Attorney General casually perjures himself

[homersapien 11,385]

4 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Unless I'm wrong there is still an ongoing FBI inverstgation involving Hillary's e-mail issues. Why not expand that to cover the whole broad issue of Russian hacking, official's contact with Russians, and any discussions about the election/campaign?

Because the current leadership of the FBI cannot be trusted in such an investigation.

A special prosecutor needs to be assigned.

[TitanTiger 20,498]

5 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Unless I'm wrong there is still an ongoing FBI inverstgation involving Hillary's e-mail issues. Why not expand that to cover the whole broad issue of Russian hacking, official's contact with Russians, and any discussions about the election/campaign?

Ok fine.  Include her servers in the investigation.  Whatever.  So are we now good with moving forward here or is there some other side trail we can get on?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

And while we are at it, let's expand the investigation to include the lies of the IRS officials to Congress and Clapper's liying under oath to Congress? Let's punish all the guilty ones like we did Gen Petraeus.

[TitanTiger 20,498]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

And while we are at it, let's expand the investigation to include the lies of the IRS officials to Congress and Clapper's liying unser oat to Congress?

Sure.  Maybe they can also review the Zapruder film while they're at it.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Sure.  Maybe they can also review the Zapruder film while they're at it.

Suits me. Let's also include all the Hollywood types who lied about leaving the country if Trump was elected

[AUDub 11,153]

Press conference at 4 Eastern (a few minutes). Does he resign?

Recusing himself.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

NO!!! He recuses himself from any investigation re.contact with the Russians.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Add Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) to the investigation. In here rush to demand that Sessions resign sshe denied ever meeting with the Russian ambassador. A picture was promptly produced of her and the ambassador .......in her Senate office.

[AUDub 11,153]

4 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

NO!!! He recuses himself from any investigation re.contact with the Russians.

Why are we yelling? 

[AUDub 11,153]

1 minute ago, Proud Tiger said:

Add Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) to the investigation. In here rush to demand that Sessions resign sshe denied ever meeting with the Russian ambassador. A picture was promptly produced of her and the ambassador .......in her Senate office.

Did she lie under oath? 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

2 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

Did she lie under oath? 

No but she was very emphatic to a reporter she had never met with the ambassador anytime, anywhere for any reason. So you give here a pass? Did she discuss the campaign with him?

 

[AUDub 11,153]

10 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

No but she was very emphatic to a reporter she had never met with the ambassador anytime, anywhere for any reason. So you give here a pass? Did she discuss the campaign with him?

She's a liar but what she did isn't a crime, Proud.

You do yourself a disservice with all of the deflecting.

[Strychnine 1,802]

49 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

Press conference at 4 Eastern (a few minutes). Does he resign?

Recusing himself.

 

I wanted him to resign the instant he was nominated, but that is my bias against private prison supporters showing.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

28 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

She's a liar but what she did isn't a crime, Proud.

You do yourself a disservice with all of the deflecting.

I understand the difference in jusy lying and perjury. But a liar shouldn't rush to criticize someone th think is a liar no matter what. Let's get Loretta Lynch under oath and ask if she discussed the Hillary FBI investigation while on her plane with Bill.

Fortunately you didn't get elected to judge my "disservice." What am i deflecting.

 

[AUDub 11,153]

11 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

I understand the difference in jusy lying and perjury. But a liar shouldn't rush to criticize someone th think is a liar no matter what. Let's get Loretta Lynch under oath and ask if she discussed the Hillary FBI investigation while on her plane with Bill.

Fortunately you didn't get elected to judge my "disservice." What am i deflecting.

You're only invoking McCaskill, Lynch and Clinton so you don't have to discuss the actual issue here. It's the meekest form of deflection.

[WDavE 332]

4 hours ago, homersapien said:

Because the current leadership of the FBI cannot be trusted in such an investigation.

A special prosecutor needs to be assigned.

I say we name the same one that Hillary had to testify about her documents and servers.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

56 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

You're only invoking McCaskill, Lynch and Clinton so you don't have to discuss the actual issue here. It's the meekest form of deflection.

You are entitled to your opinion even if doesn't please you to point out the lie of a Democratic Senator which is directly related to the issue. I would also note that Sessions didn't necessarily commit perjury. Perjury requires intent. Remember what Comey said at he end of his first investigation of Hillary's e-mail mess.....he didn't think intent was there. None other than liberal Sen. Feinstein just said on TV that she wouldn't go so far as to say Sessions committed perjury. I would also note that Session's comment was a voluntary one in response to a comment, not a question, by Sen, Franken.

FYI.......Sessions will be a guest Tucker Carlson of FOX News tonight at 8pm CST.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

7 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

That wasn't the question he was asked and it wasn't the response he gave.  

Here's Franken's question, which was very specific about Trump's campaign and surrogates:

 

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

 FRANKEN: CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week, that included information that “Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say “there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.” Again, I’m telling you this as it’s coming out, so, you know.

But if it’s true, it’s obviously extremely serious, and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?

I don't see a perjury charge sticking. You can say Sessions wasn't forthcoming and should have said he did meet with the Russian ambassador last year in his capacity of Chairman of the Armed Services Committee but Franken's question wasn't all encompassing about communicating with Russia.

Sessions answer was specific to what Franken specifically asked, which was the Trump surrogates and campaign officials communicating with Russia during the campaign. 

[AUbritt 611]

I actually think Lindsey Graham has this pretty much right.

He thinks Sessions didn't perjure himself, but that he should recuse himself from any investigation of Russian ties to the administration. He believes Sessions met with the Russian ambassador, but as a member of Congress and not as a representative of the Trump campaign. So, he buys the claim that Sessions didn't discuss Trump with the Russians. He does think, though, that Sessions should recuse himself from any Russian investigations, since now he clearly is associated with Trump.

He also thinks it's clear that Russia interfered with our election (though that the result of the election is legit), that a full investigation needs to take place, and that we need to punish Russia hard for their interference.

I'm not a Sessions fan at all; but I do think this is a reasonable take on the matter. 

[TexasTiger 12,947]

8 minutes ago, AUbritt said:

I actually think Lindsey Graham has this pretty much right.

He thinks Sessions didn't perjure himself, but that he should recuse himself from any investigation of Russian ties to the administration. He believes Sessions met with the Russian ambassador, but as a member of Congress and not as a representative of the Trump campaign. So, he buys the claim that Sessions didn't discuss Trump with the Russians. He does think, though, that Sessions should recuse himself from any Russian investigations, since now he clearly is associated with Trump.

He also thinks it's clear that Russia interfered with our election (though that the result of the election is legit), that a full investigation needs to take place, and that we need to punish Russia hard for their interference.

I'm not a Sessions fan at all; but I do think this is a reasonable take on the matter. 

The first time he was at a political convention and he paid for that trip with political funds. After the Ambassador met with Sessions and others in the Trump campaign, the Republican platform dramatically changed regarding Ukraine.

[AUbritt 611]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

The first time he was at a political convention and he paid for that trip with political funds. After the Ambassador met with Sessions and others in the Trump campaign, the Republican platform dramatically changed regarding Ukraine.

Look, I think there's a lot of smoke as far as Russia and Trump go, don't get me wrong. But I don't think Sessions is dumb enough to lie about public meetings. I buy the claim that he meant 'I didn't have any contact with the Russians about Trump'. At least, I buy it enough to think that calling for his resignation at this point is an overreaction to his testimony. 

[TexasTiger 12,947]

5 minutes ago, AUbritt said:

Look, I think there's a lot of smoke as far as Russia and Trump go, don't get me wrong. But I don't think Sessions is dumb enough to lie about public meetings. I buy the claim that he meant 'I didn't have any contact with the Russians about Trump'. At least, I buy it enough to think that calling for his resignation at this point is an overreaction to his testimony. 

I'm not calling for his resignation but they have brought the scrutiny and suspicion on themselves.

[AUbritt 611]

Just now, TexasTiger said:

I'm not calling for his resignation but they have brought the scrutiny and suspicion on themselves.

I don't disagree with that. 

[AUDub 11,153]

5 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

You are entitled to your opinion even if doesn't please you to point out the lie of a Democratic Senator which is directly related to the issue.

It's really that I just don't care to indulge your deflections.

5 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

I would also note that Sessions didn't necessarily commit perjury. Perjury requires intent. Remember what Comey said at he end of his first investigation of Hillary's e-mail mess.....he didn't think intent was there. None other than liberal Sen. Feinstein just said on TV that she wouldn't go so far as to say Sessions committed perjury. I would also note that Session's comment was a voluntary one in response to a comment, not a question, by Sen, Franken.

I'm well aware of the standard for perjury, thank you very much. 

Read this article, if you don't mind. Good insight for you. Several legal experts give their take.

 

[TexasTiger 12,947]

It's funny how most Republicans think every deception from a Democrat is perjury, but even blatant Republican lies aren't lies. I'm not sure what Session  is hiding, but his response to the question was odd. He wasn't asked about his contact and yet he went out of his way to deny any contact. Still, I doubt it is perjury. Perjury is more than just lying, regardless of your party.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/03/02/could-sessions-face-perjury-charges-former-federal-prosecutors-think-not/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_sessionsreax-desktop-tab%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.71b8f79eb305