And to further add to the absurdity of your "prosecution shopping" comment, what do you think will happen if Jeff Sessions takes himself or is taken off the case? Like do you think they just go to Chuck Schumer and ask him who he wants in charge?

Curiouser and curiouser.


https://twitter.com/matthewamiller/s...46714243022848

https://twitter.com/carolelee/status/837143170987274244

He actually didn't answer the question he was asked, and told a lie while not answering the question he was asked.

Franken: "These documents also allegedly say quote, 'There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.'

Now 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?"

Sessions: "Senator Franken, I'm not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign, and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

Is that enough context for you? There's no twisting of words here. He specifically denied something he wasn't even being pressed on personally, and it turns out he was lying.

How dare you. I was counting on him to make my biceps great again.

Well but now the spam link is in your post...

I need a blowjob from Christy Turlington.

Arse, that's some 3rd level spamming

Farenthold is a WAPO reporter and a good follow on Twitter. He's the one who broke the story last year on Trump's (lack of) charity.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.5ce0c50094da

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

First, thanks for posting the entire context, the whole story is based on taking a sentence fragment out of context.

Franken was asking about reports of the campaign exchanging information with Russia.

Sessions replied that he was unaware of that happening and did not do that himself. The sentence fragment you bolded does not stand alone outside of the context of the exchange. In the very sentence you pull the fragment from he mentions his sometimes being called a surrogate. Pretending he was replying in this sentence fragment to an unasked question like "have you ever had a chat with Russians about any topic at all?" is clearly dishonest.

People aren't dumb, when the media and others push these misrepresentations it becomes not incorrect to call the WaPo a fake news provider and people like Pelosi as dishonest.

Thing is the old school Republicans really don't like that these guys are cozy with the Russkies. When they were children the commie Russkies were the mortal national enemy, an even greater threat to their way of life than minorities and Muslims.

You don't care about straight up lying in confirmation hearings. That's part of what makes you a fascist. You will literally never accept that Trump or his team did something wrong. That makes you part of a cult of personality of a dangerous fascist ideology. You are the danger America faces, you are what we are fighting against, and it's people like you that would absolutely kill our democracy forever if you could just to put fascist Republicans in charge.

So quit pretending you care about America. You hate America and we all know that, at least the part of it that still resembles a liberal democracy.

I thought I heard he was asked the question in writing and had a similar answer. Has anyone seen the wording of that question and how it was answered? By volunteering information, Sessions avoided being asked the question directly in his hearing. Pretty obvious that he needs to at least recuse himself from investigations of the Russian connection.

I do not self-identify as a conservative.

Standard social liberal, fiscal conservative early 30s millennial.

https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/837186288663031808

Don't laugh, just confirming a truth here.

The AG serves at the pleasure of the President, yes? Trump can singlehandily fire him today, yes? With cause? Without cause? Cause his middle name is Beauguard?

https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/837162178411102208

LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!

Well he fired Sally Yates because she refused to carry out his unlawful Muslim Ban. So yeah, he can definitely fire Sessions for this act of perjury. Not just perjury, but perjury during confirmation hearings. Problem is, what does Sessions know? If he knows too much Trump may not want to piss him off.

Or to put it another way, if Trump takes Sessions' side on this, it makes him look more and more guilty of working with the Russians. There's absolutely no reason to stick with Sessions here unless Trump is guilty of some of the biggest conspiracies imagined so far.

So what will 2p2 do if the guy that ends up taking down Trump is the same guy that took down online poker? Seems like he'd be a really special kind of person.

Jeff Sessions in 1999: "Noone is above the law."

why aren't more people talking about this? This article is straight up saying that Flynn told the Russian ambassador not to overreact to sanctions and that they will be lifted under Trump. He couldn't have been communicating that, without there being several more people on Trumps team who had a relationship with the Kremlin.

Call the Department of Justice now to report the crime of perjury by Jefferson Sessions: 202-353-1555

Conservatism at its best is a mature debate on anchoring politics in traditional moral values. I mean, there ARE some good ones. Respect for institutions, admiration for law and just enforcement of it, patriotism in the sense of wanting to protect your countrymen and so forth.

It used to be that conservatism at its worst was a veneration of traditional values to the point where anything progressive was evil. Which is a bit absurd, if that was reasonable most of us should still be scraping in front of royalty.

But these days even that seems like "sensible" compared to what we see happening. The far fringes of conservatism has become little else than camouflage. When you vote for a known adulterer, disregard lies, treat the constitution as a buffet and use the judicial branch as your personal punching bag you are actually no longer a conservative. There are few traditional moral values in those choices that are worthy of respect. The "moral anchoring" of mainstream conservatism has just become a smokescreen to throw up to obfuscate any attempt at debate.

Doubling down on the derp. It is unreal the amount of bull**** you're peddling here.

I know you like JAQing off, so let's have a big circle JAQ here.

JAQ #1: Was Sessions under oath? (Yes/No)
JAQ #2: Did he say that he had no communications with the Russians during the campaign? (Yes/No)
JAQ #3: Did he have communications with a Russian diplomat during the campaign? (Yes/No)
JAQ #4: If you answered yes to #2, was that statement false? (Yes/No)
JAQ #5: If you answered yes to #1-#4, are false statements under oath from the Attorney General about ongoing investigations newsworthy? (Yes/No)

If you answered yes to all of the above, then congratulations, you're not a complete moron.