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

F3SS

Good please don't.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

No I have to put this to rest.

Latest updated polls: Nov 6

Clinton 47% Trump 42% that's huge, excuse me I mean way up,  and well outside a margin of error.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton

 

Then the following page

Quote

We simulated a Nov. 8 election 10 million times using our state-by-state averages. In 9.8 millionsimulations, Hillary Clinton ended up with at least 270 electoral votes. Therefore, we say Clinton has a 98.0 percent chance of becoming president.

 

So you got it wrong now and they got it wrong ten million times. I'm not above having a real conversation with you but just because it is I who says something doesn't mean you have to let your arrogance take over and argue. Stop being so smug and look things up yourself before end up looking the way you do right now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
Just now, F3SS said:

No I have to put this to rest.

Latest updated polls: Nov 6

Clinton 47% Trump 42% that's huge, excuse me I mean way up,  and well outside a margin of error.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton

 

Then the following page

 

So you got it wrong now and they got it wrong ten million times. I'm not above having a real conversation with you but just because it is I who says something doesn't mean you have to let your arrogance take over and argue. Stop being so smug and look things up yourself before end up looking the way you do right now.

47% vs 42% is huge lol?

Here is what I found.

Quote

Before election day, they were showing a sustained but narrowing lead for Hillary Clinton. The Telegraph's poll tracker, which was based on an average of the last five polls published on RealClearPolitics, showed Clinton leading with three percentage points over Trump.

American statistics and polling analysis site FiveThirtyEight gave Trump a 30 per cent chance of victory going into the final few days. This chance - the same as winning at rock, paper, scissors - was generous compared to other forecasters.

Ultimately the confidence in a Clinton win was proved wrong, but the final national voting share projection wasn't too far from the mark and was within the margin of error.

The final result showed Clinton leading in the popular vote by 0.3 percentage points, with Trump only winning because he seized the advantage in key swing states. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/09/how-wrong-were-the-polls-in-predicting-the-us-election/

As we can see 3 percentage points  (or 5 with your link) is not yuge. Not at all.

And don't forget the polls were right in that she did win the popular vote. 

But I don't expect truth to matter when it is easier to repeat the myth of the polls having it all wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

And if you click around on that chart the closest they ever were was October 2015.

Afterwards she was way up the whole time. She never took a hit in the polls before or after the Russian thing. She was never going to win and Russia, involved somehow or not, had zero effect on the outcome of this election. 

I'm all for an investigation. Why not? The whole thing is merely the progressives not accepting the democratic outcome of this election. I'm betting that like things have shown in the past that the louder they scream, the larger the stones they cast and the more that they attack Trump they will fall just that much harder on their face. On the other hand this is also them thinking they're still in charge and caving to an investigation is letting them believe that by getting their way. They lost the election. There's no reason the republicans ought to feel like they need to be on the defensive. They won and they won big across the country. They're the ones in charge right now. Tell the dems to pound salt for all I care.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato
1 hour ago, Paranormal Panther said:

I'm not optimistic. Your side will stop at nothing to destroy the Trump presidency. Your gal, Pelosi, already called for his removal as attorney general. She doesn't need or want no stinkin' facts.

LOL where did I call for his removal?   If I'm going to call, all I call for is a fair investigation.  That you're even replying to me like this shows you don't want one.

There's nothing you can find that Nancy Pelosi wants that I agree with.   I know that it blows your mind to read but it's true anyway.   My gal?  Are you Merc14? 

I don't even think that Trump supporters are right wingers necessarily.  I think you're more like centrist authoritarians who've been horse trained to blame everything on "the Left".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS
9 minutes ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

47% vs 42% is huge lol?

Here is what I found.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/09/how-wrong-were-the-polls-in-predicting-the-us-election/

As we can see 3 percentage points  (or 5 with your link) is not yuge. Not at all.

And don't forget the polls were right in that she did win the popular vote. 

But I don't expect truth to matter when it is easier to repeat the myth of the polls having it all wrong.

They used five polls. Huff used a lot more. Over a dozen probably. But they along with every other liberal news outlet had her at a 90%+ chance of winning and if the polls were going solely on popular vote then the polls were still wrong. Whatever though. It's too bad you were too chicken to show up here at the time to have a record of you touting the polls and showing everybody all the investigative work you've done to show how Hillary was going to run with it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

And yes 5 percentage points in almost all cases past is by all means a huge and confident lead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

Now that we got all the old poll talk straightened out we can see into the past and observe how there was barely a budge for either candidate in any direction before or after the Wikileaks.

Russia had no effect on our election.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
6 minutes ago, F3SS said:

And yes 5 percentage points in almost all cases past is by all means a huge and confident lead. 

Really?

Here is how it looked like in the last week of October.

Quote

Only 2 points separate Clinton, Trump in latest tracking poll

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/29/clinton-47-trump-45-in-post-abc-tracking-poll/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
10 minutes ago, F3SS said:

Now that we got all the old poll talk straightened out we can see into the past and observe how there was barely a budge for either candidate in any direction before or after the Wikileaks.

Russia had no effect on our election.

Unsure how true that is and how if some claiming polls are wrong or untrustworthy can then use them to validate your point.

You already ate the cake broham. You can't still have it man.

Good point either way.

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not

I have learned when anything like this comes out in the news to give it a day or so until I try to get a good picture of what's going on. Looked into it a bit and seems Sessions answered the direct question about campaign involvement with Russia but didn't mention talking with them as a senator. Not sure why he would not have mentioned that to clear the record, but it looks like they were not what the Dem's would LOVE them to be about. I'm glad to see Sessions took himself out of the investigation. I believe that was the right move.

There needs to be a complete investigation into all the Russian involvement into the election as so as possible. The left will never stop trying to discredit Trump's Presidency if it isn't done and we the American people have to have an answer to this. I really don't see anything Earth shattering coming out of an investigation, but if there is I will be there screaming bloody murder with them.

I just can't seem to get out of my head that if Obama knew of supposed Russian meddling from way back, why was nothing ever done? Also, Obama trying to humiliate Romney over Russia five years ago.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
6 minutes ago, Why not said:

I have learned when anything like this comes out in the news to give it a day or so until I try to get a good picture of what's going on. Looked into it a bit and seems Sessions answered the direct question about campaign involvement with Russia but didn't mention talking with them as a senator. Not sure why he would not have mentioned that to clear the record, but it looks like they were not what the Dem's would LOVE them to be about. I'm glad to see Sessions took himself out of the investigation. I believe that was the right move.

There needs to be a complete investigation into all the Russian involvement into the election as so as possible. The left will never stop trying to discredit Trump's Presidency if it isn't done and we the American people have to have an answer to this. I really don't see anything Earth shattering coming out of an investigation, but if there is I will be there screaming bloody murder with them.

I just can't seem to get out of my head that if Obama knew of supposed Russian meddling from way back, why was nothing ever done? Also, Obama trying to humiliate Romney over Russia five years ago.

Before conspiracy theories are woven as this point has been mentioned a few times these are two of the listed reasons. I remember reading about it before and having them say they did not want to disrupt the election so let it play out. Comey was a little gremlin with a monkeywrench. 

Quote

For months, Obama administration officials have debated how to respond to Russian hacks they believed were intended to undermine the US elections. But they kept arriving at reasons not to respond publicly.

In addition to a fear of sparking a wider cyber-conflict and an attempt to save talks with Russia over Syria, the administration did not want to give Donald Trump reason to cry foul following what they were certain would be a Hillary Clinton victory.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/13/politics/obama-administration-russia-hacks-response/

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore

The President also took flack for it from the Left.

Quote

Ultimately it is the President, invested with the powers as Commander-in-Chief, who could have chosen to act aggressively against Moscow. But he wanted to present a unified front across the American political spectrum. He wanted bipartisan support—and when McConnell rebuffed this effort (more on that in a bit), the White House decided to take the cautious route to “name and shame” the Russians.

This was, to put it mildly, an ineffective strategy.

The White House should have pulled out all the stops to halt this obvious threat to the electoral process, and let the political chips fall where they may. Obama is well aware of the GOP’smassive resistance strategy against his policies—just ask Merrick Garland—but this serious challenge to our civilization should have stiffened this President’s resolve. But it didn’t.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/12/11/obama-and-congress-knew-about-russian-hacking-and-they-did-nothing.html

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
Quote

Exclusive: Two other Trump advisers also spoke with Russian envoy during GOP convention

It's unknown what the Trump campaign officials who spoke with the ambassador – J.D. Gordon and Carter Page – discussed with him. Those who took part in the events in Cleveland said it is not unusual for presidential campaign teams to interact with diplomats.

However, the newly-revealed communications further contradict months of repeated denials by Trump officials that his campaign had contact with officials representing the Russian government.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/03/02/exclusive-two-other-trump-advisers-also-spoke-russian-envoy-during-gop-convention/98648190/

This is too much already. Heads. Roll. Now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
Quote

Jeff Sessions Used Political Funds for Republican Convention Expenses

Records show attorney general used campaign account for travel expenses to Cleveland, where he met Russian envoy

The Trump administration says Attorney General Jeff Sessions was acting as a then-U.S. senator when he talked to Russia’s ambassador at an event during last year’s Republican National Convention in Cleveland, but Mr. Sessions paid for convention travel expenses out of his own political funds and he spoke about Donald Trump’s campaign at the event, according to a person at the event and campaign-finance records.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-sessions-used-political-funds-for-republican-convention-expenses-1488509301

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
Quote

Trump Administration Repeatedly Denied There Was Any Contact With Russia During Campaign

It wasn’t just one person. Or two. There’s a growing list of people who had such communications.

...

In December, Trump’s senior aide and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, joined Flynn for a meeting with Kislyak. 

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58b8ddbde4b0d2821b4cfec5?

Trump lied to us point blank. He lied to every American. Who here has had enough of it?

How many more must fall on their swords to protect him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella

Jeff Sessions is not going anywhere. He's very strict on illegal immigration too.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ellapenella
8 minutes ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58b8ddbde4b0d2821b4cfec5?

Trump lied to us point blank. He lied to every American. Who here has had enough of it?

How many more must fall on their swords to protect him?

Google Lied To You. Fakebook Lied To You. Radio lied to you. The media lied to you. Obama lied to you. Hillary lied to you. The DNC lied to you. Google it !

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
13 hours ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

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. 

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

 

 

And she was busted within minutes for "lying" as well.  

Claire McCaskill says she’s had “no call or meeting w/Russian ambassador. Ever.” But she tweeted about two. It’s easy to forget.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Google Lied To You. Fakebook Lied To You. Radio lied to you. The media lied to you. Obama lied to you. Hillary lied to you. The DNC lied to you. Google it !

 

Did you lie to me too? 

1 minute ago, and then said:

And she was busted within minutes for "lying" as well.  

Claire McCaskill says she’s had “no call or meeting w/Russian ambassador. Ever.” But she tweeted about two. It’s easy to forget.

No, she said as part of the SASC. She met with him about Russian baby adoptions. 

No other SASC member has claimed they met with a Russian ambassador as pary of the SASC as Sessions lamely claimed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
4 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

Google Lied To You. Fakebook Lied To You. Radio lied to you. The media lied to you. Obama lied to you. Hillary lied to you. The DNC lied to you. Google it !

 

Are you OK with Trump lying just because you think these others have?

Yes or no Ella?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

The appearance, with all the lies members of the Trump team have fed us about not meeting with Russians, is that they have something to hide.  Now what might that be?  The conclusion is hard to escape that they were colluding about how to fool the American people into electing Trump -- and they succeeded.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore
4 minutes ago, Frank Merton said:

The appearance, with all the lies members of the Trump team have fed us about not meeting with Russians, is that they have something to hide.  Now what might that be?  The conclusion is hard to escape that they were colluding about how to fool the American people into electing Trump -- and they succeeded.

I know right. And the far right will just keep making up excuses for each and every case. No credibility for Trump's team and the die-hard supporters who cannot accept even one instance of impropriety.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton
1 minute ago, Avatar Samantha Ai said:

I know right. And the far right will just keep making up excuses for each and every case. No credibility for Trump's team and the die-hard supporters who cannot accept even one instance of impropriety.

Yea -- that hits it right on the nose -- no sense of propriety. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not

Sam, number one Obama like everyone else thought Clinton was a shoe in. So of course he was not going to do anything. You all know if Obama thought there was the slightest chance Trump could have won the election he, they (Dem's) would have thrown anything and everything at the Russian conspiracy. They figured there was no way Trump could win so why rattle Putin's cage.

Second, you do understand the so called meetings Sessions had were not secret, one on one meetings. Sounds to me like they were with dozens of other ambassadors during one so called meeting, and the other they all were in one place togather.

Look, I'm not a Trump lover, but I'm also not a Trump HATER. I would love to have seen someone else as POTUS (not Clinton) but he is our President. I also see all the sh-t the left is throwing at the wall and praying to have something stick. I'm not buying any of it until there if PROOF.     Really getting tired of the childishness from the left because of the ass kicking they took throughout the whole election, not just the Presidency. 

  • Like 7

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.