• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

WATCH LIVE: Sessions testifies about Russia meetings in Senate hearing

Stephen50right said:
Could this be any more boring? The Democrats have absolutely nothing on Jeff Sessions, and it's obvious.
Click to expand...

LOL, not if you listen to this forum.

This is just more wasted time on a fabricated pile of horse manure. While important matters go uncovered (which is he media's sole intention).
 
Erod said:
All this keeps blowing up in your faces, and it's just a coping mechanism to distract from the massive amount of corruption and failure in the DNC.

Jeff Sessions is rock solid. And you people hate rock solid.
Click to expand...

Nothing's blowing up in 'our' faces. He swore under oath that he had no 3rd meeting with the Russian ambassador at the Mayflower but he also says 'it's conceivable' that he did.

He's only 'rock solid' to someone who's been drinking since breakfast.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Nothing's blowing up in 'our' faces. He swore under oath that he had no 3rd meeting with the Russian ambassador at the Mayflower but he also says 'it's conceivable' that he did.

He's only 'rock solid' to someone who's been drinking since breakfast.
Click to expand...

And it appears sessions is trying to dodge specific questions without invoking executive privilege
 
So is Jeff Sessions citing executive privilege or what?
 
Erod said:
All this keeps blowing up in your faces, and it's just a coping mechanism to distract from the massive amount of corruption and failure in the DNC.

Jeff Sessions is rock solid. And you people hate rock solid.
Click to expand...

Rock solid? The term you're looking for is "fossilized".

What blew up in anyone's faces? I'd be happy if Sessions was exonerated. I don't want the dinosaur running the drug war to also be a Russian stooge.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
And it appears sessions is trying to dodge specific questions without invoking executive privilege
Click to expand...

It appears to me that the liberals on the committee are trying to get him to answer anything in the course of questions concerning private conversations, so that they can deny executive privilege in the future....
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Nothing's blowing up in 'our' faces. He swore under oath that he had no 3rd meeting with the Russian ambassador at the Mayflower but he also says 'it's conceivable' that he did.

He's only 'rock solid' to someone who's been drinking since breakfast.
Click to expand...

Meetings with ambassadors happen all the time throughout the halls of Washington among both parties like clockwork, sometimes formal and sometimes just in passing conversations at various functions. What constitutes a meeting, versus a conversation?

He's trying to circumnavigate this cluster**** of a fabricated scandal you guys have concocted.
 
It's inappropriate to answer questions about private conversations with the President, without the President reviewing the questions and deciding the appropriate answer?

He basically just said, he can't comment til he gets told what to say. How is that not suspicious as hell.
 
TheGoverness said:
Well he keeps citing some vague DOJ rule that he's for some reason choosing not clarifying.
Click to expand...

It's not executive privilege, that would be President Trump's privilege to exercise.

He's claiming that his conversations were confidential so he won't comment. Which is just as well considering his own admissions toward the sorry state of his memory.
 
TheGoverness said:
Well he keeps citing some vague DOJ rule that he's for some reason choosing not clarifying.
Click to expand...

No, he's trying to tip-toe through the legal minefield the Democrats are laying out in front of him.
 
Erod said:
Meetings with ambassadors happen all the time throughout the halls of Washington among both parties like clockwork, sometimes formal and sometimes just in passing conversations at various functions. What constitutes a meeting, versus a conversation?

He's trying to circumnavigate this cluster**** of a fabricated scandal you guys have concocted.
Click to expand...

Apparently it is now a formal meeting if you say Hi to someone at a gathering....
 
ThoughtEx. said:
It's inappropriate to answer questions about private conversations with the President, without the President reviewing the questions and deciding the appropriate answer?

He basically just said, he can't comment til he gets told what to say. How is that not suspicious as hell.
Click to expand...

He had all weekend to work out a story with the president. The best he came up with was to claim it's all confidential without any real justification.

Basically, what he's claiming is that the president isn't accountable to congress, which he should know (as a former senator) is bull****.
 
Napoleon said:
Judging from his testimony I'd be shocked if he could recall his own name or what day it is.
Click to expand...

Can you remember the specifics of every meaningless conversation you had nine months ago? No, you can't, and you don't talk to as many people in a year as a senator does in a week.
 
Sessions said he might of had a conservastion with the Russian ambassador in the reception area, but not in a formal setting.
 
Erod said:
Can you remember the specifics of every meaningless conversation you had nine months ago? No, you can't, and you don't talk to as many people in a year as a senator does in a week.
Click to expand...

I don't testify under oath that something definitively did not happen if the truth is my memory is so shot that I don't know. It seems pretty clear that he does know and he's lying under oath again.
 
Absentglare said:
I didn't say that he lied, i said it was objectively false.

However, now that you bring the L-word into it, either his memory is failing so badly that he's unfit, or he lied.
Click to expand...

you are using a semantics argument.
or he answered the question that was asked.
 
Napoleon said:
I don't testify under oath that something definitively did not happen if the truth is my memory is so shot that I don't know. It seems pretty clear that he does know and he's lying under oath again.
Click to expand...

No, it's clear that you guys are getting your asses handed to you again for the umpteenth time. LOL
 
TheGoverness said:
Sessions said he might of had a conservastion with the Russian ambassador in the reception area, but not in a formal setting.
Click to expand...

As have hundreds of senators and congresspeople as well. It's called......Washington.
 
Absentglare said:
He had all weekend to work out a story with the president. The best he came up with was to claim it's all confidential without any real justification.

Basically, what he's claiming is that the president isn't accountable to congress, which he should know (as a former senator) is bull****.
Click to expand...

All these liberal senators are doing anyway is mugging for the camera's....There's nothing here....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom