Reply With Quote
lol "lawnewz"
sessions lied about talking to russia at all. we know it was knowingly and willfully because his statement yesterday said he didnt think it was relevant when he was asked about it.
fake newz
Law Newz
Factual Reporting: HIGH
Notes: Law Newz is founded and run by Dan Abrams, who is currently the Chief Legal Anchor for ABC News, and host of both 60 Days In and Live PD on the A&E network. Has a slight left bias in reporting, but is well sourced.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/law-newz/
lol literal cuckold
lol "lawnewz"
sessions lied about talking to russia at all. we know it was knowingly and willfully because his statement yesterday said he didnt think it was relevant when he was asked about it.
fake newz
Seems legit, I mean I get all my financial advising from www.stockz-n-sheeeit.com and the z gives it the credibility I need mixed with the edginess I crave.
did Clinton LIE under oath about speaking with Lynch?
Sessions LIED under oath, which the Repugs really didn't like when Clinton did it back in the '90s.
Deceptive question from Al Franken. So Sessions didn't lie. But as usual, fake news media will leave things out.
Board libs fixating on the (admittedly horrible) name of a website because they can't defend their argument that Sessions lied.
He has an out if he continues to insist he had no conversations regarding the campaign. Unless evidence,comes out like it did for flynn/sanctions
not what he was asked.
not what is being suggested.The suggestion that our Senators should not be meeting with representatives of foreign governments is ludicrous,
its coming from people on both sides of the aisle and has nothing to do with having meetings related to a foundation. nice redirect, we gonna talk about bengazi next?especially coming from people who championed the Clinton Foundation meeting with foreign governments frequently to fund their Clinton Foundation and personal enrichment.
lol fakenewz
The Gravity Is Strong
this is much more about Sessions' need to conceal the meeting than the meeting itself.
. But why did Sessions have this meeting at all? It seems at best ill-conceived, coming in the heat of allegations of inappropriate connections between Trump and Russia last Fall.
Far more baffling, why did he choose to conceal it?
A bit of the timeline here is helpful. Sen. Franken's question to Sessions was on January 10th. Sen. Leahy asked a slightly different question. But I'm not sure of the precise date. It was on January 12th that the Post's David Ignatius first reported that Flynn had been in contact with Ambassador Kislyak on the day President Obama announced retaliatory sanctions against Russia. If Leahy's question was also before the 12th (they were written questions, so possible), that was before the issue of Kislyak specifically became a charged public issue. But Sessions actual confirmation vote came almost a month later, plenty of time to revise his testimony.
Why are there so many unforced errors?
Why conceal this meeting?
Frankly, why lie about it?
As I said, big, big scandals work like this. People who don't even appear to be that close to the action keep getting pulled under for what seem like needless deceptions.
The cover up works better than you think. The other reason the cover up is a logical response is that it usually works. You only find out about it when it doesn't. So it's a good bet.
Astronomers can't see black holes directly. They map them by their event horizon and their effect on nearby stars and stellar matter.
We can't see yet what's at the center of the Trump/Russia black hole.
But we can tell a lot about its magnitude by the scope of the event horizon and the degree of its gravitational pull, which is immense.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/...+%28TPMNews%29
=============
Sessions Met With Russian Ambassador Twice During Campaign
The revelation about Sessions' contact with the Russian ambassador comes as allegations that Trump associates were in contact with Russian officials during the campaign are under increasing scrutiny.
As attorney general, Sessions oversees the Justice Department and the FBI, which is currently investigating potential contacts between Russia and the Trump campaign.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/sessions-met-russian-ambassador
Lol cnnz
Absolutely what he was asked.
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 do ents 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 do ents 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.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.944820e7a174
In short, Franken asked Sessions about rumors that Russian intermediaries were colluding with Trump's campaign surrogates to help advance Trump's campaign. Sessions responded that he was a Trump surrogate and he did not communicate with Russia in that role.
It doesn't matter if he spent every waking moment on the phone with Russia as part of his duties with the Armed Services Committee. Unless he was collaborating with them on Trump's campaign, he did not lie. And there is no proof that he was doing that.
Yes, there's plenty of people in the Republican wing of the Uniparty who hate Sessions too. This fake controversy is being drummed up by globalists on both sides of the aisle who really just don't like his positions on immigration and trade.its coming from people on both sides of the aisle
"fake controversy"
... which raises the question of what he said to the Russian is critical, since HE LIED to hide the meetings.
weak posting far right fringe sites like law newz.
Not any better than breitbart or drudge report.
So terrible it's not even listed as a news site..
Another reason why this bogus Sessions narrative is being pushed today:
Prove it."fake controversy"
... which raises the question of what he said to the Russian is critical, since HE LIED to hide the meetings.
The media has no shame. Pure political propaganda.
wapoz
How could anyone with 2 working neurons believe anything the wapoz says
They havent been right for about a couple years
I don't care if Sessions stuck a cigar up the Russian's butt. That's consensual sex between adults, completely legal.
But why did Sessions LIE UNDER OATH about two meetings with the Russian?
Prove that he lied under oath or STFU.
Well taking a closer look at the text of the questions, he asked if people in the campaign communicated with Russia. Do the questions specify that the communications were about the election?
I guess "in the course of the campaign" is the best possibility but is that just referring to the time frame?
The opposition party and the Hillary Clinton colluded. I wonder why no one cares about that. It seems Schumer and Pelosi feed off fake news. It is a pathetic display.
God you are dumb.
According to the CNN report that Franken is directly referencing in his question:
These senior intelligence officials also included the synopsis to demonstrate that Russia had compiled information potentially harmful to both political parties, but only released information damaging to Hillary Clinton and Democrats. This synopsis was not an official part of the report from the intelligence community case about Russian hacks, but some officials said it augmented the evidence that Moscow intended to harm Clinton's candidacy and help Trump's, several officials with knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politi...report-russia/
So, yes, it's obvious that the alleged communications that Franken was asking about were related to the election.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions