ran the Justice Department’s legislative affairs division during Obama’s first term.

“There are human beings occupying each of those seats,” Weich, now dean of the University of Baltimore School of Law, said of the interim officials. “But that’s not the same as having appointed and confirmed officials who represent the priorities of the administration. And the administration is clearly way behind in achieving that goal.”

Filling the vacancies has also been complicated by Sessions not having his second-highest-ranking official in place. Rod J. Rosenstein, nominated for deputy attorney general — the person who runs the Justice Department day-to-day — is still not on board, although he is expected to be confirmed by the Senate this month. Traditionally, the deputy attorney general helps to select the U.S. attorneys.

Rosenstein, who served as U.S. attorney for Maryland, has also been designated, upon his confirmation, to take on the responsibility of overseeing the FBI’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and any links between Russian officials and Trump associates after Sessions was forced to recuse himself.

 

Majority of Americans Want Sessions Head on a Pike

Republicans will always come to the support of traitors and bigots.

Liar! Liar! Pants on Fire!

Majority of Americans want Attorney General Sessions to resign for lying under oath

New poll finds that more than half of all U.S. voters believe Sessions lied under oath at his confirmation hearing

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has served as a controversial national figure since President Donald Trump nominated the former Republican Alabama senator to serve as the nation’s top cop. Now, less than four weeks since assuming office, a majority of Americans already want Sessions out.

According to a majority of voters polled in a Quinnipiac University survey released Wednesday, Sessions lied under oath during his confirmation hearing about his contact with the Russians while serving as an emissary for the Trump campaign and should resign. Reports emerged earlier this year that top aides and allies to Trump’s 2016 campaign were in constant contact with senior Russian intelligence officials before election day.

Unsurprisingly, that number breaks mostly along partisan lines. More than eight in 10 Democrats said the attorney general should resign, while only 11 percent of Republicans said Sessions should step down. Additionally, 43 percent of American voters already had an unfavorable opinion of Sessions’ job performance. The poll of 1,123 American voters took place from March 2 to March 6, and has a margin-of-error of +/- 2.7 percent.

Pollsters also found more than half of those surveyed believe Sessions lied about speaking with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak at his January hearing. According to the poll, 52 percent of voters believe Sessions committed perjury when he said he “did not have communications with the Russians” during his Senate confirmation hearings.

In January, Sessions was under oath when he told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had not been in contact with any Russian official. However, as reports from the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal at the beginning of this month revealed, Sessions and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak met twice ― once at a Heritage Foundation event in July, and another time in Sessions’ Senate office in September― while Session served in a senior surrogate role for the Trump campaign and now the attorney general is being probed by federal investigators for those communications.

“The gavel comes down hard on Attorney General Jeff Sessions,” said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.  “He lied and he should quit because of it, say Americans, who are clearly very concerned about the Russian affair and all the administration personnel involved with it.”

A majority of Americans voters are expressing a sentiment that only one U.S. senator has dared to utter, so far.

“Listen, I’ve been cutting him a lot of slack. I’ve been refusing to say that he lied,” Democratic Minnesota Sen. Al Franken told CNN‘s Jake Tapper on Tuesday. It was a question asked by Franken at Sessions’ confirmation hearing that got the loyal Trump supporter tripped up. Even as he recused himself from any Department of Justice investigation of the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, Sessions insisted that he had not lied when he told Franken that he “did not have communications with the Russians:”

SEN. FRANKEN: If there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?

SEN. SESSIONS: Senator Franken, I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign, and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment.

Thirty-four percent of voters said Sessions did something illegal by making that claim, and 29 percent said his testimony was unethical but not illegal.

Following his recusal, Sessions followed-up with a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday insisting his statements were correct all along and that he would not return for any additional testimony.

“I wanted to wait for this letter to come out. It’s hard to come to any other conclusion that he just perjured himself,” Franken said, accusing Session of committing a crime in order to be confirmed as the nation’s top prosecutor:

 

Chorus Grows for Sessions Head on a Pike

Democrats are calling for Session’s resignation…Republicans are trying to soften that by calling for him to “recuse” himself from Russian-Trump investigation.

Right about now…I’m betting on the head-rollers. Sessions committed at minimum Perjury…At most Treason in participation in a criminal conspiracy to suborn the US Election in collusion with a foreign enemy of the state.

The last is some heavy duty isht, and could see Mr Sessions in jail for the rest of his life. Suggest Mr. Sessions start talking about who else in the Chumph’s administration was involved in this criminal activity.

And of course the death knell to anyone appointed to office during Chumph…”Trump Says He Has ‘Total’ Confidence In Attorney General Sessions”

Sic Semper Traitors

Here Are All the Members of Congress Calling on Jeff Sessions to Resign or Recuse Himself

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to resign over reports that he spoke with Russia’s ambassador to the United States during the presidential campaign.

The two leaders’ remarks were echoed by many other Democratic lawmakers after the Washington Post first reported the connection, especially after Sessions had said during his confirmation hearings that he had not had contact with Russians during the campaign.

Republicans, meantime, either called on Sessions to recuse himself from investigations related to Russia and the election or defended him.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy has already made conflicting statements: on MSNBC’s Morning Joe the Republican leader said “I think, the trust of the American people, you recuse yourself in these situations,” but less than an hour later on Fox, he said his statement was misunderstood and “I’m not calling on him to recuse himself.”

In a statement Wednesday, Sessions said, “I never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign. I have no idea what this allegation is about. It is false.”

Here’s a look at which positions members of Congress have taken on the controversy.

Resign

Schumer: “The information reported last night makes it clear beyond the shadow of a doubt that Attorney General Sessions cannot possibly lead an investigation into Russian interference in our elections, or come anywhere near it. With these revelations, he may very well become the subject of it. … Because the Department of Justice should be above reproach, for the good of the country, Attorney General Sessions should resign.”

Pelosi: “First, it’s clear Attorney General Sessions must immediately recuse himself from any and all investigations into Russian ties to the Trump campaign and interference in the 2016 election,” the top House Democrat said in a statement. “The fact that he spoke with Russians and then, under oath, denied it is unacceptable. If the attorney general refuses to recuse himself, he should resign.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: “We need Attorney General Jeff Sessions – who should have never been confirmed in the first place – to resign,” the Democratic senator from Massachusetts tweeted. “We need it now.”

Sen. Claire McCaskill: “It’s clear Attorney General Sessions misled the Senate– the question is, why?” The Democratic senator from Missouri said in a statement. “Attorney General Sessions should resign.”

Sen. Kamala Harris: “Attorney General Sessions deceived Congress and the American people, irreparably damaging his integrity, and is therefore ineligible to serve as the top law enforcement official of our country,” the Democratic senator from California said in a statement. “He must resign immediately.”

Rep. Ed Markey: “AG #Sessions should resign,” the Democratic senator from Massachusetts tweeted. “This is exactly why we need an independent special counsel to investigate #TrumpRussia”

Rep. Elijah Cummings: “His statement was demonstrably false, yet he let it stand for weeks — and he continued to let it stand even as he watched the President tell the entire nation he didn’t know anything about anyone advising his campaign talking to the Russians,” the Democratic Maryland representative said in a statement. “Attorney General Sessions should resign immediately, and there is no longer any question that we need a truly independent commission to investigate this issue.”

Rep. Jan Schakowsky: “Under oath, Jeff #Sessions said: “I did not have communications with the Russians.” He did. That’s perjury. He must resign,” the Democratic representative from Illinois tweeted.

Recuse

Rep. Jason Chaffetz: “AG Sessions should clarify his testimony and recuse himself,” the Republican leader of the House Oversight Committee tweeted.

Sen. Lindsey Graham: The Republican senator from South Carolina said that if the FBI finds that Trump’s campaign had illegal contact with Russia, Sessions “cannot make [the] decision” over whether to prosecute and should recuse himself, CNN reports.

Sen. Patrick Leahy: “No more excuses, recuse yourself and appoint a Special Counsel immediately, and come clean about any contacts you had with the Russians,” the Democratic senator from Vermont said in a statement. “It is an egregious breach of public trust that Attorney General Sessions has not already recused himself. Now we must ask whether he has perjured himself.”

Sen. Amy Klobuchar: “Attorney General Sessions should recuse himself from investigations related to Russian interference in our democracy,” the Democratic senator from Minnesota said in a statement. “He said he would if there was a conflict of interest, and it is clear that there is.”

Sen. Al Franken: “It’s clearer than ever now that the attorney general cannot, in good faith, oversee an investigation at the Department of Justice and the FBI of the Trump-Russia connection, and he must recuse himself immediately,” the Democratic senator from Minnesota said in a statement.

Sen. Brian Schatz: “Only way to staunch bleeding today is for Mr. Sessions to remove himself, have independent inquiry. Anything else will make it worse,” the Democratic senator from Hawaii tweeted.

 

Busted – AG Sessions Part of Trump-Putin Treason Conspiracy

In his confirmation hearings, under oath, Attorney General Jeff Sessions categorically stated “I Did Not Have Communications With The Russians”, and have no knowledge of anyone in the Trump Campaign having contacts with the Russians, in response to a direct question fro Senator Al Franken.

Sessions lied and perjured himself.

Republicans can no longer sweep the Russia-Trump Hacking of the election under the rug. This Treason has literally blown up in their faces. This is perjury by the highest lawyer in the land, and the man who is supposed to be above reproach as the head of the Department of Justice. It speaks to an effort by Putin’s Bitch to cover up their dirty deeds and treason, and to suppress the rightful investigation of Election hacking, with aid by Republican Party stalwarts attempting to suppress evidence and to stall the investigations.

Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disclose

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.

One of the meetings was a private conversation between Sessions and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak that took place in September in the senator’s office, at the height of what U.S. intelligence officials say was a Russian cyber campaign to upend the U.S. presidential race.

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. As attorney general, Sessions oversees the Justice Department and the FBI, which have been leading investigations into Russian meddling and any links to Trump’s associates. He has so far resisted calls to recuse himself.

When Sessions spoke with Kislyak in July and September, the senator was a senior member of the influential Armed Services Committee as well as one of Trump’s top foreign policy advisers. Sessions played a prominent role supporting Trump on the stump after formally joining the campaign in February 2016.

At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign.

“I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.”

In January, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) asked Sessions for answers to written questions. “Several of the President-elect’s nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?” Leahy wrote.

Sessions responded with one word: “No.”

In a statement issued Wednesday night, Sessions said he “never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign. I have no idea what this allegation is about. It is false.”

Justice officials said Sessions met with Kislyak on Sept. 8 in his capacity as a member of the armed services panel rather than in his role as a Trump campaign surrogate.

“He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee,” Flores said.

She added that Sessions last year had more than 25 conversations with foreign ambassadors as a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, including the British, Korean, Japanese, Polish, Indian, Chinese, Canadian, Australian and German ambassadors, in addition to Kislyak….More Here…

 

 

 

Yet Another Case of Lying Cops in San Francisco

Video evidence is proving again and again that Police testimony about arrests, and even what is purportedly found at arrests is not as reliable as the Courts make it out to be. The upper left corner of this video shows Cops attacking a man in a crowd for no obvious reason in an illegal stop.

Feds drop gun charges after video shows officer lied

About a dozen men stood around a craps game on the corner of Eddy and Taylor streets in December. But the late-night game was soon called off when police rolled up on the men.

As the men quickly spread out at around 11 p.m., moving away from the two officers, one man was picked out of the crowd and taken to the ground by an officer. That man was subsequently brought up on gun charges in federal court.

But the charges were dismissed Thursday because video evidence apparently contradicted sworn statements and police reports about the incident being a lawful stop.

“The video was unequivocal in rebutting everything the police officer testified to — at least to all the pertinent details,” said U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer after he dismissed the case against Brandon Simpson, who faced up to 10 years in prison.

The case is the latest in a list of recent incidents where video has appeared to contradict police accounts of events, including the Dec. 2 killing of Mario Woods and the more recent killing by police of Luis Gongora last month.

According to testimony from one officer, Nicholas Buckley, and decelerations and police reports from Buckley and Officer John Fergus, Simpson was stopped because it appeared he was concealing a weapon.

The officers’ version of events contends Buckley followed Simpson and asked him to stop more than once, but Simpson did not comply. A prolonged scuffle ensued, and Buckley said he had to strike Simpson several times to subdue him. Then, according to Fergus’ declaration, he noticed a white sock nearby. Inside that sock was a gun.

But video of the incident discovered by the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office and provided to the Federal Public Defender’s Office told a different story.

Instead, the incident transpired very quickly. Within 10 seconds of his arrival on the scene, Buckley had his hands on Simpson. Then, two other officers arrived and tackled Simpson, who was subdued within half a minute. While on the ground one of the officers is seen punching Simpson at least eight times. Buckley’s declaration said he punched him twice.

In his statement in court, Breyer touted the power of video technology to prove what in fact occurred in any incident and called for body cameras for all police, which are already on their way to San Francisco.

Breyer ended his statement by saying he is not enraged but “saddened” by what occurred.

The court’s findings have since been forwarded to the Police Department. Police did not return calls for comment on whether the officers face discipline.

Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose office has become known for its powerful video evidence, said discrepancies between the truth and what officers say are common. There just isn’t always video to prove it.

“Clearly, they manufacturers this,” said Adachi. “There’s a word for it. They call it ‘testilying.’ Officers do this to justify why they stopped someone.”

Usually, police officer testimony and their reports are taken without question as a true depiction of events, he said.

“Video has now become a champion of justice,” Adachi said, adding that this has been especially true with police misconduct cases.

Adachi believes hundreds of cases will be affected by this case, since everything the two officers have said in court will now be in question.

“They should be charged with perjury,” he added.

 

First Flint Water Criminal Charges

The Michigan State AG has filed the first charges for the Flint Water Contamination impacting thousands of Flint, Michigan residents and their children with lead poisoning.

One would hope that this is just the first round, as the stink on this one reaches all the way to the Governor’s office, although it is questionable whether a Republican AG would be that honest. This may well be just the sacrificial lambs tossed under the bus to escape real culpability.

Criminal charges today in Flint water crisis

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette will announce criminal charges today in connection with his ongoing investigation of the Flint drinking water crisis, three sources familiar with the investigation told the Free Press on Tuesday.

Officials believe the city got artificially low lead readings because they didn’t test the homes most at risk — those with lead service lines or other features putting them at high risk for lead. Among those to be charged is a City of Flint official who signed a document saying the homes Flint used to test tap water under the federal Lead and Copper Rule all had lead service lines — a statement investigators allege was false.

Schuette is to announce felony and misdemeanor charges against at least two, and possibly as many as four people, according to two other sources familiar with the investigation. The investigation is ongoing and more charges are expected, sources said.

The charges, which will be brought against individuals connected with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and the City of Flint, relate to the lead contamination of Flint’s drinking water and not to the possible link between Flint River water and an outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease that is tied to the deaths of 12 people, one of the sources said.

Schuette, a Republican who is widely expected to run for governor in 2018, opened an investigation in January, tapping former Detroit FBI Director Andrew Arena and Royal Oak attorney Todd Flood to head the probe.

Andrea Bitely, a spokeswoman for Schuette, would neither confirm nor deny the charges.

Sources said the number of people to be charged Wednesday was still uncertain late Tuesday because of the possibility one or more of those targeted could agree to cooperate with authorities and avoid charges.

A person familiar with the matter said that other parts of state and Flint city government remain under investigation. The prosecution team is trying to uncover more about why the individuals expected to be charged Wednesday, as well as others still under investigation, may have acted the way they did and who may have instructed them to do so, according to one of the sources….More…