Donald Trump and US politics

You're grasping at straws, Budget. Sessions didn't lie. The question of "did he communicate with the Russians", wasn't a broad question, it was specifically related to communicating with the Russians on the behalf of the Trump campaign. Not as official business related to being a Senator. You're manufacturing up stuff. This is the kinda stuff they call "Fake News". Stop letting fake news rot your brain.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

Hey, no harm, no foul on him talking to the Russian ambassador. There's nothing inherently wrong with that whatsoever. I just wonder why he felt the need to lie about it.

He didn't. You are repeating the talking points memo that was heavily circulated and is the latest leftist attack plan on Trump. The MSM and their their puppets would have included the key word: Twice.

................

"There was absolutely nothing misleading about his answer,” said Sarah Isgur Flores, Sessions’s spokeswoman.

In January, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) asked Sessions for answers to written questions. “Several of the President-elect’s nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?” Leahy wrote.

Sessions responded with one word: “No.”

“He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee,” Flores said.

She added that Sessions last year had more than 25 conversations with foreign ambassadors as a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, including the British, Korean, Japanese, Polish, Indian, Chinese, Canadian, Australian and German ambassadors, in addition to Kislyak.

.........

about the 2016 election, <--- So, Sessions could have met with them and talked about Path of Exile, and the media would still try to spin it as him saying that he didn't meet with the Russians.

I was referring to the question by Al Franken. The reason I didn't say "twice" is because there's clearly wiggle room on the question by Leahey. The same cannot be said about his answer to Al Franken, where he clearly identified himself as a member of Trump's campaign, and then clearly stated that that group, which includes himself, had no contact to Russia. That, as it turns out, is simply not true.

By the way, I love how in a story about how the attorney general lied to congress about interacting with the Russians, your first thought is to blame the media for bringing it up after Trump's big speech.

...What?

FWIW, the white house went that route as well, so if anyone here is going off talking points, it's probably you. Except I wouldn't make that claim, because it's stupid and does nothing to further the conversation.

No, dude, this is legitimately newsworthy. The AG, by his own standard (or at least the standard he held Bill Clinton to), committed perjury. Not only that, but it was over a subject where there are still serious questions open, and an issue for which the white house has already thrown out one high-level advisor. That's big news, like it or not, and if you expect the media to just sit on that so that they can spend more time moistening Trump's balls over a mediocre speech, I'd have to ask why.

"

The display of "solidarity" during the speech

No offense, but if you bought into that shit, I think Trump has a bridge he'd like to sell you. His speech was absolutely full of broadsides against the left, attacks on his political opponents, and the absurd claim that America united behind him. Um, newsflash buddy, 3 million more people voted for your opponent, and you're the least popular president to date. It's really easy to say you want to work with the opposition. Has Trump actually done anything to show that he's interested in that?

"

If what I have seen tentatively proposed as his budget premise holds up, then we're looking at running the US at one trillion dollars UNDER tax revenue. When Trump pulls off an infrastructure expansion with added jobs and cutting the deficit, the collective left will lose their minds, and fiscal conservatives will warm up to Making America Great Again.

And if Trump starts negotiations with the country of Equestria, we can harness crystal magic for infinite cheap electricity and I can finally bang my waifu.

What? It's got about the same likelihood of happening.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

Dude, when you're asked "Did you or your team have any contact with Russia" and you know for a fact you were on the phone with the Russian ambassador on numerous occasions, the correct and honest answer is, "yes". You can complain about this being an unfair question if you'd like, that it doesn't really matter that Jeff Sessions was in contact with Russia, and I'd agree... right up until he lies about it. Then it becomes suspect.

But that isn't what he was asked and you didn't check the source. Literally fake news.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

Yeah, god forbid we be a little concerned about the continuing negative influence Putin has been having on elections across the world. God forbid we be concerned that a foreign power whose head of state is a brutal autocratic dictator intervened in our election on behalf of one party, and that that party is now getting caught in increasingly embarrassing snafus about how much they communicated with that foreign power and how willing they are to lie about it.

We're not at war with Russia. But if their illegal actions helped change the results of our election, that's a pretty substantial thing. And if our president, whose team has been acting really weird towards Russia for quite some time, is hiding things about his relationship with Russia, that should really be cause for concern.

"If" being the key word in all of that, and you're consistently more than a "little" concerned.

I get that you want it to be real, deep down, because it explains so much so easily and it would implode the executive branch and force a new vote with new candidates.

I give it really low odds of being real. Same as most other conspiracy theories with lots of interesting coincidences and mysterious powers-that-be.

"

MrSmiley21 wrote:

You're grasping at straws, Budget. Sessions didn't lie. The question of "did he communicate with the Russians", wasn't a broad question, it was specifically related to communicating with the Russians on the behalf of the Trump campaign. Not as official business related to being a Senator. You're manufacturing up stuff. This is the kinda stuff they call "Fake News". Stop letting fake news rot your brain.

Rolling tape:

https://twitter.com/JamieOGrady/status/837130762684153858?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

For those who can't watch the video, here is the exact quote:

“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.”

You're confusing this with a different question asked, where Session's answer was a simple "no". And we have no real reason to believe that he was lying in that case. But this answer, where he explicitly says that he did not have communications with the Russians during the campaign, is not true.

"

pneuma wrote:

"If" being the key word in all of that, and you're consistently more than a "little" concerned.

I get that you want it to be real, deep down, because it explains so much so easily and it would implode the executive branch and force a new vote with new candidates.

I give it really low odds of being real. Same as most other conspiracy theories with lots of interesting coincidences and mysterious powers-that-be.

Um... Actually, the "if" there is nothing more than a formality. We know that the russians were behind the Podesta hack, we know that phishing is in fact illegal, and we know it had an impact on the election. We also know that this isn't going to lead to new elections, or criminal charges against anyone in the Trump camp.

The more important question which remains open is what else is going on between Trump and Russia. This is now the second time we've had a member of Trump's inner circle lie about their interactions with Russia; this time, it's under oath. What are they hiding? Even if it's nothing, we should investigate. Good luck getting congressional republicans on board with that, though. There was apparently money in the budget for 7 fucking Benghazi investigations, but it's too much to ask to spend a little time looking into why Trump's inner circle is so weird about Russia.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

You're confusing this with a different question asked, where Session's answer was a simple "no". And we have no real reason to believe that he was lying in that case. But this answer, where he explicitly says that he did not have communications with the Russians during the campaign, is not true.

No, he was asked about communications between the Russians and the Trump campaign, and this question wasn't related to meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee. This is why your claims are silly, and fake news. Very fake news.

"

MrSmiley21 wrote:

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

You're confusing this with a different question asked, where Session's answer was a simple "no". And we have no real reason to believe that he was lying in that case. But this answer, where he explicitly says that he did not have communications with the Russians during the campaign, is not true.

No, he was asked about communications between the Russians and the Trump campaign, and this question wasn't related to meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee. This is why your claims are silly, and fake news. Very fake news.

Here's the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BpgHcanjCQ

He names himself as a surrogate and makes it clear that the trump campaign, himself included, had no contact with Russia.

I saw the video, my point still stands. You got nothing. He's not gonna resign, nor should he be expected to. He made a distinction between himself as a surrogate for his official position in government, and him as a member of the Trump Campaign. His remarks about "not having contact with the Russians" was in reference to his position in the Trump Campaign, not as his position as a surrogate. Why would he even bring up his surrogate role unless it was related to the question? He didn't lie or mislead anyone. The left is just obfuscating this issue, because they literally got nothing else.

Why not attack him over something legitimate, like his push to continue the "War on Drugs" by going after legalized marijuana? He seems to have a serious axe to grind with marijuana use. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that states that legalized it have had lots of benefits from doing so. It's created lots of small businesses, and it's income for the States to use as funding for schools and infrastructure.

This issue, and abortion are 2 of the things I'm not with the American Right on.