Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on June 12, 2017, 11:33:36 PM
-
Trump is considering firing special counsel Mueller, friend says
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/13/trump-is-considering-firing-special-counsel-mueller-friend-says.html
He should be fired
-
God Bless Robert Mueller.
-
God Bless Robert Mueller.
Why? Because he's best friends with Comey and a sure witch hunt
-
Trump and his associates have done nothing at all illegal or even remotely unethical and so the total and complete vindication that the Donald has already proclaimed surely will be confirmed in spades by the Mueller investigation.
-
Why? Because he's best friends with Comey and a sure witch hunt
You'd never see a friend or relative working in Trump's administration :D
-
it's clear as the day is long that "there's no there there" and so how sweet it'll be when the truth sets the Trump team free.
-
They should have never appointed a special prosecutor, but it would be mistake for Trump to fire Mueller. He shouldn't create the impression that he's trying to cover something up, when there is zero evidence that he broke the law. This thing will drag on for a while, but he'll be better served by waiting for the outcome.
-
They should have never appointed a special prosecutor, but it would be mistake for Trump to fire Mueller. He shouldn't create the impression that he's trying to cover something up, when there is zero evidence that he broke the law. This thing will drag on for a while, but he'll be better served by waiting for the outcome.
Indeed. Even though Mueller's association with Comey could be an issue, removing him now will certainly create the appearance of a cover up. They should let the investigation unfold and hopefully it will be conducted thoroughly and impartially.
-
They should have never appointed a special prosecutor, but it would be mistake for Trump to fire Mueller. He shouldn't create the impression that he's trying to cover something up, when there is zero evidence that he broke the law. This thing will drag on for a while, but he'll be better served by waiting for the outcome.
I agree.
They asked deputy AG Rosenstein about this and he said he'd the only one with the power to do this.
He then said he no plans to fire Mueller.
-
Indeed. Even though Mueller's association with Comey could be an issue, removing him now will certainly create the appearance of a cover up. They should let the investigation unfold and hopefully it will be conducted thoroughly and impartially.
One thing you can take to the bank: after the investigation shows there is no evidence that Trump conspired with the Russian government to get elected president so he could become a Russian puppet, Democrats will still be talking about this loony through conspiracy theory through the 2018 elections.
-
I almost want to see him do it because the Left would go full on Def Con 1 in response.
And the thing is he still might.
Talk about drawing heat, this guy is like The 1983 Fabulous Freebirds, Georgeous George and Memphis Territory Andy Kaufman all wrapped up into one.
-
One thing you can take to the bank: after the investigation shows there is no evidence that Trump conspired with the Russian government to get elected president so he could become a Russian puppet, Democrats will still be talking about this loony through conspiracy theory through the 2018 elections.
I'm going to refrain from making any Russian investigation thread posts UNTIL
we all know a lot more information. I think it looks bad for
Flynn, Kushner, etc and who knows about Trump himself.
BUT, I'm waiting for more evidence to come in before I decide.
I'll try to make serious comments on other topics as they come up.
-
I almost want to see him do it because the Left would go full on Def Con 1 in response.
And the thing is he still might.
Talk about drawing heat, this guy is like The 1983 Fabulous Freebirds, Georgeous George and Memphis Territory Andy Kaufman all wrapped up into one.
Certainly cannot question his willingness to step outside the box.
-
I'm going to refrain from making any Russian investigation thread posts UNTIL
we all know a lot more information. I think it looks bad for
Flynn, Kushner, etc and who knows about Trump himself.
BUT, I'm waiting for more evidence to come in before I decide.
I'll try to make serious comments on other topics as they come up.
"More evidence"? ::) How about any evidence? You cannot even articulate this stupid theory or how Russia "hacked our election."
-
One thing you can take to the bank: after the investigation shows there is no evidence that Trump conspired with the Russian government to get elected president so he could become a Russian puppet, Democrats will still be talking about this loony through conspiracy theory through the 2018 elections.
Are you an intelligens officer Dos E?
How can you know for a FACT that there is no connection between Trump and Russia?
If Trump was a liberal you would be all over this story, no?
-
quit reading after fox news
-
Trumptard in Chief has only himself to blame
If had never fired Comey he wouldn't be dealing with a special prosecutor.
-
"More evidence"? ::) How about any evidence? You cannot even articulate this stupid theory or how Russia "hacked our election."
Yup, I'm doing the prudent thing and reserving final judgement UNTIL
the investigation is done.
-
Are you an intelligens officer Dos E?
How can you know for a FACT that there is no connection between Trump and Russia?
If Trump was a liberal you would be all over this story, no?
I know for a FACT there is zero evidence of Trump conspiring with the Russian government to get elected president so he could become a Russian puppet.
I actually think this asinine conspiracy theory is worse than that birther crap, because the entire Democrat party has embraced this lunacy.
-
Yup, I'm doing the prudent thing and reserving final judgement UNTIL
the investigation is done.
::)
-
I know for a FACT there is zero evidence of Trump conspiring with the Russian government to get elected president so he could become a Russian puppet.
How do you know this fact? Do you expect us to take you at your word? If it turns out your "facts" are wrong, will you kill yourself?
-
How do you know this fact? Do you expect us to take you at your word? If it turns out your "facts" are wrong, will you kill yourself?
The same reason I know for fact that there is zero evidence you are currently an NFL QB.
Why would I kill myself over something said on a message board? ::)
And my facts are just that: facts. There is zero evidence supporting this stupid conspiracy theory.
-
The same reason I know for fact that there is zero evidence you are currently an NFL QB.
Why would I kill myself over something said on a message board? ::)
And my facts are just that: facts. There is zero evidence supporting this stupid conspiracy theory.
Your analogy is very odd.
Because you seem so impassioned by all this. ;)
As you or anyone else knows unless they are privy to some inside information....if there is any.
-
Your analogy is very odd.
Because you seem so impassioned by all this. ;)
As you or anyone else knows unless they are privy to some inside information....if there is any.
Your contention that I could be wrong about the complete absence of evidence is . . . predictable.
Impassioned? lol. Talk about misusing words.
I'm not privy to inside information. What I know is I have seen absolutely nothing supporting this stupid theory. And what is truly disturbing is some ordinarily smart people are embracing this crap, because they are so partisan. I spent 2.5 hours over the past couple days watching Jeff Sessions' testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. I am embarrassed to have some of those guys serving in the Senate.
-
I know for a FACT there is zero evidence of Trump conspiring with the Russian government to get elected president so he could become a Russian puppet.
I actually think this asinine conspiracy theory is worse than that birther crap, because the entire Democrat party has embraced this lunacy.
And large swaths of the Republican party,too. ::)
Count me in as another who'd like to know how you know this for a fact? ::) Are you basing this on your "talent" for reading minds and predicting the future that you've exhibited in so many previous posts?
FWIW, the conspiracy theory that so many dems and republicans have bought into is more nuanced than that, but what we do know for a fact is that Russia aggressively tampered with the election, Michael Flynn lied about communications with Russia (for curiously unexplained reasons) and is now under criminal investigation and WaPo is reporting that Trump is now under investigation for obstruction of justice in regards to firing Comey. You should get in touch with some of trump's croneys and reassure them that there is no evidence, because they are some of the guiltiest acting politicians I've ever seen.
-
And large swaths of the Republican party,too. ::)
Count me in as another who'd like to know how you know this for a fact? ::) Are you basing this on your "talent" for reading minds and predicting the future that you've exhibited in so many previous posts?
FWIW, the conspiracy theory that so many dems and republicans have bought into is more nuanced than that, but what we do know for a fact is that Russia aggressively tampered with the election, Michael Flynn lied about communications with Russia (for curiously unexplained reasons) and is now under criminal investigation and WaPo is reporting that Trump is now under investigation for obstruction of justice in regards to firing Comey. You should get in touch with some of trump's croneys and reassure them that there is no evidence, because they are some of the guiltiest acting politicians I've ever seen.
False. That birther crap was embraced by fringes. If you are trying to say the Republican party embraced the birther conspiracy in an equivalent manner to how Democrats are pushing this stupid Russia conspiracy, then you are a lying hack. If you're not, then you're still a hack, but not necessarily a liar. :)
I know for a fact there is no evidence. Every member of Congress who has answered that direct question has said the same thing: no evidence of Trump colluding with the Russian government to try and win the election.
I know you folks have a lot invested in this, but it really is one the stupidest things I've seen in all my years of following politics.
-
Your contention that I could be wrong about the complete absence of evidence is . . . predictable.
Impassioned? lol. Talk about misusing words.
I'm not privy to inside information. What I know is I have seen absolutely nothing supporting this stupid theory. And what is truly disturbing is some ordinarily smart people are embracing this crap, because they are so partisan. I spent 2.5 hours over the past couple days watching Jeff Sessions' testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. I am embarrassed to have some of those guys serving in the Senate.
You could be wrong or you could be right. The point is neither of us really knows what is the truth of this situation.
In my opinion, you seem fervent with regards to this whole business. On the other hand, you could be just stirring the pot....moderator.
I can one up you, I watched the entire Sessions' testimony live. My conclusion is that Sessions is not stupid. He completely avoided telling direct lies. He probably lied by omission though. If he honestly does not recall all that he said he did, he has a terrible memory. Personally, I don't buy it.
-
False. That birther crap was embraced by fringes. If you are trying to say the Republican party embraced the birther conspiracy in an equivalent manner to how Democrats are pushing this stupid Russia conspiracy, then you are a lying hack. If you're not, then you're still a hack, but not necessarily a liar. :)
I know for a fact there is no evidence. Every member of Congress who has answered that direct question has said the same thing: no evidence of Trump colluding with the Russian government to try and win the election.
I know you folks have a lot invested in this, but it really is one the stupidest things I've seen in all my years of following politics.
By fringes I assume you're referring to Trump who spent 4 years talking about it and promised us his investigators were finding unbelievable things which he was going to tell the world about very soon
btw- there are PLENTY of Republicans in Congress who also embraced the birther nonsense along with millions of Republican voters
Since our phony "coach" was also a birther I guess you're calling him part of the fringe too
-
False. That birther crap was embraced by fringes.
If you are trying to say the Republican party embraced the birther conspiracy in an equivalent manner to how Democrats are pushing this stupid Russia conspiracy, then you are a lying hack. If you're not, then you're still a hack, but not necessarily a liar. :)
Its most vocal supporter was the current republican president. ::) So, you are, in fact, the liar and hack.
But that wasn't even my point. My point was that Dems aren't the only ones who have questions about trump's seedy Russian ties. Many republican lawmakers called for investigations. Many republican voters have said they are suspicious.
I know for a fact there is no evidence. Every member of Congress who has answered that direct question has said the same thing: no evidence of Trump colluding with the Russian government to try and win the election.
::) You are aware of why investigations are conducted, right? Do you think when police conduct investigations, they already have the evidence they need laid out and organized and the investigation part is just for fun? Your reasoning is that not having evidence before an investigation is conducted means that there is no evidence? Am I interpreting you correctly?
-
I know for a fact there is no evidence. Every member of Congress who has answered that direct question has said the same thing: no evidence of Trump colluding with the Russian government to try and win the election.
It looks like the investigation is still on although I don't see where collusion is a direct part of it.
Today's story from FOX News; Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election has expanded to include an examination of whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice, according to a new report from The Washington Post.
Investigators have also been looking for proof of possible financial crimes committed by Trump associates, officials told The Post.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/14/special-counsel-is-investigating-president-trump-for-obstruction-justice-new-report-says.html
-
It looks like the investigation is still on although I don't see where collusion is a direct part of it.
Today's story from FOX News; Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election has expanded to include an examination of whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice, according to a new report from The Washington Post.
Investigators have also been looking for proof of possible financial crimes committed by Trump associates, officials told The Post.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/14/special-counsel-is-investigating-president-trump-for-obstruction-justice-new-report-says.html
"...officials said."
Oh look, another leak.
-
You could be wrong or you could be right. The point is neither of us really knows what is the truth of this situation.
In my opinion, you seem fervent with regards to this whole business. On the other hand, you could be just stirring the pot....moderator.
I can one up you, I watched the entire Sessions' testimony live. My conclusion is that Sessions is not stupid. He completely avoided telling direct lies. He probably lied by omission though. If he honestly does not recall all that he said he did, he has a terrible memory. Personally, I don't buy it.
Dude. As of today, 14 June 2017, I am "right." There is no evidence.
I don't know how the heck you read fervor into my comments. That's silly. It's difficult to read tone in writing, but some of the ways you can are use of exclamation marks, all caps (i.e., yelling), etc.
O Rly? What specifically did Sessions lie about?
-
"...officials said."
Oh look, another leak.
Yes it is another leak. Leaks are not all lies or false facts.
-
Like I said, this bastard should be fired. I don't give a shit what kind of reputation he has, he's best friends with Comey and has Clinton/Obama ties and right off the bat hires Clinton donors for his special counsel. This will be a totally biased witch hunt and more waste of our money. Don't be surprised if the libs plant evidence...
http://freebeacon.com/politics/muellers-special-counsel-hires-multiple-hillary-hillary-clinton-donors/
-
Yes it is another leak. Leaks are not all lies or false facts.
do you think you sound wise, or knowledgeable on the subject of leaks during the Trump Era?
jesus, you are in Howard territory.
-
God Bless Robert Mueller.
-
Its most vocal supporter was the current republican president. ::) So, you are, in fact, the liar and hack.
But that wasn't even my point. My point was that Dems aren't the only ones who have questions about trump's seedy Russian ties. Many republican lawmakers called for investigations. Many republican voters have said they are suspicious.
::) You are aware of why investigations are conducted, right? Do you think when police conduct investigations, they already have the evidence they need laid out and organized and the investigation part is just for fun? Your reasoning is that not having evidence before an investigation is conducted means that there is no evidence? Am I interpreting you correctly?
It's most vocal supporter wasn't even a friggin Republican and wasn't pushing that stupid theory when did have his sudden political conversion and ran for president. The Republican party did not endorse that absurd theory. A really dumb analogy. So you really are a lying hack. Sorry I gave you the benefit of the doubt.
No you're not interpreting me correctly. You first need evidence before you start an investigation. There is none. This is the biggest political farce I can recall. I am seriously concerned about how off the rails those people have gone. To think these folks pass laws that affect me is unsettling.
When you actually dig deeper than "Russian hacking of our election" talking points (or your laughable "seedy ties to Russia" line) and look at the specific things a lot of you folks are claiming is evidence of a conspiracy, it's flat out ridiculous. Jeff Sessions has a handshake meeting with the Russian ambassador in a room with about a hundred people, and that is evidence he was conspiring with Russia to help Trump win the election? How can you say that stuff out loud without feeling like a fool? (Rhetorical question.)
-
God Bless Robert Mueller.
You believe in God?
-
Yes it is another leak. Leaks are not all lies or false facts.
Except EVERYTHING that the left has leaked has been a lie.
-
It looks like the investigation is still on although I don't see where collusion is a direct part of it.
Today's story from FOX News; Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election has expanded to include an examination of whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice, according to a new report from The Washington Post.
Investigators have also been looking for proof of possible financial crimes committed by Trump associates, officials told The Post.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/14/special-counsel-is-investigating-president-trump-for-obstruction-justice-new-report-says.html
Stop the presses. Another unnamed source. lol. This is blockbuster news.
-
God Bless Robert Mueller.
Gimme a break. Liberals don't believe in God...shut up.
-
I don't know how the heck you read fervor into my comments. That's silly. It's difficult to read tone in writing, but some of the ways you can are use of exclamation marks, all caps (i.e., yelling), etc.
O Rly? What specifically did Sessions lie about?
Would you describe your "tone" as indifferent or casual?
Do you honestly buy that Sessions doesn't recall as much as he said he doesn't? Lying by omission is still lying although it is difficult to prove.
-
Would you describe your "tone" as indifferent or casual?
Do you honestly buy that Sessions doesn't recall as much as he said he doesn't? Lying by omission is still lying although it is difficult to prove.
My tone in this context is direct, mocking, incredulous, and humorous.
What specifically did Sessions lie about?
-
Jeff Sessions has a handshake meeting with the Russian ambassador in a room with about a hundred people, and that is evidence he was conspiring with Russia to help Trump win the election?
Are you speaking of the possible third meeting (encounter) Sessions had with Russian Ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington last April. The one he doesn't "remember"? If you are, there were reportedly only about 25 people there and not a couple of hundred.
-
Are you speaking of the possible third meeting (encounter) Sessions had with Russian Ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington last April. The one he doesn't "remember"? If you are, there were reportedly only about 25 people there and not a couple of hundred.
I'm talking about the encounter he had at the hotel (25, 50, 100, whatever). I'm not talking about the fictitious "third meeting" he said did not happen. Even if it did, who cares?
Or maybe they were plotting the secret alliance between Trump and Putin to defeat Clinton? :o
[/youtube]
-
My tone in this context is direct, mocking, incredulous, and humorous.
What specifically did Sessions lie about?
I didn't say Sessions lied. I said it seems unlikely that he honestly does not remember/recall all the events he claimed not to.
-
I didn't say Sessions lied. I said it seems unlikely that he honestly does not remember/recall all the events he claimed not to.
What events? Did we watch the same testimony?
-
What events? Did we watch the same testimony?
I believe we did. You have your filters and I have mine.
-
You have your filters and I have mine.
Please don't go shoot a congressman.
-
I believe we did. You have your filters and I have mine.
I don't have filters. I call things as I see them. I didn't hear a bunch a "I don't recall" answers, particularly to relevant questions. What I did hear were questions that strictly divided along party lines. It was pathetic.
But back to your claim about him supposedly not remembering things. What, specifically, are you talking about?
-
What events? Did we watch the same testimony?
I'm not going to bother counting them.
I believe this article sums up Sessions' selective memory problem.
"Presumably under pressure to protect the president without perjuring himself, Attorney General Jeff Sessions found new and creative ways to deflect hours of probing questions by the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, most of which amounted to a variation on a familiar theme: “I don’t recall.”"
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/jeff-sessions-senate-testimony
-
Please don't go shoot a congressman.
:o
-
I'm not going to bother counting them.
I believe this article sums up Sessions' selective memory problem.
"Presumably under pressure to protect the president without perjuring himself, Attorney General Jeff Sessions found new and creative ways to deflect hours of probing questions by the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, most of which amounted to a variation on a familiar theme: “I don’t recall.”"
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/jeff-sessions-senate-testimony
I'm not reading a Vanity Fair article to that supposedly summarizes what I just watched.
I'm not asking you to count. Give me a few things that you heard.
-
I don't have filters. I call things as I see them. I didn't hear a bunch a "I don't recall" answers, particularly to relevant questions. What I did hear were questions that strictly divided along party lines. It was pathetic.
But back to your claim about him supposedly not remembering things. What, specifically, are you talking about?
You and I can agree that the questions were divided along party lines and at times, it was pathetic and absurd....particularly when almost no question was asked and a Senator used their time to grandstand for Sessions.
-
You and I can agree that the questions were divided along party lines and at times, it was pathetic and absurd....particularly when almost no question was asked and a Senator used their time to grandstand for Sessions.
lol. Seriously? Most of them, on both sides, spent a good deal of time making speeches. The only one who really got the heart of the matter IMO was Cotton.
-
I'm not reading a Vanity Fair article to that supposedly summarizes what I just watched.
I'm not asking you to count. Give me a few things that you heard.
I'll do better. Here are some excerpts from Sessions' testimony last Tuesday. While not all Sessions' answers were "I do not recall" or "I don't remember", this list includes all his answers which were non-committal with the exception of those where he wouldn't answer because they violated some rule which he couldn't cite.
Burr: From your testimony, you said you don't remember whether the ambassador from Russia was there.
SESSIONS: I did not remember that, but I understand he was there.
BURR: You never remember having a conversation or meeting with the ambassador?
SESSIONS: I do not (remember).
WARNER: You don't recollect when he had the conversations with the ambassador?
SESSIONS: I do not (recollect).
WARNER: To the best of your memory you had no conversation with him at that meet something.
SESSIONS: I don't recall that, senator. Certainly, I can assure you nothing improper if I had a conversation with him. It's conceivable, but I don't remember it.
WARNER: I understand. I'm trying to understand you corrected the record and clearly by the time you get a chance to correct the record, you would have known that the ambassador was at that April 27th session. It received quite a bit of press notoriety. And again, echoing what the chairman said, again for the record, there was no other meeting with any other officials of the Russian government in the campaign season.
SESSIONS: Not to my recollection. I would say with regard to the two encounters, one at the Mayflower hotel that you refer to, I came here not knowing he was going to be there. I didn't have any communications with him before or after that event. Likewise at the effect at the convention went off the convention grounds to a college campus for an event.
RUBIO: As far as someone who is not an official from another count row and a businessman or anyone walking down the street, it struck me as someone who wanted to find out what the campaign was up to. In hindsight, it appears suspicious some.
SESSIONS: I don't recall it now.
BLUNT: Well, that's what I thought you were saying, but sometimes when I hear meeting, that would mean more to me than I met somebody. You might have met him at the reception. Could you have met other ambassadors at that reception as well?
SESSIONS: I could. I remember one in particular that we had a conversation with, whose country had an investment in Alabama, and we talked a little length about that, I remember that, but otherwise I have no recollection of a discussion with the Russian ambassador.
MANCHIN: I want to follow up on what Senator King had asked concerning. You are and I are about the same vintage and back in our lifetime we've never known the Russians to be -- the Russian government or the Russian military to ever be our friend, and wanting the same things we wanted out of life. With that being said, the seriousness of this Russian hacking is very serious to me and concerning, and you're saying that you had not been briefed on that. October -- I think it was October 9, when it was known that the ODNIi I think at that time Mr. Clapper and also Mr. Jay Johnson, homeland security made that public what was going on, then on December 29 President Obama at that time expelled 35 Russian diplomats, denied access to two Russian-owned compounds. and he broadened the existing sanctions. Sir, I would ask did you have any discussions at all -- have you had any discussions or sat in on any type of meetings or recommendations made to remove those sanctions?
SESSIONS: I don't recall any such meeting.
MANCHIN: And during the time not from the president being inaugurated on January 20, prior to that in the campaign, up until and through the transition, was there ever any meetings that he showed any concern or consideration or just inquisitive of what the Russians were really doing and if they had really done it?
SESSIONS: I don't recall any such conversations. I'm not sure I understood your question. Maybe I better listen again.
MANCHIN: You were part of the national security team, so if he would have heard something about Russia and with their capabilities and our concern about what they could do to our election process, was there ever any conversations concerning that whatsoever?
SESSIONS: I don't recall it, Senator Manchin.
MANCHIN: It would be very helpful, I think the committee, a lot of questions that they would like and you would like to answer if possible and maybe we can check into that a little further. If I could, sir, did you have any meetings, any other meetings with Russian officials that have not previously been disclosed?
SESSIONS: I've racked my brain and I do not believe so.
MANCHIN: I'm going to go quick through this. Are there any other meetings between Russian government officials and any other Trump campaign associates that have not been previously disclosed that you know of?
SESSIONS: I don't recall any.
MANCHIN: General Michael Flynn.
SESSIONS: I don't recall it.
MANCHIN: Reince Priebus?
SESSIONS: I don't recall.
MANCHIN: Steve Miller?
SESSIONS: I don't recall him ever having such a conversation.
MANCHIN: Corey Lewandowski.
SESSIONS: I do not recall any of those individuals having any meeting with Russian officials.
MANCHIN: Carter Page.
SESSIONS: I don't know.
MANCHIN: And would I finally ask this question, because I always think -- we try to -- you have an innate knowledge.
SESSIONS: There -- there may have been some published accounts of Mr. Page talking with Russians, I'm not sure. I don't recall though.
HARRIS: Did you have any communications with Russian officials for any reason during the campaign that have not been disclosed in public or to this committee?
SESSIONS: I don't recall it, but I have to tell you, I cannot testify to what was said as we were standing at the Republican convention before the podium where I spoke.
HARRIS: My question --
SESSIONS: I don't have a detailed memory of that—
HARRIS: Did you have any communication with any Russian businessman or any Russian nationals?
SESSIONS: I don't believe I had any conversation with Russian businessmen or Russian nationals.
HARRIS: Are you aware of any communications with other Trump campaign officials and associates that they had with Russian officials or any Russian nationals?
SESSIONS: I don't recall that.
HARRIS: Did you ever communicate with him in writing?
SESSIONS: I don't believe so.
HARRIS: Is that policy in writing somewhere?
SESSIONS: I think so.
MCCAIN: Knowing you on the committee, I can't imagine that. Did you raise concerns about Russia's support for President Bashar Al Assad and his campaign of indiscriminate violence against his own citizens including his use of chemical weapons?
SESSIONS: I don't recall whether that was discussed or not.
MCCAIN: Did you raise concerns about Russia's interference in our electoral process or interferences of the electoral processes cause of our allies?.
SESSIONS: I don't recall that being discussed.
MCCAIN: And his response was?
SESSIONS: I don't recall.
MCCAIN: During that 2016 campaign season, did you have any contacts with any representative, including any American lobbyist or agent of any Russian company within or outside your capacity as a member of congress or a member of the armed services committee?
SESSIONS: I don't believe so.
-
lol. Seriously? Most of them, on both sides, spent a good deal of time making speeches. The only one who really got the heart of the matter IMO was Cotton.
Hello....they are politicians. This is what politicians do. They have a lot in common with car salespeople and other hucksters. I agree with you regarding Cotton.
-
I'll do better. Here are some excerpts from Sessions' testimony last Tuesday. While not all Sessions' answers were "I do not recall" or "I don't remember", this list includes all his answers which were non-committal with the exception of those where he wouldn't answer because they violated some rule which he couldn't cite.
Burr: From your testimony, you said you don't remember whether the ambassador from Russia was there.
SESSIONS: I did not remember that, but I understand he was there.
BURR: You never remember having a conversation or meeting with the ambassador?
SESSIONS: I do not (remember).
WARNER: You don't recollect when he had the conversations with the ambassador?
SESSIONS: I do not (recollect).
WARNER: To the best of your memory you had no conversation with him at that meet something.
SESSIONS: I don't recall that, senator. Certainly, I can assure you nothing improper if I had a conversation with him. It's conceivable, but I don't remember it.
WARNER: I understand. I'm trying to understand you corrected the record and clearly by the time you get a chance to correct the record, you would have known that the ambassador was at that April 27th session. It received quite a bit of press notoriety. And again, echoing what the chairman said, again for the record, there was no other meeting with any other officials of the Russian government in the campaign season.
SESSIONS: Not to my recollection. I would say with regard to the two encounters, one at the Mayflower hotel that you refer to, I came here not knowing he was going to be there. I didn't have any communications with him before or after that event. Likewise at the effect at the convention went off the convention grounds to a college campus for an event.
RUBIO: As far as someone who is not an official from another count row and a businessman or anyone walking down the street, it struck me as someone who wanted to find out what the campaign was up to. In hindsight, it appears suspicious some.
SESSIONS: I don't recall it now.
BLUNT: Well, that's what I thought you were saying, but sometimes when I hear meeting, that would mean more to me than I met somebody. You might have met him at the reception. Could you have met other ambassadors at that reception as well?
SESSIONS: I could. I remember one in particular that we had a conversation with, whose country had an investment in Alabama, and we talked a little length about that, I remember that, but otherwise I have no recollection of a discussion with the Russian ambassador.
MANCHIN: I want to follow up on what Senator King had asked concerning. You are and I are about the same vintage and back in our lifetime we've never known the Russians to be -- the Russian government or the Russian military to ever be our friend, and wanting the same things we wanted out of life. With that being said, the seriousness of this Russian hacking is very serious to me and concerning, and you're saying that you had not been briefed on that. October -- I think it was October 9, when it was known that the ODNIi I think at that time Mr. Clapper and also Mr. Jay Johnson, homeland security made that public what was going on, then on December 29 President Obama at that time expelled 35 Russian diplomats, denied access to two Russian-owned compounds. and he broadened the existing sanctions. Sir, I would ask did you have any discussions at all -- have you had any discussions or sat in on any type of meetings or recommendations made to remove those sanctions?
SESSIONS: I don't recall any such meeting.
MANCHIN: And during the time not from the president being inaugurated on January 20, prior to that in the campaign, up until and through the transition, was there ever any meetings that he showed any concern or consideration or just inquisitive of what the Russians were really doing and if they had really done it?
SESSIONS: I don't recall any such conversations. I'm not sure I understood your question. Maybe I better listen again.
MANCHIN: You were part of the national security team, so if he would have heard something about Russia and with their capabilities and our concern about what they could do to our election process, was there ever any conversations concerning that whatsoever?
SESSIONS: I don't recall it, Senator Manchin.
MANCHIN: It would be very helpful, I think the committee, a lot of questions that they would like and you would like to answer if possible and maybe we can check into that a little further. If I could, sir, did you have any meetings, any other meetings with Russian officials that have not previously been disclosed?
SESSIONS: I've racked my brain and I do not believe so.
MANCHIN: I'm going to go quick through this. Are there any other meetings between Russian government officials and any other Trump campaign associates that have not been previously disclosed that you know of?
SESSIONS: I don't recall any.
MANCHIN: General Michael Flynn.
SESSIONS: I don't recall it.
MANCHIN: Reince Priebus?
SESSIONS: I don't recall.
MANCHIN: Steve Miller?
SESSIONS: I don't recall him ever having such a conversation.
MANCHIN: Corey Lewandowski.
SESSIONS: I do not recall any of those individuals having any meeting with Russian officials.
MANCHIN: Carter Page.
SESSIONS: I don't know.
MANCHIN: And would I finally ask this question, because I always think -- we try to -- you have an innate knowledge.
SESSIONS: There -- there may have been some published accounts of Mr. Page talking with Russians, I'm not sure. I don't recall though.
HARRIS: Did you have any communications with Russian officials for any reason during the campaign that have not been disclosed in public or to this committee?
SESSIONS: I don't recall it, but I have to tell you, I cannot testify to what was said as we were standing at the Republican convention before the podium where I spoke.
HARRIS: My question --
SESSIONS: I don't have a detailed memory of that—
HARRIS: Did you have any communication with any Russian businessman or any Russian nationals?
SESSIONS: I don't believe I had any conversation with Russian businessmen or Russian nationals.
HARRIS: Are you aware of any communications with other Trump campaign officials and associates that they had with Russian officials or any Russian nationals?
SESSIONS: I don't recall that.
HARRIS: Did you ever communicate with him in writing?
SESSIONS: I don't believe so.
HARRIS: Is that policy in writing somewhere?
SESSIONS: I think so.
MCCAIN: Knowing you on the committee, I can't imagine that. Did you raise concerns about Russia's support for President Bashar Al Assad and his campaign of indiscriminate violence against his own citizens including his use of chemical weapons?
SESSIONS: I don't recall whether that was discussed or not.
MCCAIN: Did you raise concerns about Russia's interference in our electoral process or interferences of the electoral processes cause of our allies?.
SESSIONS: I don't recall that being discussed.
MCCAIN: And his response was?
SESSIONS: I don't recall.
MCCAIN: During that 2016 campaign season, did you have any contacts with any representative, including any American lobbyist or agent of any Russian company within or outside your capacity as a member of congress or a member of the armed services committee?
SESSIONS: I don't believe so.
Not sure what you're trying to prove with this. It's been established that the once again got their asses handed to them. It's a political farce and witch hunt and the libs keep coming up with NOTHING
-
Not sure what you're trying to prove with this. It's been established that the once again got their asses handed to them. It's a political farce and witch hunt and the libs keep coming up with NOTHING
Read the transscrip you fucking sheep.
Try thinking for yourself for once
-
It's most vocal supporter wasn't even a friggin Republican and wasn't pushing that stupid theory when did have his sudden political conversion and ran for president. The Republican party did not endorse that absurd theory. A really dumb analogy. So you really are a lying hack. Sorry I gave you the benefit of the doubt.
Yes, he was a republican at the time and he promoted the theory repeatedly on the most influential conservative news vehicle. Hannity pushed it. Limbaugh pushed it. Drudge pushed it. That's as mainstream republican as you can get. Just look at how many right wingers on this board were birthers. If you are playing semantics and claiming that birtherism was never part of the republican party's official platform then I guess you're right. ::)
And what am I lying about? The many republican lawmakers who called for an investigation that I've posted about before? Or the many republican constituents who have voiced questions about trump's seedy russian connections that you can easily google?
No you're not interpreting me correctly. You first need evidence before you start an investigation. There is none. This is the biggest political farce I can recall. I am seriously concerned about how off the rails those people have gone. To think these folks pass laws that affect me is unsettling.
No , that's not how investigations work. Once a crime is suspected to have occurred, then an investigation takes place to gather evidence. The crime being investigated is Russia's involvement in influencing the election. That investigation includes gathering evidence
to figure what Americans were involved and what their roles were. Part of that investigation includes a criminal investigation of Michael Flynn. ::)
-
Not sure what you're trying to prove with this. It's been established that the once again got their asses handed to them. It's a political farce and witch hunt and the libs keep coming up with NOTHING
It's just a dumb strategy.
These clowns are being mocked all over twitter and YouTube.
If the Democrats were smart they would promote their own platform and solutions rather than go into the deep end of the mud pit where Trump has shown the ability to drown everybody up to this point.
-
It's just a dumb strategy.
These clowns are being mocked all over twitter and YouTube.
If the Democrats were smart they would promote their own platform and solutions rather than go into the deep end of the mud pit where Trump has shown the ability to drown everybody up to this point.
OMG - being mocked on twitter and youtube !!!
are you sure?
-
Yes, he was a republican at the time and he promoted the theory repeatedly on the most influential conservative news vehicle. Hannity pushed it. Limbaugh pushed it. Drudge pushed it. That's as mainstream republican as you can get. Just look at how many right wingers on this board were birthers. If you are playing semantics and claiming that birtherism was never part of the republican party's official platform then I guess you're right. ::)
And what am I lying about? The many republican lawmakers who called for an investigation that I've posted about before? Or the many republican constituents who have voiced questions about trump's seedy russian connections that you can easily google?
No , that's not how investigations work. Once a crime is suspected to have occurred, then an investigation takes place to gather evidence. The crime being investigated is Russia's involvement in influencing the election. That investigation includes gathering evidence
to figure what Americans were involved and what their roles were. Part of that investigation includes a criminal investigation of Michael Flynn. ::)
Regarding your list of mainstream birthers - Bum will just tell you he never saw or heard them thus it never happened
Not even sure WTF he is talking about regarding needing evidence to start an investigation. That's just fucking flat out stupid unless he thinks all crime is like a murder and starts with a dead body. Most investigations start with a suspicion or allegations.....for example see any of the numerous failed Republican investigations of Hillary.
It also seems the various intelligence agencies do have plenty of evidence such as tape recordings (remember Flynn denied everything until he was told they had him on tape). Comey and others have also mentioned they can't discuss certain things they know in open hearings but for some strange reason they haven't yet shared this classified data with Bum.
There's an article in Bloomberg from a couple of days ago that the Russian hackers hit voter registration systems in 39 states. Being an intelligent and curious person I'm sure Bum will conclude there is no reason to look at that any further.
-
OMG - being mocked on twitter and youtube !!!
are you sure?
Outlets such as YouTube and twitter are the future of media.
The left and the corporate media become weaker by the day.
-
Outlets such as YouTube and twitter are the future of media.
The left and the corporate media become weaker by the day.
they'll never replace or supercede TV, Radio, Cable etc.. in this country
youtube and twitter are more influential in countries like Russia
Since you're obviously an avid Twitter and YouTube user I'm sure you're aware of the massive protests in Russia a couple of days ago along with the arrest of Alexei Navalny (who as you know has used YouTube to great effect to communicate with young people in Russia)
-
they'll never replace or supercede TV, Radio, Cable etc.. in this country
youtube and twitter are more influential in countries like Russia
Since you're obviously an avid Twitter and YouTube user I'm sure you're aware of the massive protests in Russia a couple of days ago along with the arrest of Alexei Navalny (who as you know has used YouTube to great effect to communicate with young people in Russia)
Your lack of foresight sickens me.
-
Your lack of foresight sickens me.
your gullibility sickens me
-
your gullibility sickens me
Even if they do "find something"(they won't) it's not going to matter because nobody believes outlets like CNN(counterfeit news network) and the New York Slimes when they are retracting fake news stories almost daily.
-
Even if they do "find something"(they won't) it's not going to matter because nobody believes outlets like CNN(counterfeit news network) and the New York Slimes when they are retracting fake news stories almost daily.
What stories have they retracted?
-
What stories have they retracted?
I'm too lazy to post the links.
-
Even if they do "find something"(they won't) it's not going to matter because nobody believes outlets like CNN(counterfeit news network) and the New York Slimes when they are retracting fake news stories almost daily.
LOL - let me guess. You got this information from Twitter and Youtube
Schmuck
-
I'm too lazy to post the links.
Can't you think of a few off the top of your head?
-
LOL - let me guess. You got this information from Twitter and Youtube
Schmuck
What information?
-
What information?
?
you can't read your own post to which I replied?
-
?
you can't read your own post to which I replied?
I have no idea what you're talking about.
-
I have no idea what you're talking about.
For fucks sake - are you serious?
Did you learn this (SEE YOUR QUOTE BELOW) from the honest news sources on Twitter and YouTube
Even if they do "find something"(they won't) it's not going to matter because nobody believes outlets like CNN(counterfeit news network) and the New York Slimes when they are retracting fake news stories almost daily.
-
For fucks sake - are you serious?
Did you learn this (SEE YOUR QUOTE BELOW) from the honest news sources on Twitter and YouTube
Meltdown.
-
Meltdown.
so no answer as to where you go that patently idiotic belief?
Here's a screen shot of CNN website
I don't see any retractions yet today but I have to assume that this shot includes a bunch of fake news but I don't know which ones are the fakes
Can you point them out for me
Thank you for your service
-
I'm too lazy to post the links.
come on dude
all you have to do is make it up
that's where you got your idiotic premise in the first place
-
so no answer as to where you go that patently idiotic belief?
Here's a screen shot of CNN website
I don't see any retractions yet today but I have to assume that this shot includes a bunch of fake news but I don't know which ones are the fakes
Can you point them out for me
Thank you for your service
Nah I'm good.
But if you believe that CNN is still taken serious in 2017 by all means, please feel free to do so.
-
Yes, he was a republican at the time and he promoted the theory repeatedly on the most influential conservative news vehicle. Hannity pushed it. Limbaugh pushed it. Drudge pushed it. That's as mainstream republican as you can get. Just look at how many right wingers on this board were birthers. If you are playing semantics and claiming that birtherism was never part of the republican party's official platform then I guess you're right. ::)
And what am I lying about? The many republican lawmakers who called for an investigation that I've posted about before? Or the many republican constituents who have voiced questions about trump's seedy russian connections that you can easily google?
No , that's not how investigations work. Once a crime is suspected to have occurred, then an investigation takes place to gather evidence. The crime being investigated is Russia's involvement in influencing the election. That investigation includes gathering evidence
to figure what Americans were involved and what their roles were. Part of that investigation includes a criminal investigation of Michael Flynn. ::)
You are flat out lying when you try and compare the Democrats pushing of this loony Russia conspiracy with the equally loony birther conspiracy. No, Trump was not a Republican nor was he running for office. In fact, he disavowed it when he became a candidate. No, Hannity was never a birther. Drudge doesn't push anything. All Drudge does is post links to stories. I knew you were hack. I didn't know you were a dishonest hack.
You clearly don't know how investigations work. You need evidence of a crime before you start an investigation. That evidence could be as simple as someone with knowledge making an accusation. We don't have any of that with Trump. It's just a bunch partisans running around with their hair on fire yelling without really saying anything.
And when you nuts do talk about "evidence," you bring up things like "Michael Flynn." Despite the fact there is zero evidence Flynn worked as a Trump surrogate to conspire with the Russian government to get Trump elected. You people are friggin crazy.
-
What stories have they retracted?
lol Oh brother. Stop trolling. How about the other day when they claimed "unnamed sources" confirmed Comey would testify before the Senate that he never told Trump he was not under investigation.
-
Nah I'm good.
But if you believe that CNN is still taken serious in 2017 by all means, please feel free to do so.
So none of these stories are fake?
Are you sure?
-
lol Oh brother. Stop trolling. How about the other day when they claimed "unnamed sources" confirmed Comey would testify before the Senate that he never told Trump he was not under investigation.
BFD - a source gave them wrong info and they corrected it
Apparently right wingers don't even know the definition of fake
Fake is something that is intentionally fraudulent
Errors are retracted
If you want an example of a fraudulent story you can refer to the DNC staffer who was killed last year.
Faux New repeatedly ran with a fraudulent story about that until they were shamed into admitting it by the family
I'm sure Faux News also covered Pizza Gate - another Fraudulent Story
-
Can't you think of a few off the top of your head?
Nah I'm good.
But if you want to continue with your phony little "investigations" ::) , by all means please feel free to do so.
-
After reading through this thread, one thing strikes me as an absolute certainty: Straw Fag likes to watch his wife get fucked by large hebrew men while he jerks off.
-
After reading through this thread, one thing strikes me as an absolute certainty: Straw Fag likes to watch his wife get fucked by large hebrew men while he jerks off.
you seems oblivious to the fact that you just told everyone the queer things that you think about
-
Not sure what you're trying to prove with this. It's been established that the once again got their asses handed to them. It's a political farce and witch hunt and the libs keep coming up with NOTHING
-Not looking to prove anything, simply answering Dos Equis' question.
As far as coming up with nothing, Comey and Sessions' testimonies have apparently inspired the committee to investigate the possibility of Trump's collusion and obstruction of justice in this matter. -Doesn't seem like nothing to me. It is definitely not a win for Trump at this stage.
BTW, the transcript of both testimonies are available on-line. It behooves you to read them before shooting off your mouth.
-
you seems oblivious to the fact that you just told everyone the queer things that you think about
I SEEMS oblivious? Oh, you are a dindu?
If my wife ever fucked a black, I would kill her.
-
I SEEMS oblivious? Oh, you are a dindu?
If my wife ever fucked a black, I would kill her.
what else do you think about?
-
-Not looking to prove anything, simply answering Dos Equis' question.
As far as coming up with nothing, Comey and Sessions' testimonies have apparently inspired the committee to investigate the possibility of Trump's collusion and obstruction of justice in this matter. -Doesn't seem like nothing to me. It is definitely not a win for Trump at this stage.
BTW, the transcript of both testimonies are available on-line. It behooves you to read them before shooting off your mouth.
Holy shit. I'm out. You leftists are mental. Comey already said there was nothing. The Dems said there was nothing the whole fuckkng world said there is nothing and from what I understand Mueller must resign because of conflict of interest. Jesus Christ.
-
I SEEMS oblivious? Oh, you are a dindu?
If my wife ever fucked a black, I would kill her.
You must be in denial.
-
I SEEMS oblivious? Oh, you are a dindu?
If my wife ever fucked a black, I would kill her.
And if she fucked a whitey?
-
Holy shit. I'm out. You leftists are mental. Comey already said there was nothing. The Dems said there was nothing the whole fuckkng world said there is nothing and from what I understand Mueller must resign because of conflict of interest. Jesus Christ.
Isn't it so strange that their leaders can literally tell them "Nothing there" "Nothing happened" and these guys still choose to believe the myth?
Scary how insinuating a lie for so long can cause so many to continue to believe it even when it is admitted.
-
You are flat out lying when you try and compare the Democrats pushing of this loony Russia conspiracy with the equally loony birther conspiracy. No, Trump was not a Republican nor was he running for office. In fact, he disavowed it when he became a candidate. No, Hannity was never a birther. Drudge doesn't push anything. All Drudge does is post links to stories. I knew you were hack. I didn't know you were a dishonest hack.
I DIDN'T compare the birther conspiracy theory to the Russian collusion scandal. YOU did.I pointed out that you trying to pass birtherism off as some sort of underground thing that hardly any republicans supported was bs.
Practically everything you said in that post was demonstrably false.
No, Hannity was never a birther. :
An entire segment of him pretending to not be a birther while repeatedly pointing out how he finds it suspicious that Obama
won't release any more records.
No, Trump was not a Republican nor was he running for office. :
An interview from 2011 in which trump discusses his conservative views, how disappointed he'd be if he didn't get
the republican nomination if he decided to run, how he's glad he is a birther because it was one of the reasons he was polling so well among republicans..
Drudge doesn't push anything. All Drudge does is post links to stories.
Right at 9 minutes, Drudge very clearly says the purpose of the stories he chooses is to influence what people are talking about.
You clearly don't know how investigations work. You need evidence of a crime before you start an investigation.
That evidence could be as simple as someone with knowledge making an accusation. We don't have any of that with Trump.
It's just a bunch partisans running around with their hair on fire yelling without really saying anything.
I guess you missed this thread ::) :
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=632591.0
I'm sure somehow you won't be able to figure out how to click on any of the videos or somehow when trump says he's a conservative and considering running for president, you know- FOR A FACT -that it actually means the opposite. ::)
-
Holy shit. I'm out. You leftists are mental. Comey already said there was nothing. The Dems said there was nothing the whole fuckkng world said there is nothing and from what I understand Mueller must resign because of conflict of interest. Jesus Christ.
Comey's comments to Trump were time sensitive and likely filtered. "The Dems said there was nothing"....are you living in an alternative universe? As far as your take on what the world is saying renders you mental or just plain dumb. You understand incorrectly. Mueller does not have to resign. Sean Hannity, conservative talk show host suggested he and Rosenstein should resign. Intelligent people ignore folks like Mr. Hannity......much like they probably ignore your rants.
-
God Bless Robert Mueller.
-
God Bless Robert Mueller.
Oh, Now a liberal believes in God.