Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Sessions

13»

Comments

  • WilburHooksHands
    WilburHooksHands Member Posts: 6,804
    edited March 2017
    dnc said:

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: " No"
    oops
    Unfortunately, this. Legally malleable question.
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 113,829 Founders Club

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    The full transcript shows he specifically said in regards to the campaign. No serious person thinks he perjured himself. Even the WAPO time line said it's an over reach.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter

    dhdawg said:

    dhdawg said:

    trump and the gop will still run into heavy policy resistance, you can see that at town halls. and I still believe there will be a progressive movement sooner rather than later.

    However it will not come with this current brand of the democratic party. if anything they are a hindrance. This is the Clinton machine refusing to admit that their brand of politics no longer works and screaming about how their inevitable victory was stolen from them by Russia.

    I'm not saying we don't need to investigate it. I wouldn't put anything past these people. but the focus should be on his crazy tax proposal, his war on the env't and science, his useless border wall, the failed raid in yemen, etc. not this shit

    All you talk about are Trump's bad things. What about his good things? Not seeing them? Then you need to pray for him.
    Outside of axing tpp he hasn't really dome anything good. Not much of anything in general
    Why do you hate to compete? And win? America is poised to exert its unparalleled economic comparative advantage. Especially in the Far East. Why do you love the chinese? Do you work in air conditioning manufacturing? Car parts manufacturing?
    I manufacture air conditioning. Which makes me an air conditioner.
    Good for you! This post is about comparative advantage. Please chime back in again on the post about economic obsolescence. You will have plenty to add.
    For a guy who so desperately wants others to think he's smart, you really should learn basic English and stop trying so hard.
    Got it. You accept your inferiority. It's a first step. Good luck!
    You smelt it you dealt it. Don't worry, Cuck. I won't fuck your fat, ugly girlfriend who likes bald guys.
  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    dhdawg said:

    dhdawg said:

    trump and the gop will still run into heavy policy resistance, you can see that at town halls. and I still believe there will be a progressive movement sooner rather than later.

    However it will not come with this current brand of the democratic party. if anything they are a hindrance. This is the Clinton machine refusing to admit that their brand of politics no longer works and screaming about how their inevitable victory was stolen from them by Russia.

    I'm not saying we don't need to investigate it. I wouldn't put anything past these people. but the focus should be on his crazy tax proposal, his war on the env't and science, his useless border wall, the failed raid in yemen, etc. not this shit

    All you talk about are Trump's bad things. What about his good things? Not seeing them? Then you need to pray for him.
    Outside of axing tpp he hasn't really dome anything good. Not much of anything in general
    Why do you hate to compete? And win? America is poised to exert its unparalleled economic comparative advantage. Especially in the Far East. Why do you love the chinese? Do you work in air conditioning manufacturing? Car parts manufacturing?
    I manufacture air conditioning. Which makes me an air conditioner.
    Good for you! This post is about comparative advantage. Please chime back in again on the post about economic obsolescence. You will have plenty to add.
    For a guy who so desperately wants others to think he's smart, you really should learn basic English and stop trying so hard.
    Got it. You accept your inferiority. It's a first step. Good luck!
    You smelt it you dealt it. Don't worry, Cuck. I won't fuck your fat, ugly girlfriend who likes bald guys.
    You are so mad!!!
  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    The full transcript shows he specifically said in regards to the campaign. No serious person thinks he perjured himself. Even the WAPO time line said it's an over reach.
    Then why are you so defensive?
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 113,829 Founders Club

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    The full transcript shows he specifically said in regards to the campaign. No serious person thinks he perjured himself. Even the WAPO time line said it's an over reach.
    Then why are you so defensive?
    Link?
  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    The full transcript shows he specifically said in regards to the campaign. No serious person thinks he perjured himself. Even the WAPO time line said it's an over reach.
    Then why are you so defensive?
    Link?
    Your fucking previous post. Quoting the WA post. It wreaks of desperateness. Trumpanzees are in full on panic responding like this. Even the orangutan himself had to tweet today. Sad!
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 113,829 Founders Club

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    The full transcript shows he specifically said in regards to the campaign. No serious person thinks he perjured himself. Even the WAPO time line said it's an over reach.
    Then why are you so defensive?
    Link?
    Your fucking previous post. Quoting the WA post. It wreaks of desperateness. Trumpanzees are in full on panic responding like this. Even the orangutan himself had to tweet today. Sad!
    Its a 4 page thread that I have two posts in

    Fake post!

    This non issue was resolved yesterday when it collapsed in on itself. Hope this helps
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter

    dhdawg said:

    dhdawg said:

    trump and the gop will still run into heavy policy resistance, you can see that at town halls. and I still believe there will be a progressive movement sooner rather than later.

    However it will not come with this current brand of the democratic party. if anything they are a hindrance. This is the Clinton machine refusing to admit that their brand of politics no longer works and screaming about how their inevitable victory was stolen from them by Russia.

    I'm not saying we don't need to investigate it. I wouldn't put anything past these people. but the focus should be on his crazy tax proposal, his war on the env't and science, his useless border wall, the failed raid in yemen, etc. not this shit

    All you talk about are Trump's bad things. What about his good things? Not seeing them? Then you need to pray for him.
    Outside of axing tpp he hasn't really dome anything good. Not much of anything in general
    Why do you hate to compete? And win? America is poised to exert its unparalleled economic comparative advantage. Especially in the Far East. Why do you love the chinese? Do you work in air conditioning manufacturing? Car parts manufacturing?
    I manufacture air conditioning. Which makes me an air conditioner.
    Good for you! This post is about comparative advantage. Please chime back in again on the post about economic obsolescence. You will have plenty to add.
    For a guy who so desperately wants others to think he's smart, you really should learn basic English and stop trying so hard.
    Got it. You accept your inferiority. It's a first step. Good luck!
    You smelt it you dealt it. Don't worry, Cuck. I won't fuck your fat, ugly girlfriend who likes bald guys.
    You are so mad!!!
    No, no, no. Christ. You do it like this: "Why are you so Angry?"

    You can't even fag-poast correctly. C'mon kid. Pick up your game or stay on the bench.
  • BearsWiin
    BearsWiin Member Posts: 5,072

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    The full transcript shows he specifically said in regards to the campaign. No serious person thinks he perjured himself. Even the WAPO time line said it's an over reach.
    It's really hard to make a perjury charge stick. He may have, but there's enough plausible deniability here that, absent concrete intel on what exactly was discussed between Sessions and Kislyak, this probably goes nowhere. The interesting thing will be if concrete intel emerges that does show he perjured himself, then it's a slam dunk. But for that to happen, US intel agencies might have to divulge info on methods and capabilities that they would rather not divulge.
  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    The full transcript shows he specifically said in regards to the campaign. No serious person thinks he perjured himself. Even the WAPO time line said it's an over reach.
    Then why are you so defensive?
    Link?
    Your fucking previous post. Quoting the WA post. It wreaks of desperateness. Trumpanzees are in full on panic responding like this. Even the orangutan himself had to tweet today. Sad!
    Its a 4 page thread that I have two posts in

    Fake post!

    This non issue was resolved yesterday when it collapsed in on itself. Hope this helps

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    The full transcript shows he specifically said in regards to the campaign. No serious person thinks he perjured himself. Even the WAPO time line said it's an over reach.
    Then why are you so defensive?
    Link?
    Your fucking previous post. Quoting the WA post. It wreaks of desperateness. Trumpanzees are in full on panic responding like this. Even the orangutan himself had to tweet today. Sad!
    Its a 4 page thread that I have two posts in

    Fake post!

    This non issue was resolved yesterday when it collapsed in on itself. Hope this helps
    The perjury issue? Likely true it's going nowhere based on the standard of evidence required. Sessions had all the time in the world to explain how and why he met the Russian ambassador. Why didn't he? Fremont was correctly pointing out that the point of the sessions debate is that it was given under oath to congress.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter
    Witnessing @CirrhosisDawg double-tard poast hurts my eyes.
  • WilburHooksHands
    WilburHooksHands Member Posts: 6,804
    This went off the rails quickly.
  • dnc
    dnc Member Posts: 56,839

    This went off the rails quickly.

    New bored motto!
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter

    This went off the rails quickly.

    It's Friday. I'm already drunk. What do you expect?
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    dnc said:

    2001400ex said:

    dnc said:

    2001400ex said:

    dnc said:

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: " No"
    oops
    Who do you not read this: "Either before or after election day."
    Because the timeframe "about the 2016 election" frames the discussion. The burden of proof is not that he talked to a Russian, it's that he talked to a Russian about the election. Until that's established, he hasn't perjured anything.

    Maybe the dems should axe better questions.
    I remember the bitching saying Obama lied about saving $2,500 in medical insurance. Which was a campaign promise. Where was the burden of proof there?

    See what I'm getting at? Just because he's your guy, doesn't mean you should stick up for him and follow what your masters say. He lied. Period.
    I never bitched about that regarding Obama and neither Trump nor Sessions are my guy. Oh for three.

    You're fucking clueless as usual.

    If he was asked if he spoke about the campaign to a Russian, and said no, you're gonna have to prove that he spoke about the campaign before you can say he lied. If he lied run his ass, doesn't make a difference to me. As it is all I see is a bunch of bitching about nothing.
    Trump won the election by 3-5 million votes.
  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390

    This went off the rails quickly.

    It's Friday. I'm already drunk. What do you expect?
    No!?
  • dflea
    dflea Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,287 Swaye's Wigwam
    doogie said:

    What difference does it make?

    It doesn't.

    But this is the shitty political game that gets played in DC.

    Stop acting like you haven't seen it before from both shitty ass parties.
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,035 Standard Supporter
    dflea said:

    doogie said:

    What difference does it make?

    It doesn't.

    But this is the shitty political game that gets played in DC.

    Stop acting like you haven't seen it before from both shitty ass parties.
    https://youtu.be/KaUljset52k
    Today in the Senate.
  • tenndawg
    tenndawg Member Posts: 1,161
    edited March 2017
    Gaze upon the enchanting Mrs Sessions

    I don't think opposing weed is working for El Jefe...

    He's gotta be banging someone else, or at least whacking it in semen encrusted sweat pants...
  • PurpleThrobber
    PurpleThrobber Member Posts: 48,042
    tenndawg said:

    Gaze upon the enchanting Mrs Sessions

    I don't think opposing weed is working for El Jefe...

    He's gotta be banging someone else, or at least whacking it in semen encrusted sweat pants...

    Sessions may be opposed to weed but obviously he is in favor of gay marriage. That's a dude.
  • tenndawg
    tenndawg Member Posts: 1,161

    tenndawg said:

    Gaze upon the enchanting Mrs Sessions

    I don't think opposing weed is working for El Jefe...

    He's gotta be banging someone else, or at least whacking it in semen encrusted sweat pants...

    Sessions may be opposed to weed but obviously he is in favor of gay marriage. That's a dude.
    And an ugly one - if he / she / it tried to suck me off in the bus station bathroom I'd kick it's teeth in with my Salvation Army donated steel toed boots
  • Doogles
    Doogles Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 12,726 Founders Club
    tenndawg said:

    tenndawg said:

    Gaze upon the enchanting Mrs Sessions

    I don't think opposing weed is working for El Jefe...

    He's gotta be banging someone else, or at least whacking it in semen encrusted sweat pants...

    Sessions may be opposed to weed but obviously he is in favor of gay marriage. That's a dude.
    And an ugly one - if he / she / it tried to suck me off in the bus station bathroom I'd kick it's teeth in with my Salvation Army donated steel toed boots
    In reality you'd close your eyes and think of Shane, but still.
  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    tenndawg said:

    Gaze upon the enchanting Mrs Sessions

    I don't think opposing weed is working for El Jefe...

    He's gotta be banging someone else, or at least whacking it in semen encrusted sweat pants...

    It looks like Ned Beatty. Squeal Beauregard squea!!
  • DonLemonParty
    DonLemonParty Member Posts: 155
    tenndawg said:

    Gaze upon the enchanting Mrs Sessions

    I don't think opposing weed is working for El Jefe...

    He's gotta be banging someone else, or at least whacking it in semen encrusted sweat pants...

    Looks like two thirds of a good time to me!
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,725 Standard Supporter

    JFC, meeting with the Russians isn't the issue.

    Lying about it under oath is.

    Some of you need to learn the difference.

    Except he didn't but still
    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 didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., asked: "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?"

    Sessions responded, in total: "No."
    Not connected to the election. He didn't have sex with a Russian either......
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,725 Standard Supporter

    tenndawg said:

    Gaze upon the enchanting Mrs Sessions

    I don't think opposing weed is working for El Jefe...

    He's gotta be banging someone else, or at least whacking it in semen encrusted sweat pants...

    Sessions may be opposed to weed but obviously he is in favor of gay marriage. That's a dude.
    Funny she doesn't look like Moochelle Obama.
  • Swaye
    Swaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,739 Founders Club
    Now that more facts are in it looks like maybe I jumped the gun. I'm usually wrong anyway so whatever. I will follow the news more closely in lock down. When I'm not finger painting rainbows and shit. FML.
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,725 Standard Supporter
    Swaye said:

    Now that more facts are in it looks like maybe I jumped the gun. I'm usually wrong anyway so whatever. I will follow the news more closely in lock down. When I'm not finger painting rainbows and shit. FML.

    They have tepees with bars?