Sessions did not disclose two Russian envoy meetings

[DC Tom]

I'll tell you what's funny. Here at PPP the more Conservative members seem to want to talk about the more Liberal members, while the Libs actually want to talk about politics and such.

[This is an automated response.]

 

 

Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.61.

[Tiberius]

[This is an automated response.]

 

 

Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.61.

See!

[B-Man]

Did Sessions Commit Perjury? Let’s Talk It Out. (It doesn't matter, it's about delegitimizing him and Trump)

 

FTA:

But what about the exchange with Franken? This was what really seemed to seize the imaginations of Twitter this morning, where cries of “perjury” were flying left and right. Well, OK, mostly left, actually. I don’t think, however, that those charges are going to stick.

Franken offered a lengthy preamble suggesting that the Trump campaign had been exchanging information with the Russians, then asked him what he’d do if there was information that someone in the Trump campaign had communicated with the Russians. In the time-honored tradition of congressional hearings, Sessions said he hadn’t had any such communications, had no knowledge of such communications, and therefore wouldn’t speculate about the hypothetical.

If you read the latter part of this exchange extremely strictly, chopping off the preamble, then you can argue that Sessions was technically untruthful. The problem is that this is not how verbal communication works. The left is attempting to hold the attorney general to a standard of precision that is appropriate for written communication, where we can reflect on preceding context and choose exactly the right word.

Demanding extreme clarity from an oral exchange is unreasonable. Moreover, everyone understands that this is unreasonable — except, possibly, for the chattering classes, who spend their lives so thoroughly marinated in the written word that they come to think that the two spheres are supposed to be identical

 

.

 

Well, also the chattering classes hate Trump and Sessions. Now if you want to judge Sessions the way the chattering classes judged Obama, Eric Holder, and Loretta Lynch . . . .

[DC Tom]

See!

[This is an automated response.]

 

Shut up, you dumb !@#$ing monkey.

 

Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.61.

[grinreaper]

I'll tell you what's funny. Here at PPP the more Conservative members seem to want to talk about the more Liberal members, while the Libs actually want to talk about politics and such.

No, you are a little puppet who only spouts off what you are instructed to say by your masters. You insert your dumbshittery here, waste people's time and disrupt discussion. You are a pox on this forum.

[Tiberius]

No, you are a little puppet who only spouts off what you are instructed to say by your masters. You insert your dumbshittery here, waste people's time and disrupt discussion. You are a pox on this forum.

[Meathead]

pretty naive to think any foreign entity would actually have to modify voting machines to swing an election

 

hillarys biggest reason for losing was the deplorables comment. that was her 47% moment and it drove the disaffected sea of white seething to the polls

 

still, the timing of the release of emails showing hillarys team cheating bernie with the dnc clearly had enough affect after that to itself theoretically swing those razor thin swing states. whether it did or not is completely open to conjecture but i could certainly see it being the deciding factor and margin for victory

 

and note that im very glad those emails came out, she cheated and deserved to lose. i wish we could always catch our politicians cheating like that, im sure it happens often. as does the hacking. THIS time it could easily be viewed as an orchestrated release of information, to do exactly what it did. so point A is she cheated and got slammed for it, good. point B is the russians clearly at least helped if not outright swung the election away from the super-qualified female who hates them to the incompetent stooge who can be manipulated

 

seriously, nice job russia. not cool. but nice job

 

now we have to try to struggle through this disaster and eventually recover to kick russias ass for it. diplomatically/economically, of course

Edited March 3, 2017 by Meathead

[TakeYouToTasker]

pretty naive to think any foreign entity would actually have to modify voting machines to swing an election

 

hillarys biggest reason for losing was the deplorables comment. that was her 47% moment and it drove the disaffected sea of white seething to the polls

 

still, the timing of the release of emails showing hillarys team cheating bernie with the dnc clearly had enough affect after that to itself theoretically swing those razor thin swing states. whether it did or not is completely open to conjecture but i could certainly see it being the deciding factor and margin for victory

 

and note that im very glad those emails came out, she cheated and deserved to lose. i wish we could always catch our politicians cheating like that, im sure it happens often. as does the hacking. THIS time it could easily be viewed as an orchestrated release of information, to do exactly what it did. so point A is she cheated and got slammed for it, good. point B is the russians clearly at least helped if not outright swung the election away from the super-qualified female who hates them to the incompetent stooge who can be manipulated

 

seriously, nice job russia. not cool. but nice job

 

now we have to try to struggle through this disaster and eventually recover to kick russias ass for it. diplomatically/economically, of course

There has never been any proof offered that the DNC's email was hacked, much less that it was hacked by the Russians.

 

Wikileaks has stated, through to different sources, that they did not receive the emails from the Russians.

 

The DNC wasn't hacked, it was leaked by a high level DNC staffer who was fed up with the corruption, and was then assassinated.

[Tiberius]

There has never been any proof offered that the DNC's email was hacked, much less that it was hacked by the Russians.

 

Wikileaks has stated, through to different sources, that they did not receive the emails from the Russians.

 

The DNC wasn't hacked, it was leaked by a high level DNC staffer who was fed up with the corruption, and was then assassinated.

Love it!!!

[richstadiumowner]

Meathead Quote "the russians clearly at least helped if not outright swung the election"

 

We'll just have to take your word for it, right.

 

John Podesta's email was phished (his password was "password") a child could have exposed his email and he's a Dem. big brain and corrupt as hell.

 

So John Podesta, Project Veritas, Anthony Weiner and Clinton employee Doug Band are the ones who may have "swung" the election if you want to think the entire election pivoted or swung on the overwhelming corruption exposed in the Democrat party.

 

There's is exactly ZERO proof of any Russian involvement of any kind, or you would have presented it.

 

Edited March 3, 2017 by richstadiumowner

[Bob in Mich]

So, why do you think the Russians put any effort or money into our elections?

[Azalin]

So, why do you think the Russians put any effort or money into our elections?

 

What, did they contribute the the CGI too?

[The Big Cat]

There has never been any proof offered that the DNC's email was hacked, much less that it was hacked by the Russians.

 

Wikileaks has stated, through to different sources, that they did not receive the emails from the Russians.

 

The DNC wasn't hacked, it was leaked by a high level DNC staffer who was fed up with the corruption, and was then assassinated.

 

Holy ****. I didn't think the PPP !@#$ery could be illustrated so succinctly. I'm moderately impressed.

[keepthefaith]

Then you should have nothing to fear about the independent council looking into things

You're right, I don't fear that at all. Nobody in their right mind (or left mind) would think an independent prosecutor is appropriate without evidence. As far as I know, nobody in the media, intelligence or congress has presented a shred of evidence of collusion between any American and the Russians in the exposure of John Podesta's email. If further investigations find evidence, then it should be explored.

 

What, did they contribute the the CGI too?

Indirectly yes. Remember the Uranium deal where the dude that brokered the deal made a big fat contribution?

[Azalin]

 

Indirectly yes. Remember the Uranium deal where the dude that brokered the deal made a big fat contribution?

 

 

Hah! I was just being a wise-ass.

[Tiberius]

You're right, I don't fear that at all. Nobody in their right mind (or left mind) would think an independent prosecutor is appropriate without evidence. As far as I know, nobody in the media, intelligence or congress has presented a shred of evidence of collusion between any American and the Russians in the exposure of John Podesta's email. If further investigations find evidence, then it should be explored.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-putin-no-relationship-226282

 

How about this????

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

Holy ****. I didn't think the PPP !@#$ery could be illustrated so succinctly. I'm moderately impressed.

I'll ask you four questions:

 

- What evidence has been provided that the Russians supplied Wikileaks with the DNC emails?

 

- What reason(s) do you have for not believing Wikileaks account of their obtaining the information in question?

 

- What has the Intelligence Community, whose primary job it is to disseminate disinformation (lie), and overthrow democratically elected governments, done to earn your trust?

 

- Why was the murder of a DNC staffer quickly swept under the rug as a robbery when nothing was missing from the corpse?

[richstadiumowner]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-putin-no-relationship-226282

 

How about this????

 

Nope!

Fail.

[The Big Cat]

I'll ask you four questions:

 

- What evidence has been provided that the Russians supplied Wikileaks with the DNC emails?

 

- What reason(s) do you have for not believing Wikileaks account of their obtaining the information in question?

 

- What has the Intelligence Community, whose primary job it is to disseminate disinformation (lie), and overthrow democratically elected governments, done to earn your trust?

 

- Why was the murder of a DNC staffer quickly swept under the rug as a robbery when nothing was missing from the corpse?

 

1.) why are you asking me the first three questions as if i'm one of your barking seal whipping boys?

 

but more importantly:

 

2.) why is it so predictable that the local devotees can't/won't see the hypocrisy of consistently failing to apply the level of intellectually honest cynicism present in your first three bullets to the partisan hack buffoonery present in the fourth?

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

1.) why are you asking me the first three questions as if i'm one of your barking seal whipping boys?

 

but more importantly:

 

2.) why is it so predictable that the local devotees can't/won't see the hypocrisy of consistently failing to apply the level of intellectually honest cynicism present in your first three bullets to the partisan hack buffoonery present in the fourth?

1) I'm asking you because you responded to my post.

 

2) I presented fact. Seth Rich was murdered in what was described as a robbery, though nothing was removed from his body. Wikileaks has said that Rich was the individual who provided them with the emails.