Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Sessions sufficiently and correctly and specifically answered the question that was asked, not the general question that the media "interpreted" that he was asked--which already had moved the goalpost from his answer to the question posed to supposedly having to answer a question that wasn't asked.
.
|
The "bar" wasn't moved, a 2nd one was created when Sessions choose to answer the question the way he did (and if he did it based on a lawyers advice, I can now understand why people here think so little of attorneys). The 2nd "bar" is whether he lied to congress, not whether someone met with the Russian ambassador. He met with the Ambassador during the time period when the hacking was a front page issue (6 months ago) so it is hilarious to compare his meeting with Schumers or Pelosi from 7 years ago.
Trump repeatedly said that no one had anything to do with Russia and he didn't think anyone he deal with did either. That has been shown not to be correct time and again as members of his campaign and others had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence agents in the year prior to the election. If Trump didn't make those statements things would be different. - so since Trumps statements have proven to be not true, let him (and Schummer) take lie detector tests to see the truth. Trump even made comments about Hillary's emails before they were release so trying to get to the bottom of the hack makes sense. Others on Trumps national security team even had language removed from the Repub. platform that mentioned giving the Ukraine weapons.
It is interesting that before campaign Americans had like a 15% favorable rating of Russia, now it is like 33%. (I wonder what Reagan would think of that). If someone from the Obama admin. did the things people from the Trump admin. seem to have done, this site would have needed another server.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device