Jeff Sessions met with Russian Ambassador twice in 2016

[Deleted]

Nice, I am pleased. How many investigations has Trump running on him and his pets ?

[Shadowferal]

Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking

In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.
American allies, including the British and the Dutch, had provided information describing meetings in European cities between Russian officials — and others close to Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — and associates of President-elect Trump, according to three former American officials who requested anonymity in discussing classified intelligence.
Separately, American intelligence agencies had intercepted communications of Russian officials, some of them within the Kremlin, discussing contacts with Trump associates.

--------------------------------------
One of the upshots here is that Jeff Sessions is a lying sack of shit.

[unbound]

Remember boys and girls, having highly questionable meetings that you lie about later under oath is no big deal, and we should just ignore it. But, if you lie about a blowjob, clearly that requires immediate investigation and impeachment.

[Skroe]

I'm not sure what Republicans are thinking. Now or later, this ends badly for them. Especially with what @Shadowferal posted.

Democrats will regain power someday. Maybe in 2018. Maybe in 2020. Maybe in 2022. Some day. And when that day comes, they are going to delve so deep into Russia+Trump connections that you'd think they were Jacques Piccard going to the bottom of Challenger Deep.

The truth will out. Either they clean up this mess and it destroys some of them, or in 2,4, or 6 years the Democrats do it for them, and destroy more of them.

Seems like an easy choice to me. Protecting Trump by stalling assumes that they will somehow never have a change of power ever again and have to deal with a situation whereby the French and British give intel they gave to Obama in 2016 to Senate Democrats in 2022, blowing the lid on the entire thing.

The Russia Bomb has a timer. It will explode. The question is who it takes with it. Day by day that is becoming more clear.

[Deleted]

In general or just with relation to his presidency/campaign?

He is pretty teflon, when it comes to his private mess, so I take the way of least resistance and say presidency.

[Skroe]

Remember boys and girls, having highly questionable meetings that you lie about later under oath is no big deal, and we should just ignore it. But, if you lie about a blowjob, clearly that requires immediate investigation and impeachment.

I mean let's be fair though. We've all seen Monica Lewinsky. If she gave me a blowjob, I'd lie about it too.

Sorry that joke hasn't been made in the past day or so. Had to do it.

- - - Updated - - -

By the way, Team Resistance, take pleasure in the fact that the most miserable man in America this morning is the President of the United States, who you just know wants to go on a twitter rampage oh so badly.

[Shadowferal]

Franken: Sessions 'at the very minimum should recuse himself'

House Oversight Chairman: Sessions Should Recuse Himself

McCarthy: I think it would be 'easier' if Sessions recused himself from Russia investigation

Pelosi: Fuck that! He should resign

Sessions: Okay, okay! Maybe I should recuse myself dammit

[TZucchini]

The Chief Lawyer of the United States Government has violated perhaps the most important rule of legal questioning. Answer questions directly, and DO NOT provide more information than what you're asked.

Al Franken never asked Sessions if he had been in contact with Russia. Yet he made a statement on it anyway.

What a buffoon.

[Deleted]

By the way, Team Resistance, take pleasure in the fact that the most miserable man in America this morning is the President of the United States, who you just know wants to go on a twitter rampage oh so badly.

...and WaPo can consider itself #blocked and #deleted. #Notfunny

Al Franken never asked Sessions if he had been in contact with Russia. Yet he made a statement on it anyway.

What a buffoon.

The best people, like Volkswagen has the lowest emissions. Quality assurance, Thundercats HOOOOO !

[Guran]

So I just watched the video again, Franken asked what he would do if he found there was any communication between trumps campaign and the Russia's here is his response.

"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 did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it."

He states he has been called a surrogate and states he did not have any communications with the Russia's. To a rational human being it is easy to see he was talking about it as a surrogate of the Trump campaign, not ever.

Like I said earlier this is nothing but a witch hunt. Borderline on McCarthyism if it's not already there. Get over it, you'll only hurt your cause more by pursuing it.

So let's get this straight;
Q: What would Sessions do if/when he found ANY communication between Trump campaign & Russia.
Sessions sees himself unable to comment on it, because he's unaware of any such activities.
Even though he had contact with the Russian ambassador.
At a Republican event.
While he was also named a surrogate for the Republican presidential candidate's campaign.
Yet he can't seem to find any indication at communication between the campaign and Russia.
And finds himself unable to form any opinion or comment on even such a hypothetical event.

So he, who admits to being called a surrogate for the campaign at certain points in history,
a) had contact with probably the highest Russian official in the US at the time at a political event during a presidential campaign,
b) claiming only afterwards it was only in his role as senator,
c) does not even fathom the potential issues regarding this communication so much he apparently was unaware of making such a potentially dubious statement during his hearing, and
d) is going to be responsible for the performance of the judicial system for the next 4 years.

Here are the possible options as far as I'm concerned:
1) He really wasn't aware of the potential issue regarding his statement OR his contact with the Russian ambassador. But if he really is that daft, is it even legal to nominate him for such a position, considering the rather clear lack of mental capacity? Not to mention that if he really does not see the issue, one could also argue that he has difficulties to differentiate between his role as senator & surrogate, thus making his own conversation such an activity that was asked about. Hence he lied about being aware of such action. (Unless again, he is mentally too limited to perceive his own actions as such)
2) He was aware of the potential issue, but chose to formulate his words in such a way that he could adjust the meaning later on. Such as the contact with Russia, as well as being aware of activities (he could have assumptions, but not proof) and even the surrogate (being called one and agreeing to perform the duties of one are not equal) Heck, even being 'unable to comment' could be construed as either lack of knowledge or a legal obligation (contract with campagin) to not give any comments regarding any unsubstantiated allegations. Basicly, his 'reply' (You can't really call this an answer, as he did not mention any actions he would undertake in the future, as was directly asked about) was as vague and imprecise as possible in order to NOT be later be accused.
3) He DID talk to the Russian ambassador as surrogate and is merely using the senator thing as an excuse afterwards for being caught lying.

So is he either
1) stupid
2) devious
3) lying?
4) multiple/all of the above

[The Emperor]

But Sessions made a blank statement. If he had stated that he met Russians as part of his current job, then he would be fine. He did not.

Are you so challenged that you claim he should have answered a question he wasn't asked??
How glad I am that mental people from the left are now political outsiders.
You should really visit youtube and watch the Sessions hearing, you will know exactly what he was asked.
Also lol @ person who chided me for citing Breitbart, because their story can automatically be proven, since there's video recording of Sessions hearing

[Skroe]

Bush and Marco Rubio were fine choices.

Edit: as was Kasich, who probably would have been my first choice.

Editing this first post. I derped. John Kasich was probably my favorite Republican of the bunch.

[Skroe]

So have we reached the point we can start mapping the Trump-Putin connection like a criminal enterprise yet?

We need that infographic.

[Machismo]

Are you so challenged that you claim he should have answered a question he wasn't asked??
How glad I am that mental people from the left are now political outsiders.
You should really visit youtube and watch the Sessions hearing, you will know exactly what he was asked.
Also lol @ person who chided me for citing Breitbart, because their story can automatically be proven, since there's video recording of Sessions hearing

First off, I'm not even a liberal, at least not in the distorted version that has popped up in American politics. Secondly, Sessions offered more information than was requested. He literally did answer a question he wasn't asked. He stated he did not meet with Russians. That is demonstrably false, and his staff have even admitted that he met with Russians. We have quotes on this thread, as well as video.

His statement was false. Now, he will either have to go back and clarify, or will have to admit that he lied. In either case, it shows he's either incompetent, or a lying asshole. The bigger issue will be whether he disclosed those contacts when applying for his security clearance. Even if he had one before, he is still required by law to disclose any meeting with foreign contacts. This may go deeper than a single act of perjury/misremembering.

[Guran]

Pedantic remarks aside, the minimum is there to ensure a certain level of experience in life in general.

Not such a bad thing, while I'm not convinced that tossing anyone out over 70 would serve us better than the alternative in every case.

Considering the political experience of the current (and relatively old) POTUS, a minimum age suites the stated requirements as much as a maximum does.
A maximum age (or rather, a minimum life expectancy) also serves to ensure that the lawmaker in question still cares about the future, as he is expected to be around when the consequences occur. Not to mention that the chance on deteriorating mental capacity, which can go unnoticed for quite some time in some cases, grows with age.


And no, an age limit is not better in every case. But it might be better in the average case. Or even in most cases. And nobody prevents Congress from adding additional medical/mental tests beyond that age to be allowed to perform their duties. A lot of European nations have already been talking about reducing driver licence validity to 3-5 years once the owner is past a certain age (70 & 75 are the most common referred ages) to ensure the continued capacity to control a vehicle in traffic. I don't see why this concept is completely different from a national political seat.

[Buckeyenut88]

I'm just patiently waiting for President Tiny Hands to start exploding on twitter. We all know he can't help himself.

[Belize]

Shhh...
Can you hear it? It's the sound of the Trump Administration crumbling under it's own pile of shit.
So Sessions lied under oath during his confirmation hearings? He said he didn't know of anyone that had communications with Russia.

Also, how long until the breadcrumbs lead up?

[The Emperor]

First off, I'm not even a liberal, at least not in the distorted version that has popped up in American politics. Secondly, Sessions offered more information than was requested. He literally did answer a question he wasn't asked. He stated he did not meet with Russians. That is demonstrably false, and his staff have even admitted that he met with Russians. We have quotes on this thread, as well as video.

His statement was false. Now, he will either have to go back and clarify, or will have to admit that he lied. In either case, it shows he's either incompetent, or a lying asshole. The bigger issue will be whether he disclosed those contacts when applying for his security clearance. Even if he had one before, he is still required by law to disclose any meeting with foreign contacts. This may go deeper than a single act of perjury/misremembering.

Okay if you are so desperate to take his response out of context, I see there's nothing else I can help you with, resume pointless fuming

[Shadowmelded]

So have we reached the point we can start mapping the Trump-Putin connection like a criminal enterprise yet?

We need that infographic.

Louise Mensch has been doing that, saw an actual graph you're asking for on her twitter a week ago but she posts like 1000 times a day so it's buried (and she's also kind of conspiratorial so eh, pinch of salt)

Also https://twitter.com/DustinGiebel/sta...91491957559296

[Bodakane]

Are you so challenged that you claim he should have answered a question he wasn't asked??
How glad I am that mental people from the left are now political outsiders.
You should really visit youtube and watch the Sessions hearing, you will know exactly what he was asked.
Also lol @ person who chided me for citing Breitbart, because their story can automatically be proven, since there's video recording of Sessions hearing

I learned two things from your post.....

1. It's only a lie if you are asked a direct question. Example: I can say I've slept with Kate Beckinsale and it's a not a lie if no one asked me if I slept with Kate Beckinsale.

2. Breitbart is a legit and unbiased news source even though the head of Breitbart was the literal CEO of Trump's campaign before he became his top cabinet member.