AG Sessions spoke with Russian officials

The term marks is Democrats means you don't know what the word Marxist mean

 

Why do those who don't know what Marxism is always accuse me of not knowing either?

Marxism has three basic tenets: 1. class warfare (proletariat vs bourgeois), 2. redistribution of wealth (from the bourgeois to the proletariat), and 3. central planning of the economy (to keep lots of free stuff coming for the proletariat)
You simply cannot hear a Democrat speak today without mentioning all three tenets, many times in the very same sentence. All three tenets are so deeply interwoven in the Democrat Party Platform they can't be removed.

I know *exactly* what Marxism is. And I know that the Democrats of today *are* Marxists to the core. All you have to do is look at their adherence to the Marxist meme of: "from each according to ability and to each according to need". That meme encompasses all three tenets of Marxism.

You can deny this all you want but it only means *YOU* are the one that doesn't know what the term "Marxist" means!

 

Sessions was not part of the Trump campaign, sessions as the ranking member of the armed services committee could have talked to the Russian Ambassador about almost, right now we have no idea what they talked about. Given the nature of the past campaign I suspect that it was at least mentioned in passing but, and this is crucial, Sessions was never officially part of the Trump campaign committee so frankly anything sessions might have said short of bribery, would have been perfectly acceptable no different than you or I discussing here.

 

Where did I claim to "outsmart" you?

That you lack the evidence to support the tinpot tantrum throwing Toddler-in-Chief has nothing whatsoever to do with smarts and everything to do with the fact that he is INDEFENSIBLE!

Now I could make a crack about smart people realising as much but that wouldn't be productive.

That you cut and run instead is because you don't really have any other options. In fact under the circumstances the smart thing to do is to quit while you are this far behind because we both know that the trainwreck that is the Trump regime is only going to deteriorate even further.

Best to go and lick your wounds and hope that Putin can kill off another critic to cheer you up.

Have a nice day!

 

He gets upset with anyone who does not agree with him or points out that some of his posts are nonsense. He will then put you on ignore which is funny.

 

He was under oath. That means that he committed perjury. Now why would he lie under oath if there was nothing to the growing body of evidence that the Trump has deeper ties to Russia that seem to go WELL beyond normal diplomacy?

~Jeff Session

 

Sessions WAS part of the Trump campaign and especially so when it came to Russia!

First the FACTS!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ions-donald-trumps-pick-for-attorney-general/

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...bout-sessions-role-as-foreign-policy-adviser/

Having established that Sessions was part of Trump's campaign we can now look into his Russian ties.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...ns-russia-contacts-campaign-article-1.2986600

Sessions is LYING and PERJURED himself before Congress. He needs to be removed and replaced.

 

It appears you have fallen for the Washington Composts fake news.

 

It appears that you are deceived by the Imposter-in-Chief who now infest the Oval office.

 

That is some clairvoyance by WP to publish an article in November knowing that Sessions would be suspected of perjury few months later. The other links are from Brietbart and NYD

 

LOL, you are all hot an bothered by something you know little about but can imagine the worst.

 

The man is the AG and LIED to congress....which he ripped up Clinton for.

He is the fourth Trumpist to lie about Russia...does this concern you at all?

 

You mean like this one?

Fake News: Media, Democrats Distort Remarks to Target Jeff Sessions

 

Fake News Lies By Losers Attempting, Yet again, To Re-litigate The Election.

I'm speculating?

Post the Full Question Asked, in context with the answer and explain why any reasonable person would believe perjury was committed by Secretary Sessions.

 

Except giving aid on various issue to the campaign does not put you on the committee. Sorry you have proven nothing.

 

No he did NOT answer the question he was asked. He was asked what he would do if there were contacts between the Trump campaign and Russians. He did not say what he would do. He did not answer the question.

He was NOT ASKED about his personal knowledge of any such contacts. He VOLUNTEERED that he was "not aware of any of those activities”.

He was NOT ASKED whether he was a surrogate for the Trump campaign. He VOLUNTEERED that, “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign".

He was NOT ASKED whether he had any contacts with the Russians (in any capacity at all). He VOLUNTEERED that, "I did not have communications with the Russians.” He did not qualify that statement in any way.

 

It does when you are actually put IN CHARGE of the committee!

Next time try actually reading the links and quotes provided before your kneejerk defence of the perjuring soon to be ex-AG kicks in.

 

This is obviously FAKE and edited live video.

 

Sessions *still* did not have contact with the Russian ambassador as part of the Trump campaign. It was as part of the Senate Armed Services committee. He met with over 20 Ambassadors in 2016. Were *all* of the meetings as a representative of the Trump campaign or as part of his role as a member of the Armed Services committee? Either they all were or none were. Trying to cherry pick one meeting and claim it was different is an argumentative fallacy. This is the argumentative fallacy known as the A Priori Argument. It is an assertion starting with a given, pre-set belief, dogma, doctrine, scripture verse, "fact" or conclusion and then searching for any reasonable or reasonable-sounding argument to rationalize, defend or justify it. You are assuming that Sessions' contact with the Russian Ambassador had to be about the campaign in order to rationalize your conclusion that the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians.

Franken asked about meetings associated with being part of the Trump campaign, not as part of the Senate Armed Forces agreement.

 

IMO.. the patriotism of most right wingers and Trump fans only goes as far as their interpretation of The First Amendment. They would not know the contents of The Bill of Rights or even the Preamble if it bit them on the ass.

 

These fake media outlets are peddling it hardcore. I can't wait for all the winning to continue.

#2010-2024TheRedWave

 

It appears you put Party ahead of country.

 

It is this kind of dishonesty, like this with Sessions, that the majority of Americans are coming to the conclusion you guys can not be trusted with anything or any power whatsoever

 

Wasn't it a hearing regarding his own confirmation? The AG position is not like being a lawyer, and he failed to appreciate this, which is what is worrying. One cannot be evasive in this manner but must follow the spirit of the law in order to be beyond reproach. The integrity of the position is more important than the individual sitting in the seat at the time.

 

You aren't listening to the full exchange. Session's said: "I am unable to comment on it".

That *IS* an answer whether you like it or not! This is no different than a judicial appointment undergoing confirmation hearings saying they cannot comment on a a potential case they might hear. The AG appointment cannot state in a confirmation hearing what they might or might not decide on a case being currently investigated.

Again, you may not *like* that but it doesn't mean that Sessions lied to anyone about his contacts with the Russian Ambassador!