Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Claire.

Sessions Spoke with Russian Envoy Last Year

331 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Clarakore
25 minutes ago, White Unicorn said:

How sad is it when I'm applauding George W Bush comments of the freedom of press and investigations because absolute power corrupts. He had things investigated during his term but he never made the press the enemy of the people.

Here, here for GW Bush speaking up and for not press tripping during his tenure.

 

Quote

Why did the GOP let the chips fall where they may with Bush's failings but aren't supporting an independent investigation into all of the Trump teams ties to Russia dealings? 

Because Trump's modus operandi is drama.

 

Quote

Our integrity as a Democratic Republic is questioned because of this, but loyalty to party power comes first to most of them! Pergy and  cover-ups, White House official statements saying fake news if anything is derogatory and research reporters being called media against the American people is Putin strategy in itself.

As our fearless leader would say, Bad...Sad.

It is a strange time where Republicans now have the jackass as their mascot.

But hey every dog gets his day and even mascots sometimes get to become team captain.

Heehaw, heehaw.

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
18 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

If you really care about the legitimacy of the president then you should be calling for Sessions to recuse himself from investigating the Russia situation. If that doesn't happen a vast majority of people and im just guessing but probably the world will always have that question in the back of their minds. 

He doesn't care as a partisan hack. 

Most sensible conservatives are at minimum calling for recusal, exploring the evidence and wanting to let all these investigations play through.

and then was crying for suppression of evidence claiming national security concerns. As if national security is actually his concern.

Man these conservos are in hysterics :w00t:

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
17 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

At an absolute minimum his answer was misleading. At most it was an outright lie

Hindsight is like that.  What I've stated is the truth.  No investigation's results will ever be enough unless it removes Trump and all vestiges of him from power.  You know it, I know it and most importantly, his 60+ million supporters know it.  When this storm is over, most likely after Sessions recuses from the Russia investigation, the calls for a special prosecutor will be deafening.  If that doesn't work, another well-timed leak will occur and we'll be off to the races again.  Jeff Sessions was my senator and has never had a hint of real scandal associated with his name except for the partisan attacks of Democrats who will do anything, destroy anyone, for the continuation of their power.  There is no way anyone can prove this man lied or did anything dishonorable whatever but it won't keep the pack from chasing and trying to take him down.  Fortunately, he's a lot like Trump where personal strength is concerned.  He's loyal and will do what his boss wants with regard to this situation but he won't just quit on his own.  The Dems won't be even partially satisfied unless they can get an all expense paid, 4 year special investigation that has a prominent Dem (if they can still find one) in charge.  IF there were any hope of a truly bi-partisan investigation doing any good to put all these rumors to bed, I'd be for it.  Since there is ZERO chance of that occurring, I believe - and wrote the president last night - that he needs to roll on and tell the whiners to get below decks.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldNate
38 minutes ago, and then said:

Hindsight is like that.  What I've stated is the truth.  No investigation's results will ever be enough unless it removes Trump and all vestiges of him from power.  You know it, I know it and most importantly, his 60+ million supporters know it.  When this storm is over, most likely after Sessions recuses from the Russia investigation, the calls for a special prosecutor will be deafening.  If that doesn't work, another well-timed leak will occur and we'll be off to the races again.  Jeff Sessions was my senator and has never had a hint of real scandal associated with his name except for the partisan attacks of Democrats who will do anything, destroy anyone, for the continuation of their power.  There is no way anyone can prove this man lied or did anything dishonorable whatever but it won't keep the pack from chasing and trying to take him down.  Fortunately, he's a lot like Trump where personal strength is concerned.  He's loyal and will do what his boss wants with regard to this situation but he won't just quit on his own.  The Dems won't be even partially satisfied unless they can get an all expense paid, 4 year special investigation that has a prominent Dem (if they can still find one) in charge.  IF there were any hope of a truly bi-partisan investigation doing any good to put all these rumors to bed, I'd be for it.  Since there is ZERO chance of that occurring, I believe - and wrote the president last night - that he needs to roll on and tell the whiners to get below decks.

It never gets old to see radicalized republicans get all bent and twisted when their tactics are used against them...hehehehe....  Right or wrong, it's always amusing.  Two sides, same coin.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore

Here is the juridsticion of the Senate Armed Services committee. 

http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/about/history

Under which part of it was Sessions acting under to talk shop with Kislyak?

According to a SASC member...they never meet with ambassadors. 

Quote

Armed Services Committee Dem pokes at Sessions: We don't meet with ambassadors

A Sessions spokesman insisted that the contact with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak was in his capacity as a member of the Armed Services Committee, not as a surrogate for Trump's presidential campaign.

But McCaskill, also a member of the committee, tweeted that she has never had contact with the ambassador in her capacity on the Armed Services Committee.

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/321948-armed-services-committee-dem-our-members-dont-meet-with-russian-ambassadors

I've been on the Armed Services Com for 10 years.No call or meeting w/Russian ambassador. Ever. Ambassadors call members of Foreign Rel Com.6:06 AM · Mar 2, 2017

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
27 minutes ago, OldNate said:

It never gets old to see radicalized republicans get all bent and twisted when their tactics are used against them...hehehehe....  Right or wrong, it's always amusing.  Two sides, same coin.

What gives you the impression @and then is "radicalized"?

We see the same reaction from the other side when the situation is reversed and they are called out on their double-standards. To pretend one side has the moral high ground is delusional. It's tit-for-tat all the way down to the bottom.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore

NBC could not find any of the 20 members of the SASC to say they have had ever contacted a Russian ambassador in the capacity as a member of that committee.

Quote

Breaking: NBC can't find even one other Senate Armed Services Committee member who spoke w/ Russian Ambassador even once; 20 of 20 say no.

Out of all the members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sessions is the only one who met with the Russian ambassador “in an official capacity.” So … why? What could Sessions have to say to Russia as a member of the committee that he didn’t feel compelled to share with any other member of the committee? What made him so special?

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2017/3/2/1639360/-Sessions-compounds-his-lie-blames-chats-with-Russian-ambassador-on-Senate-committee

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
8 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

What gives you the impression @and then is "radicalized"?

We see the same reaction from the other side when the situation is reversed and they are called out on their double-standards. To pretend one side has the moral high ground is delusional. It's tit-for-tat all the way down to the bottom.

Definitely he is a hardliner.

Quite certain he has mentioned "Second Amendment solution" or some such which would make one a radical.

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldNate
Just now, Dark_Grey said:

What gives you the impression @and then is "radicalized"?

We see the same reaction from the other side when the situation is reversed and they are called out on their double-standards. To pretend one side has the moral high ground is delusional. It's tit-for-tat all the way down to the bottom.

Yes, that's kind of what I mean with the whole two sides same coin thing.  For those of us lucky enough to simply be spectators (well, as much of a spectator as one can be, you are America after all), it's like watching Tom and Jerry cartoons.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
3 minutes ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

NBC could not find any of the 20 members of the SASC to say they have had ever contacted a Russian ambassador in the capacity as a member of that committee.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2017/3/2/1639360/-Sessions-compounds-his-lie-blames-chats-with-Russian-ambassador-on-Senate-committee

So is there any record of what Sessions talked about? I want to assess exactly what damage was done through that conversation. Promises to lift sanctions isn't a world-ender. This is Russia, not North Korea.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
1 minute ago, Dark_Grey said:

So is there any record of what Sessions talked about? I want to assess exactly what damage was done through that conversation. Promises to lift sanctions isn't a world-ender. This is Russia, not North Korea.

It would be nice to find out.

He still lied and that is enough to have him tried for perjury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
4 minutes ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

Definitely he is a hardliner.

I don't want to derail the thread going after this point but a "hardliner" is not a radical. Radicals wear masks and gang up on people wearing red hats. We need to be more restrained with using extremist terms like "radical" and "Nazi". The glove has to fit nice and snugly first.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey
Just now, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

It would be nice to find out.

He still lied and that is enough to have him tried for perjury.

Agreed re the lying. There's no way around that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
Just now, Dark_Grey said:

I don't want to derail the thread going after this point but a "hardliner" is not a radical. Radicals wear masks and gang up on people wearing red hats. We need to be more restrained with using extremist terms like "radical" and "Nazi". The glove has to fit nice and snugly first.

Yes they are not the same.

"Quite certain he has mentioned "Second Amendment solution" or some such which would make one a radical."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
Just now, Dark_Grey said:

Agreed re the lying. There's no way around that.

He will probably be given the chance to reclarify himself in an official hearing and will likely be censured.

Doubt it goes further than that unless he simply resigns.

But if he did talk beyond the limits of his job description with the Russkie and there is proof, after he reclarifies but is caught in a lie, game over.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldNate
Just now, Dark_Grey said:

I don't want to derail the thread going after this point but a "hardliner" is not a radical. Radicals wear masks and gang up on people wearing red hats. We need to be more restrained with using extremist terms like "radical" and "Nazi". The glove has to fit nice and snugly first.

Sort of like how people on here generalize all the time?  lol.   I was kidding, and frankly, until the more *radical* Right clean up their act here, or the moderators enforce the forum rules around racist / religious generalizations, I'm not to worried.  As they say...when in Rome......................

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
6 minutes ago, OldNate said:

Sort of like how people on here generalize all the time?  lol.   I was kidding, and frankly, until the more *radical* Right clean up their act here, or the moderators enforce the forum rules around racist / religious generalizations, I'm not to worried.  As they say...when in Rome......................

There has definitely been a real uptick lately. It usually centers around the same posters. People who do this are no better than someone who mentions someones sexual orientation, religion or color during every disagreement.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
3 minutes ago, Michelle said:

There has definitely been a real uptick lately. It usually centers around the same posters. People who do this are no better than someone who mentions someones sexual orientation, religion or color during every disagreement.

Like you just did? Again...

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldNate
Just now, Michelle said:

There has definitely been a real uptick lately. It usually centers around the same posters. People who do this are no better than someone who mentions someones sexual orientation, religion or color during every disagreement.

No doubt.  Yet when it happens to them, even in jest, the outrage reaches volcanic proportions.  Most days I behave, but the irony of today's threads and postings has me a little on the flippant side....hehe... 

Will also say, since this is now forming a more serious side conversation, that it is not all Right leaning folks on here...I'm pretty sure we know who the usual suspects are.  I've had excellent conversations with folks on the Right here, especially in private chat.  Hopefully they understand the differentiation as well.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
Just now, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

Like you just did? Again...

What the hell?!?! 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella
1 hour ago, and then said:

Hindsight is like that.  What I've stated is the truth.  No investigation's results will ever be enough unless it removes Trump and all vestiges of him from power.  You know it, I know it and most importantly, his 60+ million supporters know it.  When this storm is over, most likely after Sessions recuses from the Russia investigation, the calls for a special prosecutor will be deafening.  If that doesn't work, another well-timed leak will occur and we'll be off to the races again.  Jeff Sessions was my senator and has never had a hint of real scandal associated with his name except for the partisan attacks of Democrats who will do anything, destroy anyone, for the continuation of their power.  There is no way anyone can prove this man lied or did anything dishonorable whatever but it won't keep the pack from chasing and trying to take him down.  Fortunately, he's a lot like Trump where personal strength is concerned.  He's loyal and will do what his boss wants with regard to this situation but he won't just quit on his own.  The Dems won't be even partially satisfied unless they can get an all expense paid, 4 year special investigation that has a prominent Dem (if they can still find one) in charge.  IF there were any hope of a truly bi-partisan investigation doing any good to put all these rumors to bed, I'd be for it.  Since there is ZERO chance of that occurring, I believe - and wrote the president last night - that he needs to roll on and tell the whiners to get below decks.

Not gonna happen. Session's too is not going anywhere. I hear there is absolutely no evidence & if there were as it's claimed that it was from when Obama was in office  So why didn't he make a big deal about it before if he was so concerned. I wonder if maybe Session's  even Flynn have helped ease the tension that was happening when  Obama  continued to provoke Russia.

Why is Comey  still there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore

Here we go again...

Kiss of death time. White House is getting the bus ready to toss Jeff under it.

Quote

White House says it didn't know about Sessions' meetings with Russian envoy

 
WASHINGTON — The White House didn't know that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had twice met with the Russian ambassador during the presidential campaign until the story broke Wednesday night, a White House official said.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/02/what-white-house-knew-about-jeff-sessions-meetings-with-russian-ambassador/98632654/

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore

He just got Flynned.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
2 minutes ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

Here we go again...

Kiss of death time. White House is getting the bus ready to toss Jeff under it.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/02/what-white-house-knew-about-jeff-sessions-meetings-with-russian-ambassador/98632654/

YES YES YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.