Which anatta am I speaking to, the liberal dissident or the alt right freak show?
Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disclose
- Thread starter christiefan915
- Start date
Which anatta am I speaking to, the liberal dissident or the alt right freak show?
I am giving a thoughtful analysis of what he said. If he had not added the last phrase,
i would be clear he was never meeting wit the Russian ambassador for any reason not directly associated
with his duties on the Armed Services Committee.
I still don't think he meant to deceive ,i think he shot his mouth off - and now the gotcha squad clings on to that wanting his resignation.
If recusal gets us past this Russiaphobia -so be it. My interest is stopping mindless Cold War 2.0
that just drains our resources, and heightens tensions for no reason in an already stalemated eastern Europe.
If sessions does not resign it will be war with Democrats. Total lies, total corruption.
counter-terrorism not the same as nation building, is not the same as power projection.
Signature strikes are not the same as insertion ops, or drone strikes where the target is identified.
When you exhibit some quality of nuanced understanding, then get back to me.
Otherwise continue your Rump noise
Focus. Sessions. This man obviously committed perjury. You are defending him. You forfeit all cred.
Fuck the Democrats -it's already total war. You guys played it that way from the beginning with"de-ligitimization"
Obama minions left time bombs in the IC that ginned up anti-Russian hysteria way past the hacking
of non-government account like the DNC and Podesta.
You cannot become anymore unhinged than your party already is/
you said that..as a lawyer you should understand perjury requires a complete removal of all doubt
that an answer was purposely duplicitous with no other way to interpret it,
clearly that is not the case here.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Boom.
Franken: "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."
"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."
First off, I'm not blogging as a lawyer any more than you are blogging as a receptionist.
The call of the question and his pointed response is perjurious. You are defending a perjuror. The only diff between sessions and bill Clinton was the absence of finger wagging.
No not boom you mental midget.
There was no content in that palin salad
Sessions response categorically eliminated the fact of any contact by him. That response, which is false, precluded followup questions. Had sessions said that he did have meetings with Russians that did not pertain to Trumps campaign, followup questions as to those contacts would have ensued. This lie truncated the questioning, and mislead the committee.
you are making the charge of perjury, not me,and now you want to back off a basic legal concept-
but still clinging to the specious charge. Yu can repeat yourself till you are blue in the face\but for perjury indictment it has to be shown there can be no other viable interpretation but a purposeful deception .
Obviously there are other credible alternatives. You and Al Franken et all are simply blowing partisan smoke
no it didn't.
Contact with Russian ambassador was incidental to his position as Senator -and the questioning was along the line of being part of the campaign.
Sessions was fully responsive towards that end.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
So once again we find the Republicans trotting out the "do as we say, not as we do" excuse to cover their asses.
the "removal of doubt"
is what a prosecutor would look for when making the charge
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Yup.
There's a pretty stiff legal criteria for perjury; and as much as the liberals want it to, the incident with Sessions falls short of it.
But dang, they're bloody determined to get their Trump/Russian connection lol!
no sourcing, but isn't this about the Michael Steel "golden showers" expose' >
Would you like tos ay how that is relevant,
and while we're at it why the IC felt compelled to brief Trump with already known by them as 'fake news'?
Sessions perjured himself under oath to Congress you idiotic twit.
Sessions is finished as well as eligible for prison.