Trump Attorney General Jeff Sessions under fire over Russia meetings

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Not sure what you're talking about [moving the goal post] I know Trump constantly moves the goal posts. Maybe you could clarify?

You said:
"Trump tweeted that Schumer met with the Russian Ambassador also. Schumer's response was he'll testify under oath what they discussed and asked if Trump and his cabinet would do the same. Somehow I don't think Pres. Trump will take him up on it"

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.

No one, not even Trump, has asked Schumer to testify, nor to do it under oath. So his bravado is meaningless. But now, because of that meaningless bravado, the goalpost of "interpreting" whether Sessions lied or not (which already was a moved goalpost from his correct answer) has been moved to whether Trump and his cabinet would answer something under oath.

This is the method of expanding something from nothing. Which is what appears to be going on. There seems to be a method to the madness of stalling Trumps appointments other than just opposing everything he tries to do. Just before he left office, Obama expanded the circle of those who could have access to classified phone intercepts. (which could have been damaging to his administration if he had done that at the beginning of his tenure). So it is more difficult to discover who is disseminating the leaks to the media. By slowing down Trumps ability to "drain the swamp" of Obama loyalists in the intelligence agencies, they will continually be able to "drip, drip" stuff that may have the appearance of connection to Russia.

The real crime that is unquestionably happening is the leak of classified information. All for a political reason. The media is all in a constant buzz at the "drip, drip," but has nothing to say about its illegality, nor its potential danger to the nation's security. All this fabricated hornets nest of "bad optics," of the lightweight threat of Russian influence (which has been going on for a long time but only since Trump won did it seem to matter) deflects from the real and dangerous power and influence of the so-called "shadow government." This unprecedented use of our own deep state to try to bring down a government should frighten us more than Trump's bumble mouth.

[wdmso]

Clinton I did not have sexual relations with that woman. Lie (he thought a BJ wasnt sex its was just a BJ) but he did lie


Sessions : “I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.”
some how not a lie and here we go again with others telling us what he really ment to say or that he answered honestly


what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign.


The question was easy "communicated with the Russian government"
session willfully dodged and gave a false answer ... If he told the truth
franken would of followed up and sessions would have stated what he now is saying 3 days later


but again another shoe drops disclosures that he met with the Russian ambassador during the convention using campaign money and later in his Senate office in Washington.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Clinton I did not have sexual relations with that woman. Lie (he thought a BJ wasnt sex its was just a BJ) but he did lie

If he truly thought that a BJ was not sex, then he did not lie. Perhaps, as Clinton did not know what sex is, you do not know what a lie is.

Sessions : “I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.”

You left out the context of "those activities." Sessions claims he "did not have communications with the Russians" within the context of the activities under examination, which was Russia interfering with the election in favor of Trump. I do realize, however, that if it is difficult for you to grasp that saying something you believe to be true, but which is not true, is not a lie, you may have even more difficulty understanding that statements stripped of context can be worse than meaningless, they can be used to say that a statement is as lie when it isn't.

some how not a lie and here we go again with others telling us what he really ment to say

Sessions told us what he meant to say. I think that he would be the one to know that better than anybody else. And what he said was a specific response to a contextual question. Spence would understand this. Again, you may have trouble with that.

or that he answered honestly what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign.


The question was easy "communicated with the Russian government"
session willfully dodged and gave a false answer ... If he told the truth
franken would of followed up and sessions would have stated what he now is saying 3 days later

If, in your scenario, Sessions answered Franken's follow up with what he is now saying, then what he is now saying clarifies that what he said in the first place is true. But, again, I understand that you have a hard time understanding that.

but again another shoe drops disclosures that he met with the Russian ambassador during the convention using campaign money and later in his Senate office in Washington.

The previous shoe didn't "drop." It was thrown at Sessions. And thrown back. As far as this current shoe being thrown, we'll see if it hits the mark. There sure are a lot of shoes flying at Trump and his team. And there sure seems to be a frenzied assistance by the media to keep them flying toward their target.

[PaulS]

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

[Got Stripers]

Trump of course being Trump started a fire across the street to deflect the continued interest in the Russian involvement and as usual he is blaming Obama for the supposed wire tap.