4 ms·

It's funny how all logic completely goes out the window when politics is concerned. Otherwise super bright people I know just start uttering the most random of

It's funny how all logic completely goes out the window when politics is concerned. Otherwise super bright people I know just start uttering the most random of things. Welcome to politics as sport. As long as my team is winning, who cares. The question posed to him during the hearing was did he meet with Russian government about the campaign. Senators meet ambassadors. It's what they do. As long as he didn't negotiate for Trump, it's all good. That being said, a special bipartisan prosecutor makes sense. Session should recuse himself from this issue.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
wahern 10y ago
According to the article it was the written question submitted by Sen. Leahy that limited itself to communications specifically discussing the campaign. The oral question by Sen. Franken was more open ended, and Sessions response seemed even less ambiguous. At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign. “I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.” Officials said Sessions did not consider the conversations relevant to the lawmakers’ questions and did not remember in detail what he discussed with Kislyak. I don't think there's any kind of conspiracy involving Russia. But clearly there was a conspiracy among the Russians to effect the campaign. And there _might_ be something of a conspiracy within Trump's camp in the sense that they're intentionally circling the wagons regarding Trump's preferred Russian policy. I wouldn't speculate about the motivations behind Trump's preferences because they're probably numerous and not even necessarily coherent; more like a general coincidence of interests that both Trump and Russia would like to exploit.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

wahern 10y ago

According to the article it was the written question submitted by Sen. Leahy that limited itself to communications specifically discussing the campaign. The oral question by Sen. Franken was more open ended, and Sessions response seemed even less ambiguous. At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign. “I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.” Officials said Sessions did not consider the conversations relevant to the lawmakers’ questions and did not remember in detail what he discussed with Kislyak. I don't think there's any kind of conspiracy involving Russia. But clearly there was a conspiracy among the Russians to effect the campaign. And there _might_ be something of a conspiracy within Trump's camp in the sense that they're intentionally circling the wagons regarding Trump's preferred Russian policy. I wouldn't speculate about the motivations behind Trump's preferences because they're probably numerous and not even necessarily coherent; more like a general coincidence of interests that both Trump and Russia would like to exploit.