In an often-contentious Tuesday hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, an indignant Attorney General Jeff Sessions made clear that he was upset that allegations that he knew of collusion between Trump campaign officials and Russian operatives during the election were impugning his “honor.” But in nearly three hours of testimony, he failed to answer many of the key questions that prompted the panel to invite him to testify in open session.
Here’s some Christmas Eve entertainment for you. By perhaps making Mike Johnson unelected as Speaker (not a done deal but a real possibility) last week’s Trump/Elon drama may leave Republicans JanSix’ing themselves this year this time. Ironic! This Roll Call article gets into the details. But the gist is that if they can’t elect Mike Johnson (or someone else between January 3rd and 6th) they can’t properly constitute themselves to officially receive the electoral votes. There won’t be a properly constituted or sworn-in House, at least not in the way it’s been done the few couple centuries-plus. The Roll Call article makes clear there are probably workarounds, maybe, largely because the constitution leaves it to the House to make up its own rules. So the House can probably, maybe?, make up a new rule to resolve the problem. But it won’t be pretty.
Just an update: There are currently 47 tickets remaining for TPM’s first live podcast taping, which will take place on January 15th in Washington, D.C. You can get your tickets here. Remember, tickets are $75 but if you are a Prime or Prime AF member, tickets are $50. If you are an Inside member, they are free. (You should have received a discount code via email. If not, feel free to email me directly Joe at talkingpointsmemo dot com.)
Hope to see you there, and happy holidays!
As of Friday evening it appears that the Trump/Musk GOP has managed to put out, or at least move to “controlled” status, the wildfire they lit for no particular reason earlier in the week. We will soon see that this three or four day drama is a microcosm for most of what is going to unfold over the next two and likely four years: an always chaotic and often destructive jostling between different versions of far-right state transformation. Here on the one hand is Trump’s autarkic and transactional MAGA, seeking to channel power, adulation and beak-wetting all toward the person of Donald Trump. There you have Elon Musk with his more chaotic and futurist/Randian version of Silicon Valley’s “move fast and break things” culture. What unites them is their personalist character, something Donald Trump and his politics brought to the national dance. We shouldn’t doll either of these variants up too much as ideologies. They’re just different versions of post-civic democracy America from the world of billionairedom, each guy’s particular wants and needs, etc., and also with some broader constituency beyond them personally.
I admit I’ve been saying mostly the same thing in my last few posts on events on Capitol Hill. I must think that if I keep writing it it will finally be clear. Oh well. I just noticed someone say they were surprised that almost 40 House Republicans defied not only Trump but Elon Musk as well.
I don’t think that’s what happened. Was Musk for this Trump/Johnson clean up effort that went down to defeat last night? That doesn’t seem clear at all. It’s way over-literal, over-determined. He wasn’t really for it or against it. He blew the deal up and then just moved on to something else.
Here’s the chain of events I see.
If you haven’t seen the details, the meltdown on Capitol Hill went from bad to worse this evening. Or awesome to awesomer, depending on your perspective. Let’s review. Donald Trump wanted a smooth ride to January 20th. He allowed the leaders of the congressional GOP to negotiate a government funding extension to smooth that ride. That was about to pass before Elon Musk stepped in with a tweet storm and blew up the whole thing. That sent Speaker Johnson and Trump back to the drawing board to come up with a new GOP-only plan to meet Musk’s objections. To get it through today it needed a 2/3rds vote in the House. It didn’t come close to 50%. For the next ten days or so the Senate is controlled by the Democrats. So the House isn’t even the only problem. Trump told House Republicans today they had to vote for this new plan. Then 38 House Republicans voted against. Now they’re barreling toward a government shutdown.
If you’re thinking about joining us for our first live-audience version of the podcast on January 15th down in DC, definitely get your tickets now. We’ve got 200 seats/tickets and we’ve already sold half of them in the first 36 hours. As noted, it’s a live-audience version of the podcast followed by a Q&A and then drinks, with your first drink included in the price of admission. Join us. It’ll be fun. Tickets are $75 if you’re not a member and $50 for Prime and Prime AF members. For Inside members, the ticket is included in the price of your membership. If you’re a member you’ll already have gotten the discounted link sent directly to your inbox. Seriously, we can’t wait to see all of you.
A new episode of The Josh Marshall Podcast is live! This week, Kate and Josh discuss Democrats’ vote against elevating AOC to a prominent role, the great capitulation of the CEOs and Biden’s acts of mercy.
You can listen to the new episode of The Josh Marshall Podcast here.
As you’ve likely seen, things kind of went off the rails on Capitol Hill. Speaker Mike Johnson had assembled one of those big spending packages to avoid a government shutdown. Then Elon Musk went off on the bill and started a stampede for the exits among House Republicans. Then Trump turned against it too. Then JD Vance. By the end of the day, it was clear not only that the bill was dead, there was a real question about whether Johnson’s speakership will survive the vote for speaker coming up on January 3rd.
But none of those points are the critical ones. This is about Elon Musk.
I got the opportunity to see the new Dylan movie at an advance screening a couple nights ago. And I wanted to share a few thoughts about it. I don’t know how to write a movie review. And I don’t know enough about movies to write one anyway. These are just some of my reactions.
First, for a tl;dr: I liked it. I recommend it. Especially if you’re at all a fan of Bob Dylan.
I’m a difficult audience for this kind of film. I know every detail and anecdote from the history the movie chronicles — each meeting, plot point, verbal exchange, performance. That’s not bragging. It’s an admission. I’m way too deep into this stuff. What that means is that it’s really hard for a biopic to recreate or dramatize these events in a way that does not seem, at least for me, sentimental, cliched, overdone. Even if you don’t know all the details as an obsessive, this material has been discussed and mythologized endlessly. How can it possibly be fresh? Biopics such as these often have a stations-of-the-cross air to them, with the hero floating from one iconic moment to the next. So there’s like a Sword of Damocles of cliché and treacleiness hanging over a project like this.
But for me, Like a Complete Unknown managed to avoid this pitfall, which surprised me. The sword doesn’t come down.
Folks, we’re really excited about this. We’re hosting the first live, in-person version of The Josh Marshall Podcast Featuring Kate Riga on January 15th in Washington, DC. Tickets just went on sale. They’re $75 per person and $50 for members. If you’re a member you’ll already have gotten an email with a link to get the membership pricing. We’ll do a live version of the podcast with the audience, followed by a Q&A and then a bar with drinks for chatting and discussion afterwards. We are really looking forward to it and we really hope you can join us.
Cash bar and every ticket comes with a coupon for your first drink. Tickets are free for TPM Inside members (again, you’ll have gotten an email). If you’re a member and for some reason haven’t received an email just drop us a line at memberships at talkingpointsmemo dot com.
SessionsWire
Dem Senator: ‘Hard To See’ How Sessions Can Be AG After Senate Hearing
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) on Tuesday said it is “hard to see” how Attorney General Jeff Sessions can remain in his position after refusing to answer questions during an open session of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
“Attorney General Sessions has recused himself from the investigation of Russian interference in our election, recommended the dismissal of the Director of the FBI, reportedly offered his resignation to the President, and refused to answer questions from the Senate Intelligence Committee,” Durbin said in a statement. “It is hard to see how he can continue to serve.”
Sessions cited executive privilege several times while testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, though he acknowledged that President Donald Trump has not in fact invoked it yet.
“So what is the legal basis for your refusal to answer these questions?” Sen. Angus King (I-ME) pressed him.
“I’m protecting the right of the President to assert it if he chooses,” Sessions replied.
RNC’s Funding Plea Attributed To Trump After Sessions Hearing: ‘WITCH-HUNT!’
The Republican National Committee sent out a fundraising email on Tuesday attributed to President Donald Trump and warning of a “WITCH-HUNT” after Attorney General Jeff Sessions testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
“There is an effort to SABOTAGE us,” the email attributed to Trump reads.
It accused Democrats of “using a conspiracy theory” to “DERAIL” Trump’s presidency.
“We MUST keep fighting,” the email reads. “WITCH-HUNT!”
Trump did not offer any comment on Sessions’ testimony via Twitter, his favored medium for rapid response.
New RNC email subject-lined: "Is this really happening in America?" pic.twitter.com/x3I02ChOrF
— Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) June 13, 2017
No Republicans (So Far) Will Go On CNN To Respond To Sessions Testimony
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer said after Attorney General Jeff Sessions testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday that Republicans hadn’t yet committed to responding to Sessions’ testimony on the network.
“I just want to alert our viewers that we’ve invited Republicans to join us as well,” Blitzer said, before an interview Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT). “Hopefully they will. So far we’ve received certain maybes down the road.”
McCain To Sessions: ‘I Don’t Recall You’ Being Interested In Russia As A Senator
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) on Tuesday said he did not recall Attorney General Jeff Sessions taking any interest in Russia as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, though Sessions claimed he met with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak in that capacity.
Sessions testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee that he pressed Kislyak on Russia’s actions in Ukraine.
“I remember pushing back on it and it was testy on that subject,” Sessions said.
“Knowing you on the committee, I can’t imagine that,” McCain replied.
He asked Sessions whether he talked to Kislyak about Russian interference in elections held by U.S. allies.
“I don’t recall that being discussed,” Sessions said.
“If you spoke with Ambassador Kislyak in your capacity as a member of the Armed Services Committee, you presumably talked with him about Russia-related security issues that you have demonstrated as important to you as a member of the committee,” McCain said.
“Did I discuss security issues?” Sessions repeated in apparent confusion.
“I don’t recall you as being particularly vocal on such issues,” McCain said. “In your capacity as the chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, what Russia-related security issues did you hold hearings on or otherwise demonstrate a keen interest in?”
“We may have discussed that,” Sessions said, apparently responding to McCain’s earlier question. “I just don’t have a real recall of the meeting. I was not making a report about it to anyone. I just was basically willing to meet and see what he discussed.”
“And his response was?” McCain pressed.
“I don’t recall,” Sessions said.
Sen. Reed Confronts Sessions With Flip-Flops On Comey Handling Of Clinton Emails
Attorney General Jeff Sessions was confronted with his flip-flops on then-FBI Director James Comey’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server Tuesday.
During a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) quoted Sessions’ responses to then-FBI Director James Comey’s announcement in July 2016 that he would not recommend charges against Clinton.
Sessions signed onto a memo from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein that cited Comey’s handling of the case as unprofessional, and one justification for his firing.
On July 7, Reed said, Sessions said the email investigation dismissal “was not his problem, it’s Hillary Clinton’s problem,” referring to Comey.
Intel Committee Chair Cuts Off Kamala Harris For Second Time In A Week (VIDEO)
Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Richard Burr (R-NC) cut off Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) for the second time in a week on Tuesday as she pressed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to discuss a policy he cited to avoid answering other questions.
Sessions Snaps At Harris: ‘If I Don’t Qualify’ My Answers, ‘You’ll Accuse Me Of Lying’
Attorney General Jeff Sessions snapped at Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) during a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday, saying the pace of her questioning made him nervous, and that she would accuse him of lying if he was not given time to qualify his answers.
“As it relates to your knowledge, Did you have any communication with any Russian businessmen or any Russian nationals?” Harris asked Sessions.
“I don’t believe I had any conversation with Russian businessmen or Russian nationals—” Sessions began in response.
Harris interjected: “Are you aware of any communications —
“— although a lot of people were at the convention it’s conceivable that somebody —” Sessions continued, before Harris spoke again
“Sir, I have just a few—” she began.
“Will you let me qualify it!” Sessions said, voice raised. “If I don’t qualify it, you’ll accuse me of lying. So I need to be as correct as best I can—”
“I do want you to be honest,” Harris said
“—and I’m not able to be rushed this fast. It makes me nervous,” Sessions said.
Watch below via ABC News:
AG Sessions during questioning by Sen. Kamala Harris: "I'm not able to be rushed this fast, it makes me nervous." https://t.co/8FmQaGtlqc pic.twitter.com/vPAp0ww1qN
— ABC News (@ABC) June 13, 2017
Sessions: Accusations Against Me Are ‘Just Like Through The Looking Glass’
Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Tuesday said suggestions he met with Russian officials to influence the 2016 election are like a story written by Lewis Carroll.
Sessions’ simile was perhaps prompted by Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-AR) remark that Democrats went “down lots of other rabbit trails” in their lines of questioning as Sessions testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee.
“It’s just like through the looking glass. I mean, what is this?” Sessions said.
Sessions said he “explained how in good faith” he claimed he had not met with Russian officials.
“They were suggesting I as a surrogate had been meeting continuously with Russians,” Sessions said. “I said I didn’t meet with them. And now, the next thing you know, I’m accused of some reception, plotting some sort of influence campaign for the American election. It’s just beyond my capability to understand.”
Sessions: All I Know About Russian Meddling ‘I’ve Read In The Paper’
Attorney General Jeff Sessions told the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday that all he knew about Russian meddling in the 2016 election he had learned from press reports.
Earlier in the hearing, Sessions said he had “in effect” recused himself from campaign-related matters the day after he was sworn in as attorney general, and not after later reports he had had undisclosed meetings with the Russian ambassador — at which point he publicly announced a recusal for the first time.
“Do you believe the Russians interfered with the 2016 election?” Sen. Angus King (I-ME) asked Sessions.
“It appears so,” Sessions said. “The intelligence community seems to be united in that. But I have to tell you, Sen. King, I know nothing but what I’ve read in the paper. I’ve never received any detailed briefing on how a hacking occurred or how information was alleged to have influenced the campaign.”
“There was a memorandum from the intelligence community on Oct. 9 that detailed what the Russians were doing,” King said. “After the election, before the inauguration, you never sought any information about this rather dramatic attack on our country?”
“No,” Sessions replied.
“You never asked for a briefing or attended a briefing or read the intelligence reports?” King asked.
“You might have been very critical of me if I, as an active part of the campaign, was seeking intelligence relating to something that might be relevant to the campaign,” Sessions said. “I’m not sure that would be —”
“I’m not talking about the campaign,” King interjected. “I’m talking about what the Russians did. You received no briefing on the Russian active measures in connection with the 2016 election?”
“No, I don’t believe I ever did,” Sessions said.