jump to last post 1-11 of 11 discussions (75 posts)

Jeff Sessions Met With Russia: More Fake News

  1. Sychophantastic profile image81
    Sychophantasticposted 5 months ago

    What do you think of the so-called revelation that Jeff Session met with the Russians and then lied to Congress about it?

    This is obviously more fake news from the left-wing media.

    1. wilderness profile image94
      wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      I saw that!  He actually spoke with the ambassador at some kind of ambassadorial meeting of many ambassadors from all over.  I'm also seeing where such a despicable act was treason and he needs jailed. lol

      "The Justice Department said late Wednesday that one of the discussions between Sessions and Sergey Kislyak was an office visit that occurred in Sessions' capacity as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. The second conversation took place in a group setting with other ambassadors following a Heritage Foundation speech."

      Of course, Sessions never denied speaking to a Russian: "...Sessions said, "I never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign.".  Almost seems like the whole thing is being blown just a wee bit out of proportion, doesn't it?

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03 … paign.html

      1. Don W profile image82
        Don Wposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        Jeff Sessions [under oath]: "I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it" (Jan 10, 2017).

        Timeline of events:
        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pol … e3fd90a15f

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

          Fascinating.  Wonder which one, or both, are true.

          1. Don W profile image82
            Don Wposted 5 months ago in reply to this

            From a legal perspective, the statement that matters is the one given under oath ("I did not have communications with the Russians") as that's the one that is potentially a case of perjury (he allegedly did have communications with the Russians). Whether he spoke about the campaign or not is irrelevant, as that's not the question he was asked under oath.

            1. wilderness profile image94
              wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

              Yes, that's the one that will likely matter.  Then the question becomes one of meaning and context.

              "“there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.”

              Did he answer in the context of being a Trump surrogate or intermediary and exchange information in that capacity?  Up to the jury, isn't it? 

              Or should we all assume that context doesn't matter, actual meaning doesn't matter and hang him because we don't like him?

              1. Don W profile image82
                Don Wposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                The exact quote is: "I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it", which indicates he is answering in the context of being a Trump surrogate.

                But you're absolutely right. It is for a jury to decide whether he committed perjury.

                It is also absolutely right that the matter is investigated, and based on the results of that investigation, a decision made as to whether he be prosecuted for perjury.

                1. Ken Burgess profile image82
                  Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                  A lawyer, a former DA, laughed at all this, and said:  "none of it would stand up in court... but in D.C. the criminals run the investigations so anything is possible."

                  I think he summed it up nicely.

                  1. Don W profile image82
                    Don Wposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                    If that is the outcome of an investigation, so be it, but it is right for the matter to be investigated, and it is right for Sessions to recuse himself from that investigation, or any related to it.

                2. wilderness profile image94
                  wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                  "It is also absolutely right that the matter is investigated, and based on the results of that investigation, a decision made as to whether he be prosecuted for perjury."

                  I thought Clinton established very well that perjury before congress was quite acceptable?  Although it will appease some to spend a few millions of taxpayer dollars to embarrass their political opponent.  I swear, after the Clinton fiasco there isn't much of a reason to "investigate" our politicians at all!

                3. wilderness profile image94
                  wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                  Yes, that's kind of how I read it - he's answering in the context of being a surrogate, not a senator.  And if true, then the statement is apparently true as well.

              2. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
                Kathleen Cochranposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                Hang him because we don't like him?  It's not like we've never seen that before.

    2. Marisa Wright profile image93
      Marisa Wrightposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      I have no idea about this particular piece of information, but I'm curious, how do you tell the difference between fake news and real news?   Is it just that you've made up your mind one group is honest and the other is lying, and how can you be so certain?

      1. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
        Kathleen Cochranposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        Excellent question.

      2. Ken Burgess profile image82
        Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        Sometimes the 'fake news' is easy to spot...

        I know I fall back on this one too often, but it is because it is the most obvious... when the MSM went ahead and pushed the Benghazi/Riots being caused by a 'youtube' video that was 'fake news' or rather, that was the MSM pushing a lie for the establishment.

        50 years ago, there would have been reporters tearing into that lie and exposing it for it was.  And they would have exposed the shipment of weapons sent to the Muslim Brotherhood and other rebels in Syria.

        Maybe not... maybe the went after Nixon because he was a Republican, maybe they dug into Iran - Contra because Reagan was a Republican, maybe they are hell bent to destroy Trump because he is a Republican.

        In which case, the question remains, who to believe and why.

        1. promisem profile image93
          promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

          If it's a lie, provide proof from a credible source other than Fox News or Breitbart.

    3. Ken Burgess profile image82
      Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      What all this has been about, Flynn, Sessions, and everyone else they are trying to tag with this... well what can I say except this gives a ton of credibility that there is some form of 'shadow government' or 'deep state' at work here trying to undermine Trump and his administration.

      Once again, what is Trump first and foremost... he is the ANTI-Establishment President, he is not part of the inner-click, he is not someone they can just throw a hundred million dollars at and buy off.  He is not an 'establishment' politician and therefore he is a threat.

      Trump most likely believes having been elected President that he is in charge, that he is there to do the people's bidding... that's a nice sentiment, but that type of President/Government died with Woodrow Wilson when he betrayed the Nation, the People, and the Constitution by signing into law the Federal Reserve Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Sixteenth Amendment, the Revenue Act, Sedition Act, Segregation, WWI etc. he was a one man wrecking crew supported by the most corrupt people alive at that time, literally the roots of everything you probably hate about our government today can be laid at Wilson's feet... he did more to strip the rights of Americans away and create a bank controlled one-world system of masters and slaves than any man in America's history.

      Sorry for getting off track... so anyways, it is interesting that SOMEONE is doing everything possible to disrupt Trump's administration, pulling strings everywhere... from Federal Judges to Senators to the FBI.

      Reminds me in many ways of the struggles Kennedy had against the 'establishment', the FBI, CIA, and Military Complex, and how when they found they couldn't control him... well...

      1. crankalicious profile image87
        crankaliciousposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        Tin foil hat anyone?

        1. Ken Burgess profile image82
          Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

          Clueless aren't you?
          We are in the midst of a 'civil war' so to speak between the MSM + D.C. Establishment and their owners/controllers VS the people... the wave of ant-establishment grows every year, in large part because everyone can communicate and learn facts without the media or political parties.

          But don't take my word for it... I realize many either support the 'establishment' because they are doing well with it, while others are unable to discern what is really going on, and are happy having their reality spoonfed to them by the likes of CNN and NY Times.

          So here, let the NY Times tell you a bit about it:
          https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/02/opin … cracy.html

          Now... the only mistake is they want to use this insight to lay blame on Russians, to ignore the truth of what they are saying... that people have the means to talk to one another in mass on the internet, and they can see for themselves what is going on, by Search, by YouTube, so when the MSM lies to them about something, or tells a falsehood, it is almost immediately found out... something that used to take weeks, months, sometime never to be uncovered is disproved overnight now.

          The Politicians the ones that have been in Washington for decades, are totally out of touch with their constituency, they are totally out of touch with how todays technology makes them incapable of escaping scrutiny.

          Politicians like Pelosi, Waters, McCain, are exposed for being out of touch, and uncaring of the needs and interests of Americans... for them its all politics and corruption and they all need to be removed from D.C.

          1. promisem profile image93
            promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

            Yes, all media lies except for Fox News.

    4. Sharlee01 profile image80
      Sharlee01posted 5 months ago in reply to this

      I am pleased to see he recused himself, it will save him from further persecution? General Sessions met with the ambassador in an official capacity as a member of the "Senate Armed Services Committee", which is entirely consistent with his testimony, and his job at the time of the meeting. I hope all the nay Sayers will consider that this before smearing him.

    5. promisem profile image93
      promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      Anyone who colludes with Russia to put Trump in the White House is a traitor.

      Anyone who defends and supports the above also is a traitor.

      1. Ken Burgess profile image82
        Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        Where is the proof?
        Obama met with the Russians constantly, was he a traitor?
        The meetings with Flynn occurred AFTER Trump was already elected President, but not yet sworn in, was he a traitor?
        What about China?  When the Clintons were funded by Chinese businessmen (and still are, as well as the Royal Saudi family) are they traitors for taking the money?  What about Clinton selling Uranium to the Russians?
        This is, and always has been a witch hunt to undermine not just Trump, but the anti-establishment movement that put him into office.  These corrupt politicians, and the various factions paying them and making them mega-millionaires, are fighting for their lives... the RNC and DNC is fighting for relevancy... they are trying to regain control of populace by convincing them that Trump is the most evil and vile human being alive, and that he and all his aids are Russian traitors.
        Do you ever open your mind up and think?
        Why are the Russians suddenly these big bad villains?
        Because they exposed some Clinton emails, and let Americans get a glimpse about what she and her campaign were really all about?
        Are we supposed to do what the Democrats are suggesting now and go to war with Russia?
        Are you truly wishing for the total break down of the American government, and for anarchy and chaos to rule in the street?
        Do you think Trump supporters are going to sit back and accept Trump being dragged out of the Presidency anymore than Obama supporters would have sat back and accepted his being thrown out?
        Do you think Trump supporters are going to believe he is a Russian conspirator anymore than Obama supporters believed he was not an American, and a Muslim conspirator?
        There would be no less of a reaction of total upheaval and violence if Trump is wrongly removed than if Obama was... unless you convince more than 90% of the country that a President is rightfully being removed... not 40%  not 50%... 90% or more,,, then you are inviting civil unrest.
        "Elections have consequences"... Trump and his aids can be removed in 2020 by election... and not sooner.
        See from MY perspective, anyone that doesn't support the President, whether they like him or not, whether they believe him to be a Muslim Manchurian Candidate or a Russian Conspirator is a Traitor... the Democrats in Congress, their actions are traitorous, they are colluding against the lawfully elected Executive, they are conspiring against the best interests of all Americans by willfully and wantonly undermining the American government, and its President.
        If they were all impeached and thrown out of office, Pelosi, Schumer, Waters, etc.  I would 100% support such an action.
        So to you, I am a traitor for supporting Trump... and to me you are a traitor because you do not.
        I am an ex-Army Ranger... if the call went out... I'd pick up my Rifle, my pistols and defend the lawfully elected President, and I would be just one of millions... if the Democrats and their ilk want to push it that far... how far are you willing to go to defend what you believe?

        1. promisem profile image93
          promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

          First of all, I didn't say anyone colluded with Russia. I just said collusion was treason. Are you saying it's not treason as long as your guy gets the White House?

          Second, comparing meetings between Obama and Russians during Obama's presidency with Trump campaign aides meeting with them during the campaign is way beyond comparing apples and oranges.

          Yes, you are a traitor if you support collusion with Russians to get Trump in the White House. No, you aren't a traitor if you simply support Trump.

          You have so many other inaccurate attacks on me that they aren't worthy of a response.

          1. Ken Burgess profile image82
            Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

            Both Pelosi and McCaskill who have pushed the matter on Sessions, and had stated they themselves never met with the Russian Ambassador, are now being shown to have lied about the matter...  they met with the Russian Ambassador in the same capacity as Sessions had, so if he was colluding with Russians, so were they.

            Second, on Obama meeting with Russians not being the same, I am sure you are aware of the infamous clip where Obama said to Medvedev during a hot mike incident "This is my last election. After my election I will have more flexibility..." Sessions meeting with a Russian Ambassador while a Senator and in pursuit of his duties as such, and Obama meeting with Medvedev in pursuit of his duties as President... its all the same.

            I don't have any other innacurate attacks on you, I only had questions... other than the 'traitor' issue being couched in a way to get you to see another perspective in hopes to get you considering ramifications or alternative viewpoints... Sessions, nor anyone else in the Trump Administration is any more guilty of 'treason' with the Russians than Obama or Clinton (selling of Uranium and other issues aside)... at least there is no PROOF of such being given by anyone.

            So until there is concrete, serious, evidence of such... the actions being taken now by Pelosi, Watters, etc. is what I would call treasonous, and certainly impeachment worthy, for reasons noted above in previous posts.

            1. promisem profile image93
              promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

              Sessions meeting with the Russians as a top campaign aide to Trump is not even close to Obama meeting with Russians as president. Not to mention the five other campaign aides who now admit to meeting with them.

              Sessions is not guilty of collusion? How do you know? Do you have access to him that the rest of us don't?

              I understand why you would defend the guy you voted for. But denying reality is exactly what Trump and the Russians want from American voters.

              1. Ken Burgess profile image82
                Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                I'm not defending the guy... I am making every effort to expose the corruption in D.C. ... Trump the outsider, the 'drain the swamp' candidate, has walked into a minefield of opposition.

                Until there is irrefutable proof given, that there was direct effort in conjuction with the Russians to steal an election, by means of voter fraud, or something else as serious... I don't give a crap who met whom as  Senator, or who made a phone call... that means nothing to me... its all BS, unsubstantiated BS. 

                And most likely those who voted for Trump, and many who didn't could care less as well.

                1. promisem profile image93
                  promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                  Then I will ask these questions with respect. Why did all of those campaign aides meet with the Russians at all? Why did they meet in secret? Did they not understand the risk of how the meetings would be perceived?

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image82
                    Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                    This is something that will get fleshed out.
                    And now we have the Obama wiretaps and server hacking that will be looked into.
                    And now we also have a Loretta Lynch video, being featured on the Official U.S. Senate Democrats facebook page that is calling out for civil unrest and violence.
                    Looks like things just got pushed to the point where SOMEONE and likely MANY someone's are going to be publicly flayed as traitors to the Nation.
                    With leaders like Pelosi, Watters, Warren leading the brilliant and oh so well articulated charge from one side ... and Trump and his Admin on the other...

                    This shouldn't come as a surprise... as I keep telling you... this is the anti-establishment 'drain the swamp' candidate/movement (not Republican or Conservative)  ... as much as you might find Trump distasteful, it isn't really about him, its about more than 60 million Americans saying 'we've had enough' that put him in office to take down the corrupt and criminal politicians that have been in there for DECADES screwing over the American people every chance they got.

    6. psycheskinner profile image81
      psycheskinnerposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      He admits himself that the meetings happened, so what is fake about the news?

      1. promisem profile image93
        promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        It's fake because his supporters say it's fake. Everything is fake if it doesn't fit their view of the world.

        1. ahorseback profile image48
          ahorsebackposted 5 months ago in reply to this

          How can it be   a prosecutable offence  for one diplomat to meet with another diplomat , unless in those meetings - secret deals like selling uranium to the Russians  or selling  missile guidance systems to the Chinese military  , is a prosecutable offence [ The Clintons ] ? Perhaps an administration  selling  American guns to the Mexican drug cartels  [ Obama ]is a  normal diplomatic occurrence for liberals ?
          See what I mean about the naiveté of liberal ideologies ,they have O political memory .
          Why even argue with those who have no clue about political reality  ?

          1. promisem profile image93
            promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

            Really? What is your political experience?

            Mine includes multiple campaign work, a father who was a Republican official, a son who was a Republican aide and many other political activities. Please prove your political expertise.

          2. crankalicious profile image87
            crankaliciousposted 5 months ago in reply to this

            It's not prosecutable for one diplomat to meet with another. However, it is perjury to say that "I never met with the Russians" when you did meet with the Russians while testifying under oath in front of Congress. Further, it may be prosecutable if it's proven that your trip to meet with said Russians was paid for by the Trump campaign.

            1. ahorseback profile image48
              ahorsebackposted 5 months ago in reply to this

              Naïve   ,    for one thing  the Trump campaign paid  for itself ,  unheard of on the left I know  ,   two ,  I hope Sessions had met with the Russians or any government , It just proves the Trump administration "hit the ground running "..       Better open your eye's , it seems every member of the left , those making the allegations has met with the Russians also .

              Fake News IS real.

              1. crankalicious profile image87
                crankaliciousposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                The Trump campaign paid for itself? So did the Hillary campaign.

                "The campaign paid for itself." All campaigns fund themselves.

                Are you trying to say that Trump was self-funded? If so, that is a lie.

  2. ahorseback profile image48
    ahorsebackposted 5 months ago

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13431323.jpg

    In the early  1980's  then Sen, Ted Kennedy privately INVITED the  Russian government into  a clandestine attempt to sabotage Ronald Reagans  re-election campaign !     How shallow the memory of democrats love for ANY external conspiracies of  the American electoral process !

    Do democrats have ANY political memory muscle at all ?

  3. ahorseback profile image48
    ahorsebackposted 5 months ago

    Liberals "looking in haystacks for needles"  should be happy that the administration is talking to the  Russians , When  diplomats stop being diplomatic  , that's when things get nasty .    Far be it though for todays  liberals to understand either real diplomacy and real politics  in general .

  4. Valeant profile image88
    Valeantposted 5 months ago

    I love how Trump says certain media outlets are fake news, but then quotes directly from Fox News when it comes to Sweden.  An outlet that puts a Swedish Security expert on who is unknown to swedish security experts:  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world … 01506.html

    1. promisem profile image93
      promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      Yep, all media is fake news if it says something he doesn't like. It's real news if he does like it.

  5. profile image59
    ronscalesposted 5 months ago

    You have to know that those Right Wing nut cases still believe in the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, and that there's only one Santa who is White and has a Summer home in Alaska right? They're making Pinocchio appear amateurish with the steady flow of lies from "The Spice Man", and Kelly "Oneway".

    1. GA Anderson profile image84
      GA Andersonposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      And you have to know that no one would ever describe your comment as "'reeking with credibility'.

      GA

  6. blueheron profile image97
    blueheronposted 5 months ago

    If you are a congressman, part of your job is to meet with foreign ambassadors. The reason we have foreign ambassadors is so people can meet with them and talk to them. The whole idea that there is anything objectionable about any political figure's meeting with a Russian ambassador is utter horseshit.

    1. Don W profile image82
      Don Wposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      The allegation is that Sessions lied under oath. If he did, that's perjury.

      Perjury is a criminal offense.

      If the allegation is true, then the whole idea that there is nothing objectionable about an attorney general committing a criminal offense is (to use your words) "utter horseshit".

      1. Ken Burgess profile image82
        Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        They asked him under oath if he had met with the Russians in a capacity on behalf of the Trump campaign... he said no.

        Sessions maintained Thursday that he didn't speak to the Russian official in his capacity as a surrogate of Trump's campaign but instead as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

        Unless they can produce proof (audio tape or such) that directly proves that he did act on behalf of Trump's campaign with the Russian this is total garbage.

        1. promisem profile image93
          promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

          He also said he had no "communications" with the Russians and then admitted that he did.

          If Hillary Clinton had help from Russian intelligence to win the election, would you be just as supportive of her?

          1. Ken Burgess profile image82
            Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

            OK... look they asked him if he communicated with the Russians ON BEHALF OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN... is there some other questioning or reference you have other than that?

            And please show proof that Russian Intelligence helped Trump win the election... show where they went out and changed votes, hacked computers to change the counts... something OTHER than they exposed Podesta's emails or the DNC's emails... I see nothing wrong with anyone, whether they are the NY Times or the Russian Intelligence exposing the TRUTH of what a candidate really thinks, or does.

            Too bad that Podesta and Clinton had their emails hacked... and it was shown to the people that they had a low opinion of just about everyone, and were willing to screw over Bernie, Bernie supporters, the validity of the Democratic primary, that they were willing to accept questions in advanced of a debate... and that infact they expected such help from their media sources, etc. etc.

            The Russian Intelligence, or WikiLeaks, or who-ever did American's a great service in doing so... they did the job that our News agencies used to do, are supposed to do... now those agencies are just a propaganda machine for the corrupt and criminal elites trying to enslave the majority of Americans to their version of what the world is supposed to be, and how it is supposed to work.

            1. promisem profile image93
              promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

              I can only prove that multiple Trump campaign aides met with the Russians. I can prove it because they admitted it.

              It would be naive for anyone to think that they met just to share some vodka or swap stories about trout fishing during a presidential campaign.

              1. Ken Burgess profile image82
                Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                Well wow... they met with Russian officials, so did Pelosi even though she denied it, and then had to retract that denial the other day... so did every other Senator in a position where such meetings would be considered part of the job.

                But forget that stuff now... the news that the Obama Administration pushed the phone taps, hacking, etc. of Trump and his associates, despite being denied by FISA, through the use of the NSA, I mean... when all this shakes out the corruption of D.C. ... the DNC. Clintons, Obama, and all their stooges still in Congress is going to be so monumental, that no amount of covering-up by the media will help...

                What WikiLeaks exposed on the Clintons will be nothing compared to this, no wonder they have been so desperate to take down Trump and all his staff before this could be dug up and exposed.

                A great guy to listen to about this stuff and where it is going is Lionel.
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsNAtA0vTj0

                1. promisem profile image93
                  promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                  Lord. Are you talking about Pelosi's 2010 meeting with the Russian ambassador during a year without a presidential campaign? How does that compare to six Trump campaign aides meeting with Russian spies?

                  Once again, where is your proof of Obama wiretapping other than Trump's Twitter account and Breitbart?

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image82
                    Ken Burgessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

                    If you want specific facts, go search for them Google Search YouTube UK paper, Israel paper, whatever foreign flavor that suits your fancy.

                    Type in: "Obama FISA spies on Trump"  on Search or YoutTube and enjoy what comes up.

                    One of the two sides will eventually win... the corrupt and criminal 'establishment' currently represented by Pelosi, Watters, McCain, you know, those politicians that have been sitting in Congress for over 20 years who are responsible for everything from NAFTA & Glass and Steagall act repeal 1999, to this current false accusations and obstructionism of the new President.

                    Look at Pelosi, she has been there almost 30 years.
                    In  2009, Pelosi reported a minimum net worth of $21.7 million.
                    Pelosi was worth at least $35.2 million in the 2010 calendar year
                    She reported a minimum of $43.4 million in assets in 2011.

                    Politics are GOOD for those Congressmen and women who stick around.

                    Trump wants to 'Drain the Swamp'... and the Swamp wants to drown Trump.

            2. crankalicious profile image87
              crankaliciousposted 5 months ago in reply to this

              That is not what was asked. Sessions volunteered the information and simply said he did not meet with the Russians, which was a lie.

    2. promisem profile image93
      promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      He was not acting as a congressman. He was representing the Trump campaign. It's an important difference.

  7. Deni Edwards profile image89
    Deni Edwardsposted 5 months ago

    What's fake about it?  He met with the Russian Ambassador in a closed-door meeting and didn't disclose it during his confirmation hearing.  So tell me why this is fake news.

    1. promisem profile image93
      promisemposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      You are quite right. Not only didn't he disclose it, but he also denied any communications with the Russians during the campaign.

      And now we have six Trump campaign aides admitting they had contact with the Russians during the campaign. No doubt they just talked about the weather.

  8. profile image61
    fauna6posted 5 months ago

    Sessions admitted that he had met with Russians, himself.

  9. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 5 months ago

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13433819.jpg

    1. ahorseback profile image48
      ahorsebackposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      [img]https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13433823.jpg[/img

      To mature political  voters , who won hands down  in this election ,   ALL Of  the liberal crying and manipulation of  the incredibly  biased media -- Is but a last ditch effort of DNC  whiners and losers . The last gasp of a entire ideology in  its death throws .
      " Everything after first place is  last place !"

      https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13433824.jpg

  10. profile image61
    Deborah Stewartposted 5 months ago

    Pls pardon me for jumping in but I believe I may have some insight as to why many think that "drain the swamp" is a tired and impotent phrase.  For one thing, it was presented as an innovative idea, when it is really a rehashing of an old slogan that had been rehashed by Ronald  Reagan, but had actually been used as early as the beginning if the 20th century by anti-capitalism Socialists wanting to rid D.C. (which was built on a swamp, btw) of capitalists!  Too funny.  Still, many Trump supporters just love the chant.  One, with an increasing following despite or perhaps because of his constant errors and mis-interpretations, even creditted Trump  with "coining the phrase."  He thinks it's just so darn clever!

  11. Space Unicorn profile image59
    Space Unicornposted 5 months ago

    Potato

 
working