It will be fine
Well-Known Member
You understand there's a difference between a tweet and something said under oath to the senate right?
The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming!
- Thread starter Sportello
- Start date
oldngray
nowhere special
Exactly.
McCaskill not only tweeted but met with ambassadors, which she claimed she never did.
The point remains that Sessions did not lie. Attempts to show otherwise are looking more foolish all the time.
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
He claims the campaign wasn't discussed in his meetings. He also claims he doesn't recall all that was said in the meetings. A competent administration official would have disclosed the meetings when asked about it to avoid just this scenario. Best case he's incompetent, worst case he's a liar.
How much black smoke needs to be pouring out of building before republicans can agree the fire department should probably look into it?
Brownslave688
You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
Mccaskill is filth. Can't believe she keeps getting voted in.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Funny, I said the same thing about Drumpf.
ImWaitingForTheDay
Annoy a conservative....Think for yourself
OK, let's reframe the question..."What if Mr. Sessions was a Democratic AG in a Democratic administration? Then would you suggest the recuse himself?" GO--->
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Trump has run other campaigns ?
ImWaitingForTheDay
Annoy a conservative....Think for yourself
Soooo Jeff Sessions LIED to congress and said that he had no contact with ANY Russian officials. He claimed this during his confirmation hearing. It turns out that he had contact with the Russian ambassador twice during Comrade Tᴙụᴍᴩ's campaign.
Isn't there ANYONE in this administration who doesn't work for the Kremlin?
Drain the swamp?
Drain the Volga river first.
Isn't there ANYONE in this administration who doesn't work for the Kremlin?
Drain the swamp?
Drain the Volga river first.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Seems that several Russians have already died .
Babagounj
Strength through joy
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
Sessions recused himself from the ongoing investigations. Can this administration make it one whole week without new scandals? How will they present their legislative agenda with the focus on all their ties to Russia?
moreluck
golden ticket member
Can the Dems refrain from being
s?
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
Democrats don't even have to do anything. Republicans hold the house, senate and White House and haven't even put forth a real proposal for a real bill. They are incompetent.Can the Dems refrain from being
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
Will happily trade her for Ron Johnson.
Sportello
Well-Known Member
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Let's see what real lawyers have to say on this matter .
Sorry But Jeff Sessions Absolutely Did NOT Perjure Himself Under Oath When Asked About Russia
The criminal law only prohibits lying to Congress under two statutes — 18 USC 1621 and 18 USC 1001.
Section 1621 requires a person “willfully and contrary” to a sworn oath “subscribe a material matter” which is both false and the person knows to be false.
Section 1001 is basically the same, without certain tribunal prerequisites: it also requires the government prove a person willfully made a materially false statement.
This requires three elements: first, a false statement; second, the false statement be “material”; and third, the false statement be made “knowingly” and “willfully.”
A statement is not false if it can be interpreted in an innocent manner.
A statement is not material if it is not particularly relevant to the subject of the inquiry.
Willfully is a very high standard of proof: it requires the person know they are committing the crime, and do so anyway.
None of the three exist as to Sessions.
Sorry But Jeff Sessions Absolutely Did NOT Perjure Himself Under Oath When Asked About Russia
The criminal law only prohibits lying to Congress under two statutes — 18 USC 1621 and 18 USC 1001.
Section 1621 requires a person “willfully and contrary” to a sworn oath “subscribe a material matter” which is both false and the person knows to be false.
Section 1001 is basically the same, without certain tribunal prerequisites: it also requires the government prove a person willfully made a materially false statement.
This requires three elements: first, a false statement; second, the false statement be “material”; and third, the false statement be made “knowingly” and “willfully.”
A statement is not false if it can be interpreted in an innocent manner.
A statement is not material if it is not particularly relevant to the subject of the inquiry.
Willfully is a very high standard of proof: it requires the person know they are committing the crime, and do so anyway.
None of the three exist as to Sessions.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
Usually two tokes.
Similar threads
