 |
|
Here you go with bonus analysis of the lie:
Posted on: March 2, 2017 at 17:08:04 CT
tigerspy MU
Posts:
9882
Member For:
26.46 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
Here's the exchange with Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) (who said in a statement Wednesday night that Sessions's comments were “at best, misleading"):
FRANKEN: Okay. CNN has just published a story, and I'm telling you this about a news story that's just been published. I'm not expecting you to know whether or not it's true or not. But CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week that included information that, quote, “Russian operatives claimed to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say, quote, “There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump's surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.”
Now, again, I'm telling you this as it's coming out, so you know. But if it's true, it's obviously extremely serious and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?
SESSIONS: Senator Franken, I'm not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it.
Sarah Isgur Flores, Session's spokeswoman, explained in a separate statement to The Post on Wednesday night: “He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee.”
That's not really true.
Sessions was clearly asked whether there was anyone “affiliated with the Trump campaign” who communicated with the Russian government during the campaign. Sessions admitted that he fit this definition of being affiliated with the campaign — as a surrogate (and, really, a top adviser as well) — and said he “did not have communications with the Russians.”
But while the question was in the context of the campaign, it was not about whether the campaign was actually discussed or whether that was the purpose of the meeting. And Sessions's denial doesn't carve out any exceptions for talking about non-campaign matters with the Russian government. At the very least, you would expect Sessions, a lawyer, to be more careful with his words here. But he doesn't even use the non-denial denial like he did in his statement Wednesday night.
FRANKEN: Okay. CNN has just published a story, and I'm telling you this about a news story that's just been published. I'm not expecting you to know whether or not it's true or not. But CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week that included information that, quote, “Russian operatives claimed to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say, quote, “There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump's surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.”
Now, again, I'm telling you this as it's coming out, so you know. But if it's true, it's obviously extremely serious and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?
SESSIONS: Senator Franken, I'm not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it.
Sarah Isgur Flores, Session's spokeswoman, explained in a separate statement to The Post on Wednesday night: “He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee.”
That's not really true.
Sessions was clearly asked whether there was anyone “affiliated with the Trump campaign” who communicated with the Russian government during the campaign. Sessions admitted that he fit this definition of being affiliated with the campaign — as a surrogate (and, really, a top adviser as well) — and said he “did not have communications with the Russians.”
But while the question was in the context of the campaign, it was not about whether the campaign was actually discussed or whether that was the purpose of the meeting. And Sessions's denial doesn't carve out any exceptions for talking about non-campaign matters with the Russian government. At the very least, you would expect Sessions, a lawyer, to be more careful with his words here. But he doesn't even use the non-denial denial like he did in his statement Wednesday night.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
Here you go with bonus analysis of the lie: - tigerspy MU - 3/2 17:08:04