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

Why is even Al Franken even relevant in the Senate ? He's a SNL clown.

We are dealing with another leak to the fake news MSM. Funny how it's always the Wa-Po or the NYT who publish these leaks, the two newspapers who were exposed by Wikileaks to have been in collusion with the DNC and the Hillary campaign.

The timing of all of these leaks are very suspicious.

Did you watch the State of the Union speech ? When the camera focused on the Senate's # 1 clown, Al Franken did you notice his body language and posture. He looked like a slob, he was lounging in his seat with his legs fully stretched out with a big clown grin on his face while all of the other liberals and progressives were having a melt down.

 

What you "think" is irrelevant. What Sessions actually said is a matter of records. And he did not answer "that he didn't meet to discuss the campaign."

 

...the conversation between Sessions and the Russian diplomat was held in secret and it is not on the public record.

That is the only reason that the Trump administration can claim that Sessions was only discussing with the Russian ambassador in his official senatorial capacity. And unlike the discussion between Clinton and Lynch, where we have multiple interviews about the content of their conversation, we only have Sessions and the Russian ambassador saying that they don't remember the contents of the conversation.

 

What you "think" is irrelevant. What Sessions actually said is a matter of records. And he did not answer "that he didn't meet to discuss the campaign." Nor is it the "gist" of a question that asks "i there was any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government"

- - - Updated - - -

Because shoot, Sessions is a Republican. Must be "fake nonsense".

Exhibit AE.

 

The Clinton Foundation and Clinton's reckless email account and how much classified information she thus provided to the Russians and foreign governments - who in turn were paying her off for the information thru the Clinton Foundation.

 

At a minimum, a lie by omission. But his statement that he had never communicated with the Russians when he had qualifies as a flat out affirmative lie.

 

Instead of going by the actual quote, you are asking me to guess the understanding that Sessions took from the question AND to imply an additional, but unstated, aspect of his answer?

 

The amount of false information in this post is really, really astounding.

He is also a SENATOR.

This is not the result of a leak. Washington Post used the Senator's own calendar and interviews with the Senator and close associates in order to make this story.

Again, not a leak.

FFS, that wasn't even a State of the Union address.

 

Exchange of information between people who were part of the Trump surrogates and the Russians.

 

LOL! I am denying nothing. I am pointing out that there is no evidence of Sessions lying before congress. The only way you get there is by making wholly semantic arguments which would be thrown out if brought before a court of law.

 

looks like guy Sessions met with, could be a Russian spy

https://sputniknews.com/us/201703021051188303-kislyak-us-spy/

 

Yes, A grand jury should have been investigating known Clinton links to Russia shortly after Session's confirmation. Now that the corrupt DP/RP establishment is asking for it - give to them - good and hard. Better late than never. Let the swamp draining begin.

 

Incorrect. Court rooms are notorious places where you have to speak very clearly. If you state something like "I did not have any contact," and you did, that's perjury. All he needed to say was "outside my role as senator.... I did not have any contact." QED. Sessions is a lawyer. He knows this. Most of Congress are lawyers. They know this too. That's why Congress Critters of both parties are calling for him to recuse himself. They all know it's bad.

 

Fake RW propagand news.

The specific question was whether here was any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government:

SEN. AL FRANKEN: "If there was any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this (2016) campaign, what would you do?," the Minnesota Democrat asked.

SESSIONS: "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."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/02/politics/russia-jeff-sessions-confirmation-hearing/

Sessions, who was affiliated with the Trump campaign, in fact communicated with the Russian government.

Flat out lie.

 

Not at all. Being a Senator on the committee he was on it should be common knowledge he did have some contact with foreign governments. Being as such it does not need mentioning in the context of the questioning at the time.


Glad I could clear that up for ya.

 

Truth doesn't seem to matter to some people, namely, those defending Sessions' bald lie.

 

No, neither meeting was held in secret. The first was in Cleveland as part of a publicized Heritage Foundation event attended by 50 ambassadors, and the second meeting was in Sessions' Senate Offices. We know about both because they are documented.

 

I'm sorry, Session said he did not have communications with the Russians when in fact he did.

His answer can only be viewed as "correct" by those who view it is correct for Republicans to lie under oath.

Exhibit AF.

 

I'm sorry. I haven't taken enough LSD to see the appropriateness of that supposed analogy.

 

Another Democrat witch hunt. Remember these bogus prosecutions?

Alaska Senator Ted Stevens
Texas Congressman Tom Delay
Texas Governor Rick Perry

Right out of the Alinsky playbook.

 

If you want to catch someone in perjury you need more than "I interpret the question this way, and their answer this way, so I think they are lying!"... this "court room" you describe doesn't exist.

 

Actually, he said that he had been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign.

He wasn't asked that, either. Stuart Smalley's line of questioning concerned the campaign, not his activities as a Senator.

No, I'm not, but other people are desperately trying to take his words out of context.

I find it disturbing how so many Democrats lack simple reading comprehension skills. It seems that Joe Manchin is the only member of his party on Capitol Hill who is literate.

 

Fake RW propaganda news.

That was not the question he was asked. The question Session was asked is a matter of record, not the fake news RW propaganda is putting out.

Here is the record of what he was asked, and answered.

SEN. AL FRANKEN: "If there was any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this (2016) campaign, what would you do?," the Minnesota Democrat asked.

SESSIONS: "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."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/02/politics/russia-jeff-sessions-confirmation-hearing/

 

If it does not concern a blow job, the sexually repressed and hypocritical right wingers have no interest at getting at the truth or even recognizing it when it bites them on the butt.

 

Wait...are you trying to claim that mere knowledge of the existence of the meeting is enough to claim that the meeting was not held in secret? So then the meeting between Lynch and Clinton was not held in secret either.

The meeting between Sessions and the ambassador, the meeting in his office, was private. We do not have a record of the contents of that conversation. Sessions and the ambassador are both claiming that they don't even know if there are notes from the meeting or where those notes might be.