Bad news. At today's Senate confirmation hearing, Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions says he was "shocked" by the DoJ finding that poker is not part of the Wire Act and that he's open to revisiting that decision. Watch the clip here (starts at 1:57:22): www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxJ0IK8daMs&t=1h57m22s

PPA's press release encouraging Sessions to support the right of states to authorize online poker: www.theppa.org/press-release-01102017

I can't watch 10 minutes of this without being disgusted. Why are they asking so many "do you believe" and "what's your opinion on" questions? So many of these are factual questions. Rather than do you believe there has been more terrorist activity last year than previous years how about you just look up the statistics?

To his credit Sessions did say he'd have to review the DOJ opinion on the Wire Act before he makes any decisions.

This Sessions "statement" has been blown out of all proportion. He was hijacked by Graham in the middle of a series of questions about Muslims and immigration and, as he tried to complete the answer to Graham´s first question, Graham interrupted him and fed him the "revisit" question.

The overreaction by some in the poker media and PPA is just clickbait and scaremongering. This site nailed it yesterday morning - http://www.usafriendlypokersites.com...-online-poker/ - and Chris Grove pretty much repeated the article´s sentiments in a series of Tweets later in the day.

https://twitter.com/OPReport/status/819263372394795008

https://twitter.com/OPReport/status/819263663806685184

https://twitter.com/OPReport/status/819263925501865984

Nothing to see here.

States' rights are only a thing when it enables institutional suppression of minorities. Sessions and the current congress WILL move to ban online poker and throw live poker players in jail.

I disagree. Nothing on Capitol Hill is accidental. Sessions was clearly prepared to discuss the Wire Act 2011 findings, given that he was well versed on it and expressed an opinion. And, it was no non-answer. He could have said that he would not prejudice himself prior to taking office and reviewing the findings in detail. Instead, he offered up an opinion and a potential course of action.

Also, don't forget about the recent letter from 10 state AGs asking VP-elect Pence to support banning online poker. That was not accidental or coincidental either.

Not sure of the "click bait" comment. We have real opposition in Adelson. We take it very seriously.

Look at the Graham's face when he asks about poker. You can tell that he's just got that look like he's disgusted with himself for bringing up such a plugged question. And he should, cause he's another terrible politician taking money from Adelson.

+1 mostly to piss off Adios, but also because it's accurate. I'd love for a gary Johnson to explain how pot should be legalized on a federal level but gay marriage should be reserved to state governments to decide. Seems to me that state governments infringe on personal liberty via the same mechanism as the federal government, but hey libertarians gonna libertarian right.

Let's keep the non-poker politics in Politics. Thanks.

Interesting report of a CPAC poll where 90% of the attendees polled OPPOSED RAWA.

"This month, however, conservatives across the nation sent a clear message to Adelson and his cohorts that they will not tolerate such an egregious example of political cronyism.

During the Conservative Political Action Conference held at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center in National Harbor, Maryland, the Institute for Liberty conducted a survey of the attendees that should give pause to those in Congress seeking to placate the GOP’s biggest donor.


An incredible nine in ten participants said they would oppose efforts to have the federal government overturn state laws regarding online gaming. In addition, 88 percent said they see RAWA as an example of cronyism. In an age of political division and .... "

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...l-gambling-ban

If that's accurate, then that should be shouted in Sessions' and Trump's ears every day..... or just pay someone to put it onto Breitbart I guess*

(*lobbying is about getting the message heard. If that means paying some one-note blogger who will get read at 6:00 am at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, then wtf, ...... do it. . Trumpland, like it or not, has not drained the swamp Inside The Beltway, it just brought in some new crocs.)