« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Pete Sessions' Office Falsely Claims He Didn't Know Stanford
Here's a fun one...
With lawmakers scrambling to distance themselves from Allen Stanford, Bloomberg reports:
Representative Pete Sessions, a Texas Republican, got $41,375 [from Stanford's firm]. Spokeswoman Emily Davis said Sessions didn't know Stanford personally.
But check out this picture we posted the other day. It's from that 2005 junket that a group of lawmakers took to Antigua (paid for by the Stanford-linked Inter-American Economic Council) and it shows Sessions, now the NRCC chair, happily chatting with the cricket-loving billionaire.
And in 2006, Sessions' chief of staff told Bloomberg that the two men did know each other -- indeed, that Stanford asked Sessions to become a member of the Caribbean Caucus.
We're guessing that Davis' claim won't remain operative too long. We've contacted her and will let you know what we hear.
Thanks to reader T.D. for the tip.
Late Update: Davis responded via email: "No comment."
Josh
Zachary
Are you gonna believe him or your lyin' eyes?
Wake up call to Mr. Sessions- you guys don't get to make your own reality for the rest of us to observe anymore.
February 20, 2009 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's Friday, all they want to do is make the lie stick over the weekend news cycle. I'll be surprised if Sessions acknowledges the facts before the day is through.
February 20, 2009 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just don't understand what can come of lying about this? Stanford is a fraud, and he fooled many very smart people, so there isn't really shame in saying, "Yes I knew him, and I'm sorry but I didn't know he was a fraud. He was running what was then considered a legitimate company. I took money from the firm, which after recent news has prompted me to give back through a contribution to charity. I regret that this happened, but just like many other people, I was duped". Bam there is your statement, end of story.
But no, not the end of story! Now he's come out made a terrible decision to just lie about it. Print may be dead, but Journalism isn't and politicians ought to be understanding of that.
February 20, 2009 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're correct if your assumption that he didn't know the man was a fraud is true. Personally, I'm too cynical to believe that. The typical behavior of a liar is that when they are caught in a lie, they tell another lie to cover up the first lie until people become wise to the second lie, so then they tell a third lie and so on.
What is so funny to me is that he actually believed that no evidence of him knowing the guy would surface in the age of the internet, and that no one else on that junket would give his ass up if they had to save their own.
February 20, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
In the slide show of this boondogle on HufPo, Sessions was by far the most featured participant. If he claims to not know Stanford, someone should check him for Alzheimer's.
February 20, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
New repub defense: I never knew him. I never knew her. I have no memory.
February 20, 2009 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
My thoughts exactly. Another case of the famed Republican "I Can't Recall" Disease. Must be genetic.
February 20, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Genetic? You mean like evolution and stuff? That's against their religion!
February 20, 2009 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bush: 'Rove? Karl Rove? I don't think I know the man.'
February 20, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Did he have a funny nickname that could help jog my memory?
February 20, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
um....turdblossom? :-)
February 20, 2009 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does every republican lie in the face of facts? Is that part of their platform?
February 20, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did they practice Carribean counting house songs:
Stanford: Day, oh. Day-ay-ay, oh.
Sessions: Come Mr Taliban, tally me bananas.
Daylight come and me wan go home.
February 20, 2009 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pete Sessions (R-TX) must suffer from a form of selective, convenient amnesia.
February 20, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
CurtisE says:
Which made him a perfect candidate for a cabinet position in the Bush administration.
February 21, 2009 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fun Fact:
Pete Sessions is the son of William Sessions, the FBI Director who refused to resign and was finally fired by Clinton after Sessions was found to have used FBI planes for personal visits to his daughter.
February 20, 2009 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Again, I'm so happy this dude represents my state.
Where were we in the most corrupt state government pool? I think Texas's constitutionally mandated every other year legislative sessions can be the only reason we aren't worse off.
On the flip side, when Texas politicians go down, they usually do it in explosive style.
February 20, 2009 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another Texan here, and I'm wondering how long until we get a picture of Pete and Stanford together at a strip club in Vegas. They're bound to exist, no?
February 20, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
and President Obama and every other democrat has "never" been seen in a picture or doing anything derogatory......................right
February 20, 2009 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
BOTH parties are so corrupt it no longer matters WHICH party is in charge at the time... our nation still slides down the slope... and the common folks pay 100% of the ultimate price... while the two mob members reap the benefits.
Anyone with any common sense whatsoever can take a look at those scoundrels in Washington and with complete certainty know that at the MINIMUM, they have abandoned any ethics they may have once had, and at the MAXIMUM... realize actual felonies have most likely been committed....
And still we send them back to represent us.... ?????
February 20, 2009 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Allen Stanford?? Was that who that was? I could have sworn I was talking to Kevin Kline. Boy, he was great in A Fish Called Wanda. If I had known it was Allen Stanford, I would never have talked to him. Because I don't know Allen Stanford. Or his money. Honest.
Ummm, look! It's Nadya Suleman!!
February 20, 2009 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink