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

[Mithros]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

we already posted what the questions were why are you being dishonest?
the questions were did he talk to the Russians about the 2016 campaign. no he didn't.

The next question was did anyone affiliated with the trump campaign talk to the Russians.

he wasn't part of the trump campaign. he did have to talk to Russia as part of his job on the armed services board.
he didn't lie.

way to ignore the questions ask and be 100% dishonest but that is typical.

So the one question was.

Did he talk to Russia about the 2016 campaign. He answered no.

the next question which as been posted at least 3 times now was.

did anyone affiliated with the trump campaign talk to Russia.

he wasn't a part of the campaign. so you can stop being dishonest about the questions asked and the answer.

he can't comment on classified information from the armed services. Franken is not cleared for that information.

since he didn't lie you don't really have much to be interested in but your dishonesty is noted and fairly obvious.

No it isn't read the questions being posted? Leahy asked if he had communications about the 2016 campaign with Russia.

Franken asked if anyone in the campaign and communications with Russia.

He answered no to both which isn't a lie.

he didn't talk to Russia about the 2016 campaign
and he wasn't a part of the campaign.

I don't understand why people are being so dishonest. not to mention the MSM. but they are liberal hacks anyway.
I expect you to be better than what is trying to be pulled here.

Yep he asked if anyone affiliated with the campaign. he wasn't affiliated with the campaign. he also didn't talk to the Russians as a person affiliated with the campaign.
he didn't lie when he answered the question.

You can't disassociate the question from the answer.

I didn't call you a liar I called you dishonest in the discussion there is a difference.

You post is ignoring the context of the question and the answer that was related to the question more so you are doing it on purpose.

I have posted both questions for everyone to see.

No where did Sessions talk to Russia about the 2016 campaign. he didn't lie.

In no way was he affiliated with the trump campaign nor did he speak to Russia in any capacity related to the trump campaign so he didn't lie.

you are attempting to disassociate his response to the question or you are trying to distort the question into something it wasn't.
more so you are attempting to distort his answer into a different question.

that is dishonest.

Just a small sampling of your debating skills...

 

[Conservative]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

I put both franken's question and session's answer in full right there. So spare me the "you took him out of context" bull**** spin.

You have yet to prove that he was a surrogate or affiliated with the Trump campaign and that is what makes this statement out of context

 

[ludin]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

Two points... Reporters have contacted other members of the Armed Services committee. No one else has said they talked to the Russian ambassador and 19 have specifically said that they did not. So it's not like it was a common occurrence.

Second, if it's not a big deal why hide it? Why not admit that there was contact? You're under oath, that isn't a small thing. Most people I know would take that extremely seriously.

in what capacity of the trump campaign did he contact him in?
when you can actually answer that question you might have a point.

the other 19 met with other people.

the question dealt with the affiliation of the people in the trump campaign.
you dishonest to spin the question into something else is just that.

 

[poweRob]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

please explain

That story just states that they worked to secure the intel that was being gathered. You made it sound as if they were doing something nefarious.

 

[ludin]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

Just a small sampling of your debating skills...

so you can't actually address the argument.
I haven't been dishonest at all.

I have posted both questions and their responses
and there isn't a lie in either based on the questions that were asked.

 

[Conservative]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

I put both franken's question and session's answer in full right there. So spare me the "you took him out of context" bull**** spin.

The definition you want to ignore

sur·ro·gate
ˈsərəɡət,ˈsərəˌɡāt/
noun
a substitute, especially a person deputizing for another in a specific role or office.

af·fil·i·at·ed
əˈfilēˌādəd/
adjective
(of a subsidiary group or a person) officially attached or connected to an organization

Why do you insist on pursuing this?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

I guess you just glazed over this last page so...

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."

DATE: January 10

Sessions was a senator and a top Trump surrogate when he met the ambassador twice.

linkypoo...​

Sessions perjured himself. He's a liar.

The context was contact in regards to the trump campaign.


Are you really all this gullible to believe there is some MASSIVE russian collusion with ALL these different people? or do you pause for a moment and realize that the media and teh democrat party are simply creating a false narrative?



Besides, I shudder to think what the world would be like if you held hillary to this same standard...



from your of all places CNN link:


"SEN. PATRICK J. LEAHY: 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?" the Vermont Democrat asked in a questionnaire.


SESSIONS: No.


There is your context. why lie about this?

 

[poweRob]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

You have yet to prove that he was a surrogate or affiliated with the Trump campaign and that is what makes this statement out of context

Actually I did. I posted that he met twice with the russians while he was in the capacity of working for the trump campaign. Any other questions?

 

[Greenbeard]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

Prove that Sessions was AFFLIATED with or PART of the Trump Campaign?

https://m.facebook.com/DonaldTrump/posts/10156714551570725:0

What do I win?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

No one to my knowledge has alleged that Sessions passed classified information to the Russian.

The anonymous sources, once again, did.

 

[poweRob]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

The context was contact in regards to the trump campaign.


Are you really all this gullible to believe there is some MASSIVE russian collusion with ALL these different people? or do you pause for a moment and realize that the media and teh democrat party are simply creating a false narrative?



Besides, I shudder to think what the world would be like if you held hillary to this same standard...



from your of all places CNN link:


"SEN. PATRICK J. LEAHY: 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?" the Vermont Democrat asked in a questionnaire.


SESSIONS: No.


There is your context. why lie about this?

I don't know why Sessions is lying about this. Why don't you ask him?

 

[ludin]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

I don't know why Sessions is lying about this. Why don't you ask him?

prove he had contact with Russia about the 2016 campaign. if you can't then he didn't lie.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

Two points... Reporters have contacted other members of the Armed Services committee. No one else has said they talked to the Russian ambassador and 19 have specifically said that they did not. So it's not like it was a common occurrence.

Second, if it's not a big deal why hide it? Why not admit that there was contact? You're under oath, that isn't a small thing. Most people I know would take that extremely seriously.

Link?

 

[bubbabgone]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

That story just states that they worked to secure the intel that was being gathered. You made it sound as if they were doing something nefarious.

The nefarious part came when the intel (classified) gathered by Obama's State Dept. was given to select Senators so they could tailor their questions and also leaked to the media.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

I don't know why Sessions is lying about this. Why don't you ask him?

See this is why I get bored. true believers so willing to believe proven liars in the media, and failing to think independently of what they are told to think. How can we have a debate when you so clearly are not thinking for yourself?

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

:lamo The Republican administration is the gift that just keeps on giving.

I also want to know what in the **** was the Russian ambassador doing at the Republican National Convention?

 

[Mithros]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

in what capacity of the trump campaign did he contact him in?
when you can actually answer that question you might have a point.

the other 19 met with other people.

the question dealt with the affiliation of the people in the trump campaign.
you dishonest to spin the question into something else is just that.

At this point you probably deserve to be banned from this thread. You can't just call people dishonest in every post you make. Yes what you're doing can easily be considered to be trolling as it's unnecessarily inflammatory, it's a personal attack, and baits a response. But more importantly its a waste of bandwidth. No one wants to wade through post after post of this garbage.

 

[Anthony60]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

Are you for real? Wait, I bet yo are, you are that guy who posts conpiracy blogs.....

So if we are talking about A, and he says "I did not partake in A", hes saying he did not partake in "A, B, C, D" and so on?


how does that logic work for you?

The left is absolutely desperate. It is well known that he met with many foreign dignitaries. They are just grasping for anything they can. And of course, they have the press ready to put anything in the headlines that they want, otherwise this would be nothing.

 

[Risky Thicket]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

The nefarious part came when the intel (classified) gathered by Obama's State Dept. was given to select Senators so they could tailor their questions and also leaked to the media.

That's not correct according to what I read.

 

[poweRob]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

prove he had contact with Russia about the 2016 campaign. if you can't then he didn't lie.

I'm sure he could use that angle as a weasel. Let's just have that independent investigation and see what the NSA heard. Shall we?

 

[bubbabgone]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

Actually I did. I posted that he met twice with the russians while he was in the capacity of working for the trump campaign. Any other questions?

He was a Senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when he shook the Russian Ambassador's hand and also met with him. Those were the 2 instances.
Sessions said they met in his capacity as the Committee member.
I don't know what they discussed and neither do you ... right?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

History will look back at this as the 2nd coming of McCarthyism.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

I'm sure he could use that angle as a weasel. Let's just have that independent investigation and see what the NSA heard. Shall we?

"Have you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party".

 

[poweRob]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

See this is why I get bored. true believers so willing to believe proven liars in the media, and failing to think independently of what they are told to think. How can we have a debate when you so clearly are not thinking for yourself?

You... ReverendHellh0und... preaching about actually having a debate. Comedy gold right there.

 

[ludin]

Re: Sessions met with Russian envoy twice last year, encounters he later did not disc

At this point you probably deserve to be banned from this thread. You can't just call people dishonest in every post you make. Yes what you're doing can easily be considered to be trolling as it's unnecessarily inflammatory, it's a personal attack, and baits a response. But more importantly its a waste of bandwidth. No one wants to wade through post after post of this garbage.

When you are being dishonest I have every right to call it out. It is not a person attack on you but what you are posting you are 100% wrong.

when why can't you actually address what was said instead of making something up that wasn't said?