Oh, so we must investigate because of the seriousness of the charge even though zero evidence has been brought forwarded? Nice logic. In a police state.
My theory on Russia.....
- Thread starter OKSTATE1
- Start date
If that is what he is saying, it is a laughable excuse.
I'm not convinced that Sessions was involved in anything underhanded. But, he should have answered questions, under oath, honestly. At the very least, he should not be spearheading an investigation into the relationship between Russia and members of Trump's team.
No, it referred to the entirety of your idiotic claims. He didn't meet with the Russian Ambassador as part of the Trump campaign, which was the area of the questioning and what he meant with his answer. The written questions from the Senate, dealing with the same line of questioning, explicitly asked Sessions if he had met with the Russian Ambassador on behalf of the Trump campaign. He had not.
Claire McCaskill FALSELY (I'm not saying explicitly that she was lying, maybe she just forgot) claimed this morning that she had never met with the Russian Ambassador as part of her duties on the Armed Services Committee. The fact is that such meetings with ambassadors occur fairly routinely for Senators on certain committees and they are also fairly unremarkable and unimportant.
Yeah, there's smoke, and it's being blown up your butthurt ass by a rejected and repudiated and defeated democrat party apparatus looking for anything at all to hold onto as Donald Trump moves forward with his agenda.
FRANKEN: Okay. CNN has just published a story, and I'm telling you this about a news story that's just been published. I'm not expecting you to know whether or not it's true or not. But CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week that included information that, quote, “Russian operatives claimed to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say, quote, “There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump's surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.”Now, again, I'm telling you this as it's coming out, so you know. But if it's true, it's obviously extremely serious and 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?
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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it.
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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it.
claire mccaskill is incredibly irrelevant to the topic at hand
the united states attorney general should be held to a high enough standard to make himself clearly understood in a senate hearing
this was not a sound bite
it was an omission of fact
you can't get away with what i meant to say
dealing with a two bit divorce attorney
on the stand in custer county
dealing with a two bit divorce attorney
on the stand in custer county
She's relevant insofar as she demonstrated either A: how easily forgotten such a meeting would be OR B: that she is part of a completely orchestrated set up.
The whole story is laughable and transparently promulgated
Thanks for proving my point.
The whole story is laughable and transparently promulgated
Thanks for proving my point.
She's relevant insofar as her comments demonstrate either A: how easily forgotten such a meeting is, OR B: she is a willing participant in the transparently obvious campaign to undermine the incoming administration.
so sessions gets the
A easily forgetful
B orchestrated setup
card?
easily forgetful?
WTF is that???
have a staffer press search on your ipad meetings app and bingo you can speak clearly and tell us all in context you met with the ambassador
you've got 10k an hour worth of in the staffers and attorneys and you can't even ask for a timeout to clarify?
this sessions dude is a c level attorney
if that's his skill set
A easily forgetful
B orchestrated setup
card?
easily forgetful?
WTF is that???
have a staffer press search on your ipad meetings app and bingo you can speak clearly and tell us all in context you met with the ambassador
you've got 10k an hour worth of in the staffers and attorneys and you can't even ask for a timeout to clarify?
this sessions dude is a c level attorney
if that's his skill set
obviously the line of questioning is hostile
don't you think sessions would want to be quite clear on the topic?
marshall go to your calender button on your phone and enter a name
you'll know in less than a second if you've met with someone in your office
sessions only and i mean only excuse is the context of the question but you seem more than willing to throw any crap against the wall you can
don't you think sessions would want to be quite clear on the topic?
marshall go to your calender button on your phone and enter a name
you'll know in less than a second if you've met with someone in your office
sessions only and i mean only excuse is the context of the question but you seem more than willing to throw any crap against the wall you can
you don't add much to the convo
no clarification just a jab
you going back on ignore with sys and orange roberto
Again, making my point. He answered the question posed by Franken in the context it was asked -- with regards to Russian contacts with the Trump campaign.
What possible reason would he have to lie about a meeting with the Russian ambassador? Whether you want to believe it or not, Jeff Sessions is a reasonably intelligent guy. He'd have been aware that his other meetings with the Russian ambassador would have come out. There again, it's transparent that he was answering in the context of the question regarding the campaign.
FRANKEN: CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week, that included information that “Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say “there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.” Again, I’m telling you this as it’s coming out, so you know.
“If there was any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this (2016) campaign, what would you do?”
SESSIONS: “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.”
Written question from Pat Leahy: 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?” the Vermont Democrat asked
SESSIONS: No.
This is all a result of a defeated and rejected Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and a Democrat Party apparatus, along with the media, trying to take down the presidency of Donald Trump. They have suffered a lot of defeats since 2010 across this country and it is funny to watch them desperately try to hang on with such pathetic manufactured narrative. A non narrative, actually.
You admit there is smoke. So, why shouldn't there be an investigation? Don't you want to know the truth? Wouldn't you like for there to be an investigation that finds no conflict of interest and no discussion of anything pertaining to the election/business interests between Trump representatives and Russian diplomats/intelligence operatives?
There is now enough smoke that there should be an investigation and it Sessions should not be involved. Let's stop whining and see what comes of said investigation.
Conspiracy Theory: Russia plans to take over Eastern Europe, but definitely can't do it as long as the EU and NATO are fully backed by the US and the US is opposed enough to such an expansion to go to war. Trump administration is nationalist and has hinted at a lack of support for the EU and NATO and at a reconciliation with Russia. Therefore, the globalists' plan is to raise enough smoke regarding Russia to force Trump to take a hardline regarding Russian expansion.
Makes a certain amount of sense. I'm not saying I agree, but it isn't without a certain sense of logic.
Maybe you should do some investigation yourself. Tell us what you find.
https://fnn.app.box.com/s/ow93u483x6kcub4ww26mn9sgab0h1y2q
A lot of possibilities suggested, be real interested to know what our intel knows and believes. Everyone concerned about if they inteferred, what I want to know if they did, what is the end game? Certainly my remembering the Cold War impacts my view, Putin seems like a smart guy and I am going to assume Russian counter intelligence is good, very curious if they tampered what their motive was, does not sound sophisticated enough to just say because they could.
Question: If the question is contextualized as in the examples above, why do we expect the answer to also be contextualized. Maybe the dems should have been smarter with their questions (or followups) to remove or expand the context in which they were asked. But I haven't seen one example where Sessions could be stated as having lied in his answers...and I say this as one who isn't a Sessions fan due to his continued support of the failed war on drugs position.
Sessions meetings with the Russian ambassador as part of his Committee and other duties are known occurrences. Sessions was asked if he had communicated with the Russians regarding Trumps campaign and he answered no. The question wasn't vague and his answer wasn't vague. He wasn't asked if he had any communication with any Russian in 2016. I'm not seeing where this can be remotely confusing.
Sessions was asked if he had communications with Russia about the 2016 election. He said no.
They did not ask him if he had any communication with Russia in his official capacity as a Senator.
Where is the lie?
They did not ask him if he had any communication with Russia in his official capacity as a Senator.
Where is the lie?
The people pushing the story aren't confused.
Sure. Why not? If no one did anything wrong, the investigation won't find any wrongdoing.
But, the slush fund just became a story yesterday. The Russia issue has been ongoing for over a month and that investigation should get underway sooner, IMO.
this is very true but
al frankenstein's job and ass is not on the line here so what does he care if he's clear or not...
sessions should have been in cover all bases and cya mode
trump fired flynn for lying not for what he did
we'll see how trump handles this
I like this theory but don't agree with it. I don't think Russia has any intention of invading any additional territory. They don't need to. They needed Crimea to maintain an Ice-free port to ensure independence of Russia, and they knew that the US was 10 years embedded into fighting in the ME and wouldn't step up to stop them (if the US doesn't step up then NATO and the UN won't/can't). They got what they wanted.
Now I think they are just going to wait and laugh as all the Eastern European countries who fleed the Socialist state in the 80s for the promise of capitalism of the West get entrapped under the socialist policies of the EU. Those countries will eventually shift away from the EU (just like Brexit and the potential Frexit) and will beg Russia for trade and support. Much like the cold-war, capitalism will eventually win. The only difference is that now Russia is the capitalist country while the EU countries are becoming decidedly less so.
Any attorney will tell you to only answer the exact questioned asked, the more you volunteer the more you are cross examined and the more that can be twisted. It is not lieing to answer to only what is asked. You are taught to answer just yes or no if possible, or I don't know. Sessions had no responsibility to guess what they were asking for and to delve past the question asked, it was a poor cross examination by those asking the questions and possibly intentional to set him up.
now fake tears shumer and pelosi are sounbiting for an investigation into russian election involvement
sessions is either an asshole for lying or a dumbass for not being clear
all of this should be on the snowflakes with trumps people laughing at them
sessions is either an asshole for lying or a dumbass for not being clear
all of this should be on the snowflakes with trumps people laughing at them
That we are even having this conversation attests to the embarrassment Barack Obama and his shadow government members must feel as a result of the repudiation and rejection dealt them by the American people in November. This is all about Obama self substantiation as well as taking down a sitting president.
Its both. This is considered a hearing and thus subject to the rules and laws of a legal preceding, including the potential of perjury.
Justin
no doubt sessions has plausible deniability
concerning a perjury conviction but the process is open to engagement and that slows #maga down
Utter Democrat rejection --- the corporate media spent the entire last year promoting constant anti-Trump propaganda and psyops.
Yet what happens when Democrats get to hear Trump unfiltered or an extended period?
