Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Kamala clearly want to get social media buzz for her run in 2020 they way she was interrupting Sessions. It's four more years of the Orange Goblin if that happens.
Smart guy waited until he had the nations attention and told his story unfiltered by the media. There is no perjury. He answered the question in the context Franken asked it, which was quite frankly a stupid and unfair question, during his confirmation. When he realized it seemed misleading, he corrected the record.
He happened to be at the same venue as the Russian ambassador may or may not have spoken to him but doesn't remember. He does remember he didn't have a substantive convo with him about anything, much less one involving collusion.
What is it about all that that you cannot comprehend? Its pretty simple.
You are correct. It is pretty simple. Did he communicate with Russians or not?
Sessions partially corrected the record several weeks later after the news broke that he lied.
Kamala clearly want to get social media buzz for her run in 2020 they way she was interrupting Sessions. It's four more years of the Orange Goblin if that happens.
She asked him for a yes or no answer and Sessions was rambling on trying to run out the clock.
She tried to get him to answer the question and was interrupted.
Why men seem to think it is fine and dandy to interrupt women is beyond me.
Is there ever a yes or no answer, in this instance?
Because she was F'n rude and was not listening to the lead dude?
...
One of the questions he rambled around about was whether he referred to written notes in preparation for testifying. That could have easily been answered with a "yes" or "no."
As it was her time to question, she was the "lead dude" during that time.
She was not rude. She was direct and no-nonsense. Sessions tried his swarmy, southern-fried charm on her to no avail. She got him to admit that his Russian meetings took place within the context of the campaign rather than as part of his Senate duties. (Which we all knew since not a single other member of the committee met even once with the Russian ambassador during this time and McCain got him to admit he had never expressed any interest in the Ukraine business while on the committee.)
These hearings aren't afternoons at the club where they pat each other on the back and talk about inconsequential matters.
The committee is trying to track down some serious business and he was refusing to give a straight answer.
If Sessions, Coats, and Rogers aren't charged with Contempt of Congress for refusing to answer questions with no legal basis for doing so, then Congress might as well fold up the hearings because they have abdicated their oversight responsibilities.
The one thing that strikes me is the contrast between the way Comey testified and how Sessions and the other two testified. Comey was very cooperative, gave answers without hesitating, did not "forget" things, and appeared to really want to do the right thing. Yes, he did have things he couldn't say in an open arena, but he went behind closed doors willingly, and probably gave them everything he knew.
Sessions, and the others, we trying to cover their butts, and the butt of Donald Trump. You could tell they were holding back and citing unfounded reasons why they could not answer some questions.
It was refreshing to watch Comey, and repulsive to watch Sessions and his buddies.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.