Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disclose

Page 15 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Here's a handy guide

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...n-team-trump-and-russia/ar-AAnL8kM?li=BBnb7Kz

Aren't you at least a little bit concerned with Russian hackers screwing with the election, lets think about next election what happens if they screw around again or is it better that all Politicians end up being extra nice to Russia so they don't end up at the wrong end of a shit storm.
A handy guide for what...developing tin-foil hat conspiracy theories?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,615
17,191
136
Your sarcasm meter is tuned to "Progressive". There is very, very little "rational adult discourse" in this thread. It's a cornucopia of posts from people that think like teenagers being manipulated by the media. My post is as relevant to this situation as the rest of them which is to say it's not.

Adult discourse my ass. Leftists running around with their hair on fire screaming Russian this and Russian that isn't even remotely related to sanity in any degree.

I can't put into words how totally ignorant every one of you sounds. You should be ashamed of yourselves and would be if you had any degree of self consciousness instead of the huge degree of arrogance that rules your every thought and action.

Oh, and thanks for the compliment!

You are projecting... Again
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,594
136
You actually want an investigation of Trump based on zero evidence? Sounds like a Spanish Inquisition to me.

So to be clear you think despite the fact that:

1) Two of his closest surrogates lied to federal authorities about contacts with Russia during and after a campaign where Russia explicitly attempted to aid in Trump's election.
2) When Trump was informed that his National Security Adviser had been potentially compromised by that same hostile foreign power he did nothing for weeks and still let him sit in on extremely sensitive national security matters.

All that adds up to 'zero evidence' that Trump could have been involved in this somehow or that those individuals were working to cover something up for Trump? Are you joking? That more than meets the plausible standard for investigating Trump's involvement and any objective and rational person would agree.
 

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
9,511
5,737
136
Holy shit, Chuck Schumer has been working for the Russians since at least 2003! The following link has photographic proof of this. The first picture shows Schumer smiling broadly no doubt after getting his payout for subterfuge and espionage. In the second picture we see Schumer making a "code signal" to Putin.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/03/flashback-chuck-schumer-meets-vlad-putin-new-york-city/

An investigation must be launched! Who's next in line when Schumer ends up behind bars?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-one-schumerputin-pic/?utm_term=.c2f4af8e9933
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
There is enough smoke arguably more smoke than Benghazi
You're certainly entitled to your opinion. And I would actually would like to see an investigation as well...in order to give you irrefutable proof that your tin-foil hat conspiracy theories are insane. That said, I doubt it will phase you one iota and you'll find some other contrived outrage(s) to whip yourselves into a frenzy over. It's really quite pathetic.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,594
136
Your sarcasm meter is tuned to "Progressive". There is very, very little "rational adult discourse" in this thread. It's a cornucopia of posts from people that think like teenagers being manipulated by the media. My post is as relevant to this situation as the rest of them which is to say it's not.

Adult discourse my ass. Leftists running around with their hair on fire screaming Russian this and Russian that isn't even remotely related to sanity in any degree.

I can't put into words how totally ignorant every one of you sounds. You should be ashamed of yourselves and would be if you had any degree of self consciousness instead of the huge degree of arrogance that rules your every thought and action.

Oh, and thanks for the compliment!

It's funny that you originally tried to say this:

Sessions was asked about “possible contacts between members of President Trump’s campaign and representatives of Moscow.” and he answered truthfully. If Dems are butt hurt because in hindsight they feel they should have asked a different question then maybe they can start a committee to look into rolling back time so that past mistakes could be corrected.

That's clearly false as the Congressional record obviously shows that Sessions answered Franken's question falsely. What it is though is basically a word for word recital of the narrative that right wing media about the issue. It's frankly hilarious that you think other people are being manipulated by the media when you're parroting right wing media falsehoods without even knowing it. Your own quote applies to you so incredibly hard it's amazing:

I can't put into words how totally ignorant every one of you sounds. You should be ashamed of yourselves and would be if you had any degree of self consciousness instead of the huge degree of arrogance that rules your every thought and action.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,594
136
Holy shit, Chuck Schumer has been working for the Russians since at least 2003! The following link has photographic proof of this. The first picture shows Schumer smiling broadly no doubt after getting his payout for subterfuge and espionage. In the second picture we see Schumer making a "code signal" to Putin.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/03/flashback-chuck-schumer-meets-vlad-putin-new-york-city/

An investigation must be launched! Who's next in line when Schumer ends up behind bars?

Conservatives probably should have been smarter than to try and push this issue as Schumer just owned them:

Screen-Shot-2017-03-03-at-4.12.00-PM.png


Anyone want to bet that Trump and his cabinet members would run away screaming from this invitation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ch33zw1z

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,615
17,191
136
You're certainly entitled to your opinion. And I would actually would like to see an investigation as well...in order to give you irrefutable proof that your tin-foil hat conspiracy theories are insane. That said, I doubt it will phase you one iota and you'll find some other contrived outrage(s) to whip yourselves into a frenzy over. It's really quite pathetic.

Kind of like how we had multiple Benghazi investigations that found no wrong doing or illegal/corrupt activity by the state department and yet you bring it up all the time?

Pathetic indeed.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
It's interesting how well Repubs can direct the narrative away from the central issue. It's not about an investigation, a recusal, a special prosecutor, contact with the Russians, or even the question posed by Franken. It's about this statement by Sessions-

I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.

" I did not have communications with the Russians." is an outright lie from our chief law enforcement officer in sworn testimony before Congress.

The man isn't worthy of the Office.
 
Last edited:

agent00f

Lifer
Jun 9, 2016
12,203
1,243
86
Your sarcasm meter is tuned to "Progressive". There is very, very little "rational adult discourse" in this thread. It's a cornucopia of posts from people that think like teenagers being manipulated by the media. My post is as relevant to this situation as the rest of them which is to say it's not.

Adult discourse my ass. Leftists running around with their hair on fire screaming Russian this and Russian that isn't even remotely related to sanity in any degree.

I can't put into words how totally ignorant every one of you sounds. You should be ashamed of yourselves and would be if you had any degree of self consciousness instead of the huge degree of arrogance that rules your every thought and action.

Oh, and thanks for the compliment!

You seem under the impression that you possess any sort of intellect. Is there some post that you can point to which illustrates this? Like one which contained some of sort of non-trivial reasoning or knowledge. That would go a long way to make a convincing case that you're not just a typical blustering moron evident from every post.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,594
136
It's interesting how well Repubs can direct the narrative away from the central issue. It's not about an investigation, a recusal, a special prosecutor, contact with the Russians, or even the question posed by Franken. It's about this statement by Sessions-

" I did not have communications with the Russians." is an outright lie from our chief law enforcement officer in sworn testimony before Congress.

The man isn't worthy of the Office.

The blizzard of deflections indicates conservatives feel genuinely threatened here.

I have to say that while I'm sure I wouldn't like any AG Trump would appoint Sessions is an entirely new level of shitty. I mean he was previously denied a spot on the federal bench for his extreme racism. It would be great for America if we could show him the door.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
The blizzard of deflections indicates conservatives feel genuinely threatened here.

I have to say that while I'm sure I wouldn't like any AG Trump would appoint Sessions is an entirely new level of shitty. I mean he was previously denied a spot on the federal bench for his extreme racism. It would be great for America if we could show him the door.

Forget the side trips. Our chief law enforcement officer blatantly lied in sworn testimony to Congress, likely in a felonious fashion.

That makes him unfit to serve. Only the most partisan fools can defend that.

Throw the bum out.
 

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
6,365
1,223
126
It's interesting how well Repubs can direct the narrative away from the central issue. It's not about an investigation, a recusal, a special prosecutor, contact with the Russians, or even the question posed by Franken. It's about this statement by Sessions-



" I did not have communications with the Russians." is an outright lie from our chief law enforcement officer in sworn testimony before Congress.

The man isn't worthy of the Office.

You know this is a gross misrepresentation of what Franken was asking him. It was about supposed contact from Trump's campaign with the Russians which is from the pissgate dossier. So Sessions answering, as a surrogate, he didn't have contact. As a US senator, which Franken was NOT asking about, he did.

Good thing Nancy Pelosi has never meet with Krislyak or she might get investigated. I'm sure if she did that she would not deny it.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,594
136
You know this is a gross misrepresentation of what Franken was asking him. It was about supposed contact from Trump's campaign with the Russians which is from the pissgate dossier. So Sessions answering, as a surrogate, he didn't have contact. As a US senator, which Franken was NOT asking about, he did.

Good thing Nancy Pelosi has never meet with Krislyak or she might get investigated. I'm sure if she did that she would not deny it.

Nope, what you're doing is a gross misrepresentation. What he said is absolutely clear. You're making up context that doesn't exist and you're parroting the right wing media narrative.

You should be ashamed of yourself.
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,112
930
126
Forget the side trips. Our chief law enforcement officer blatantly lied in sworn testimony to Congress, likely in a felonious fashion.

That makes him unfit to serve. Only the most partisan fools can defend that.

Throw the bum out.

That's some nice spin you have going on there, buddy. I've reviewed the question and answer and the question was not specific enough for his answer to be perjury. Sessions isn't going anywhere. As chairman of the armed services committee, it was his job to meet with ambassadors, which he did while he was still a senator....just as Democrats like Pelosi and countless others have done. They've pretty much all communicated with Russians. This amounts to nothing more than Democrats looking to trip him on a testimonial discrepancy that could happen easily to anyone else. I believe he answered the question, as he understood it, honestly. You are free to disagree, but that's my take, after carefully looking at all the information and trying to be objective. What I see is some still angry Democrats, trying to lynch every Republican they can find even a crumb on, because they refuse to even try and be objective. It's a war and a strong desire, on their part, for this administration to fail, even if they have to try and force it to happen.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
Lügenpost (oh my yes)

That's some nice spin you have going on there, buddy. I've reviewed the question and answer and the question was not specific enough for his answer to be perjury. Sessions isn't going anywhere. As chairman of the armed services committee, it was his job to meet with ambassadors, which he did while he was still a senator....just as Democrats like Pelosi and countless others have done. They've pretty much all communicated with Russians. This amounts to nothing more than Democrats looking to trip him on a testimonial discrepancy that could happen easily to anyone else. I believe he answered the question, as he understood it, honestly. You are free to disagree, but that's my take, after carefully looking at all the information and trying to be objective. What I see is some still angry Democrats, trying to lynch every Republican they can find even a crumb on, because they refuse to even try and be objective. It's a war and a strong desire, on their part, for this administration to fail, even if they have to try and force it to happen.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
Lügenpost (don't trip over your nose)

You know this is a gross misrepresentation of what Franken was asking him. It was about supposed contact from Trump's campaign with the Russians which is from the pissgate dossier. So Sessions answering, as a surrogate, he didn't have contact. As a US senator, which Franken was NOT asking about, he did.

Good thing Nancy Pelosi has never meet with Krislyak or she might get investigated. I'm sure if she did that she would not deny it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MongGrel

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,594
136
That's some nice spin you have going on there, buddy. I've reviewed the question and answer and the question was not specific enough for his answer to be perjury. Sessions isn't going anywhere. As chairman of the armed services committee, it was his job to meet with ambassadors, which he did while he was still a senator....just as Democrats like Pelosi and countless others have done. They've pretty much all communicated with Russians. This amounts to nothing more than Democrats looking to trip him on a testimonial discrepancy that could happen easily to anyone else. I believe he answered the question, as he understood it, honestly. You are free to disagree, but that's my take, after carefully looking at all the information and trying to be objective. What I see is some still angry Democrats, trying to lynch every Republican they can find even a crumb on, because they refuse to even try and be objective. It's a war and a strong desire, on their part, for this administration to fail, even if they have to try and force it to happen.

Yeah when he said under oath he didn't talk to the Russians it didn't really MEAN he didn't talk to the Russians.

You guys never get to make fun of Bill Clinton trying to redefine 'is' ever again. And Jesus. It's only been a month and a half. The corruption here is just off the charts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MongGrel