I appreciate the response.
Sessions didn't necessarily lie, for one. He was asked if he had been in contact with Russia in regards to Trump's campaign. He said he did not. The issue was pressed to make it sound like he denied speaking to Russia at all.
I agree Sessions didn't necessarily lie. The most charitable way I can describe his answer is "confusing". The way I'd personally describe his answer is I don't think it warrants perjury charges, but I feel it was incomplete to the point of being (deliberately?) misleading. It was an extremely poor answer given the concern surrounding that very issue.
You haven't seen the RNC. That's totally incorrect, and sounds really dumb.
The issue has little to do with the actual content of the RNC, and more to do with the way the Trump campaign changed the Republican platform leading up to the RNC. Trump himself acknowledged that "[his] people" softened the GOP policy on Ukraine, although he also said he was "not involved".
Fired for lying to the VP.
Yes, he was. However, that doesn't actually dispute the bullet point. He was fired to lying to the VP about talking with Russia.
Plausible deniability.
Is this a defense of the Trump campaign? The phrase "plausible deniability" usually implies that the deniers are actually doing whatever it is that people are claiming, but have distanced themselves enough from it to be able to deny it.
In the context of Iraq WMD, #pissgate, and the turmoil in the WH due to Obama appointees, that's a really hard pill to swallow.
I'm not sure how any of that relates to the DNC hack. I agree that there is no hard evidence available to the public to indicate that Russia was responsible for the DNC hack, but the widespread consensus among the intelligence community makes me think it's the most likely scenario.
I don't see how WMDs, Pissgate or Obama appointees would change your opinion on this point one way or another.
/#Pissgate?
Honestly, I don't dismiss the possibility of any Trump-Russia dossier, but the evidence right now is so circumstantial that I'm inclined to dismiss it unless and until I know more. Perhaps some of what's contained in the dossier is true, but enough of it looks like nonsense that I don't consider it trustworthy. Pissgate in particular seems quite improbable.
Individually, I'd be inclined to dismiss any of these points. As a whole, they make me very concerned about the nature of the relationship between the Trump administration and Russia.