ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , Jeff Sessions , lying charges , Russia conspiracies , Trump administration , Trump controversies , Trump-Russia connections , US-Russia relations

Reply
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:40 PM   #41
ChristianProgressive
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,775
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
We really haven't any good evidence of treason, for goodness' sake!
Actually, we have some very good evidence. At least 6 (or is that 7 now) members of the regime have been exposed as having Russian contacts.

Quote:
Let's wait and see what comes up. The intelligence services seem to be doing their jobs.
How long should they wait to do their ultimate job? Esp when Congress is deliberately NOT doing their job?

I get what you are saying. They need to have their ducks all lined up to be able to justify their action when they do act. But the longer they delay, the more information/evidence/sources may find themselves taken out of the picture. So far it may have cost at least 7 people their lives or careers.
ChristianProgressive is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:47 PM   #42
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 43,941
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
This wouldn't be a problem in properly run organization. He'd assign one of his deputies to do the job, with instructions not to communicate anything about the case until it is ultimately settled. He'd also make sure that everyone working for that deputy understood the same thing, that the Deputy was the ultimate person in charge for this case.

Then, the really hard part, he'd actually have to keep his hands off it and let the Deputy and the staff do their jobs, without interference.

But that's how a properly run organization would do it, and as we all know, this administration is instead a "well-oiled machine", so they're pretty much screwed.
A great many articles about how Trump bizarre method of administration is not only unworkable for government, but would be equally unworkable in most large publically owened companies,where the CEO is responsible to a Board of Director directly and indirectly the stockholders. Trump has never been accountable to anybody in his life since his father died.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:47 PM   #43
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,609
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
"Fine tuned". I only correct you because what Trump actually said is grating, whereas what you said was grammatically correct. "Well" is an adverb. "Fine" is not an adverb.
Fine is an adjective ("I hope you have a fine day!"), noun ("You can start right after you pay the fine."), verb ("What, you don't remember being fined?"), and, yes, adverb ("Once you've accepted the need to fine tune your grammar, you'll be fine.").
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:48 PM   #44
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,453
Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive View Post
Actually, we have some very good evidence. At least 6 (or is that 7 now) members of the regime have been exposed as having Russian contacts.
Having Russian contacts is not such good evidence of treason. You do know, I suppose, that we are not at war with Russia?

Let me be explicit: the degree of involvement between Trump's camp and Russia during a campaign in which Russia attempted to influence the outcome using devious methods is very, very troubling. But some of these contacts were bugged by the intelligence services and there does not yet appear to be a smoking gun regarding collusion. Maybe it will come out, but it hasn't yet.

So, no, the fact that Trump's guys had contact with Russia is not good evidence of treason. Totally worth looking into, but not evidence of treason.

Quote:
How long should they wait to do their ultimate job? Esp when Congress is deliberately NOT doing their job?

I get what you are saying. They need to have their ducks all lined up to be able to justify their action when they do act. But the longer they delay, the more information/evidence/sources may find themselves taken out of the picture. So far it may have cost at least 7 people their lives or careers.
Explain that last line. Who has lost their lives while pursuing the Trump/Russia connection? Who, aside from political appointees, have lost their jobs? I'm not trying to be unfriendly here, but I've honestly no idea who you mean. Thanks.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:48 PM   #45
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 43,941
A lot of pot users are getting a lot of enjoyment from this story......
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:51 PM   #46
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
I'm not buying this charge of lying under oath.

First of all, Sessions knows his meeting(s) are a matter of public record - a lie doesn't work to conceal that. Second, he doesn't stop being a Senator because he's "helping Trump with his campaign." Third, meeting the Russian ambassador isn't at all suspicious - dirty dealings are hardly going to take place in an open meeting, when covert is so readily available.

This is a constructed scandal with no "there" there. The charge of lying under oath is being used as the camel's nose to wedge party politics into the tent.

I think Trump pushes back on this one and Sessions doesn't get fired or quit.

ETA: We are skeptics. Quit with the mud throwing and give us some proof.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:51 PM   #47
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
"Fine tuned". I only correct you because what Trump actually said is grating, whereas what you said was grammatically correct. "Well" is an adverb. "Fine" is not an adverb.
You need a new dictionary.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fine
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:52 PM   #48
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,453
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Fine is an adjective ("I hope you have a fine day!"), noun ("You can start right after you pay the fine."), verb ("What, you don't remember being fined?"), and, yes, adverb ("Once you've accepted the need to fine tune your grammar, you'll be fine.").
I'll grant you that fine is an adverb, since that's what the dictionary says. But it is misused in the phrase "fine tuned". The proper phrase is "finely tuned".

The dictionary I checked does not support "fine tuned".

But, aside from the actual usage in question, you're quite right. "Fine" can be used as an adverb in some ways.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:54 PM   #49
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,453
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
Damn. That dictionary explicitly says that "fine" is a synonym for "finely".

You know what? **** Merriam and **** Webster too. Ain't right. Ain't no one gonna tell me it's right. **** 'em.

ETA: Other than my little tirade, thanks for your correction. But dictionaries are merely descriptive, not normative, and so this dictionary is reporting how folks abuse language. So, and I repeat myself, **** 'em.

Last edited by phiwum; 2nd March 2017 at 12:56 PM.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:55 PM   #50
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,609
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
The dictionary I checked does not support "fine tuned".
It's been in extremely common use for a very long time. It's a failing of the dictionary, not the user.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:56 PM   #51
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm not buying this charge of lying under oath.

First of all, Sessions knows his meeting(s) are a matter of public record - a lie doesn't work to conceal that. Second, he doesn't stop being a Senator because he's "helping Trump with his campaign." Third, meeting the Russian ambassador isn't at all suspicious - dirty dealings are hardly going to take place in an open meeting, when covert is so readily available.

This is a constructed scandal with no "there" there. The charge of lying under oath is being used as the camel's nose to wedge party politics into the tent.

I think Trump pushes back on this one and Sessions doesn't get fired or quit.

ETA: We are skeptics. Quit with the mud throwing and give us some proof.
Whatever our opinion, appearances are more important than logic in politics. Better men have been toppled by less. However, I agree, Trump will fight this and unless something else is found, Sessions stays.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 12:58 PM   #52
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 43,941
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm not buying this charge of lying under oath.

First of all, Sessions knows his meeting(s) are a matter of public record - a lie doesn't work to conceal that. Second, he doesn't stop being a Senator because he's "helping Trump with his campaign." Third, meeting the Russian ambassador isn't at all suspicious - dirty dealings are hardly going to take place in an open meeting, when covert is so readily available.

This is a constructed scandal with no "there" there. The charge of lying under oath is being used as the camel's nose to wedge party politics into the tent.

I think Trump pushes back on this one and Sessions doesn't get fired or quit.

ETA: We are skeptics. Quit with the mud throwing and give us some proof.


Question is not so much legality, but how much of a poltical burden Sesssions could become. His has gotten a lot of backlash..including quite a bit from Republicans....over his obsession with Pot and wanting to give a high priority to cracking down on The Devil's Weed,and now this.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:01 PM   #53
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,609
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Question is not so much legality, but how much of a poltical burden Sesssions could become. His has gotten a lot of backlash..including quite a bit from Republicans....over his obsession with Pot and wanting to give a high priority to cracking down on The Devil's Weed,and now this.
I'm sure that Russians, especially older ones, would have a lot of insight to offer regarding the waging of war against individual states of a union.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:02 PM   #54
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,453
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
It's been in extremely common use for a very long time. It's a failing of the dictionary, not the user.
As another poster has cited, other dictionaries include this use. I find it grating, but maybe that's just me.

I am fine. The engine is finely tuned.

That's what I expect to hear and it jars me when I hear something else. But I might be a wee bit peevish. Apparently no one else shares my expectations here.

Which doesn't mean much. Everyone else is wrong.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:04 PM   #55
The_Animus
Illuminator
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,043
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm not buying this charge of lying under oath.

First of all, Sessions knows his meeting(s) are a matter of public record - a lie doesn't work to conceal that.
Irrelevant. He still lied.

Quote:
Second, he doesn't stop being a Senator because he's "helping Trump with his campaign."
True and also irrelevant. He still lied. And he literally called himself a Trump surrogate when he specifically started he had NO COMMUNICATION with Russia.

Quote:
Third, meeting the Russian ambassador isn't at all suspicious - dirty dealings are hardly going to take place in an open meeting, when covert is so readily available.
Again irrelevant. You don't seem to want to understand the issue since you first posted in this thread after it had already been explained and then again after it was specifically explained to you by multiple people.

Quote:
This is a constructed scandal with no "there" there. The charge of lying under oath is being used as the camel's nose to wedge party politics into the tent.

I think Trump pushes back on this one and Sessions doesn't get fired or quit.

ETA: We are skeptics. Quit with the mud throwing and give us some proof.
Seems to me you have no idea what you're talking about.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:06 PM   #56
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,609
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
As another poster has cited, other dictionaries include this use. I find it grating, but maybe that's just me.

I am fine. The engine is finely tuned.

That's what I expect to hear and it jars me when I hear something else. But I might be a wee bit peevish. Apparently no one else shares my expectations here.

Which doesn't mean much. Everyone else is wrong.
Okay, I was wrong. It is the fault of the user.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:09 PM   #57
fishbob
Seasonally Disaffected
 
fishbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chilly Undieville
Posts: 7,017
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm having a hard time with this whole, "meeting with the Russians" thing. Ambassadors meet with principals in other governments. It's kind of their job.
NPR report this morning mentioned that Sessions met with ambassadors from several other countries, but only after he became recognized as a surrogate for Trump. Apparently meetings with ambassadors are rare for regular senate committee members. Its kind of not their job.
__________________
"When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder.
"It looks like the saddest, most crookedest candy corn in an otherwise normal bag of candy corns." Stormy Daniels
I hate bigots.

Last edited by fishbob; 2nd March 2017 at 01:33 PM.
fishbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:09 PM   #58
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,211
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Question is not so much legality, but how much of a poltical burden Sesssions could become. His has gotten a lot of backlash..including quite a bit from Republicans....over his obsession with Pot and wanting to give a high priority to cracking down on The Devil's Weed,and now this.
Yeah the war on drugs has been going spectacularily well up to now...
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:12 PM   #59
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,453
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Okay, I was wrong. It is the fault of the user.
Could be, I'll grant you that.

But come on. "Fine tuned" rather than "finely tuned"?
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:13 PM   #60
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,178
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
You don't appear to understand how recusal in this case would work. Sessions would be barred from hearing anything about the ongoing investigation. He'd be blocked from hearing whatever evidence was being discussed.
Right ... and who would hold him accountable? Al Franken? Good luck with that.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
As for Franken rambling, that's BS.
Maybe rambling isn't the right word, but the question was so broadly stated that he gave Sessions an excuse to say something like, "I would look at the facts surrounding the contact and proceed from there." As I said, I saw only a brief snippet and I thought Sessions' answer was more to the point (if blatantly untrue) than Franken's question.

Last edited by Minoosh; 2nd March 2017 at 01:58 PM.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:14 PM   #61
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Again irrelevant. You don't seem to want to understand the issue since you first posted in this thread after it had already been explained and then again after it was specifically explained to you by multiple people.
Now that I've explained why your position is wrong, do you understand the issue properly?

This adherence to toxic pedantry ("he lied, he LIED!!!") is silly and immature. But I'll spell it out just in case. There is a lie that is a misstatement of facts. There is a lie that attempts to mislead. Consider the difference between the two and recognize we are not Vulcans, but human beings.

Do you really want to cripple our national government by swinging the pedant sword? Really?

ETA: Go all in and commit. Does the difference between Sessions being an effective AG and not boil down to how he answered that question? If he had answered differently, all would be happiness and joy? Hardly. This is just party politics and "What can we throw at them next?"

Last edited by marplots; 2nd March 2017 at 01:18 PM.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:15 PM   #62
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,568
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm not buying this charge of lying under oath.

First of all, Sessions knows his meeting(s) are a matter of public record - a lie doesn't work to conceal that. Second, he doesn't stop being a Senator because he's "helping Trump with his campaign." Third, meeting the Russian ambassador isn't at all suspicious - dirty dealings are hardly going to take place in an open meeting, when covert is so readily available.

This is a constructed scandal with no "there" there. The charge of lying under oath is being used as the camel's nose to wedge party politics into the tent.

I think Trump pushes back on this one and Sessions doesn't get fired or quit.

ETA: We are skeptics. Quit with the mud throwing and give us some proof.
Isn't this the "It must have been so obvious to him that he would be caught that he could not possibly have intended to commit the crime" defense?

As mentioned- meeting with a Russian (or any) ambassador is a very unusual, almost unheard of act given Sessions specific responsibilities in the Senate; as such in my view this makes the meeting odd and possibly suspicious. Sessions lying about it makes it even more suspicious as I see it (especially given the other interactions going on between Trump's campaign and the Russians). But okay- this is just a suspicion, not evidence of anything wrong in the absence of more investigation. But lying about it is what represents an overt crime, perjury, whether the original meeting proves to be legitimate or not.

Yes we are skeptics- and I am skeptical of the spin-doctored far-fetched, retrospective attempts to explain why Sessions' straightforward denials of having met with Russian representatives were not perjury.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:16 PM   #63
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 12,699
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm not buying this charge of lying under oath.

First of all, Sessions knows his meeting(s) are a matter of public record - a lie doesn't work to conceal that. Second, he doesn't stop being a Senator because he's "helping Trump with his campaign." Third, meeting the Russian ambassador isn't at all suspicious - dirty dealings are hardly going to take place in an open meeting, when covert is so readily available.

This is a constructed scandal with no "there" there. The charge of lying under oath is being used as the camel's nose to wedge party politics into the tent.

I think Trump pushes back on this one and Sessions doesn't get fired or quit.

ETA: We are skeptics. Quit with the mud throwing and give us some proof.
You may be right and that strictly speaking Sessions did not actually commit perjury and that Sessions will keep his job.

However, even if this is the case, then it is quite clear that the credibility of Sessions will be significantly deteriorated which will make a tough job much tougher.

Also, considering that it was Trump who was so keen on “law and order” during his campaign, then it is quite likely that the credibility of Trump will be deteriorated as well.

Furthermore, even if Sessions does keep his job, then it makes it quite likely that some sort of special prosecutor/special investigator will be named since no one will trust the objectivity of Sessions in this matter. And please keep in mind, it was the issue of the special prosecutor concerning the Russian Hacking issue, and it was the special prosecutor which caused Nixon to develop an irreparable loss of credibility about 33 years ago.
__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.

Last edited by Crossbow; 2nd March 2017 at 01:22 PM. Reason: Sentence corection
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:18 PM   #64
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,453
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Right ... and who would hold him accountable? Al Franken? Good luck with that.
I'm not quite sure I understand your question here.

I think there are many times in which an AG recused himself (am I wrong?) and therefore there must be some standards for such recusals. I confess that I'm far from certain how it works, but I think it usually works even without Franken.

Anyone with more knowledge want to fill me in?
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:18 PM   #65
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
 
TheL8Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 8,188
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Al Franken's question was rambling and if Sessions had stuck to answering it he would have been fine (granted I haven't seen the whole context). Sessions just had to give a less direct answer (or a startlingly more direct answer).
Indeed. Sessions is incompetent for having added additional information not asked for.

Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm having a hard time with this whole, "meeting with the Russians" thing. Ambassadors meet with principals in other governments. It's kind of their job.
I don't but the part of his job. This particular senator just happened to be chairman of the Trump campaign's National Security Advisory Committee.

No one else on the SASC was or is a Trump surrogate, and none of them seem to have had reason to speak with Kislyak.

Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm not buying this charge of lying under oath.

First of all, Sessions knows his meeting(s) are a matter of public record - a lie doesn't work to conceal that. Second, he doesn't stop being a Senator because he's "helping Trump with his campaign." Third, meeting the Russian ambassador isn't at all suspicious - dirty dealings are hardly going to take place in an open meeting, when covert is so readily available.

This is a constructed scandal with no "there" there. The charge of lying under oath is being used as the camel's nose to wedge party politics into the tent.

I think Trump pushes back on this one and Sessions doesn't get fired or quit.

ETA: We are skeptics. Quit with the mud throwing and give us some proof.
At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken, a Minnesota Democrat, 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.
Im 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.

He did have communications with the Russians. I don't see sessions adding the modifier "as a surrogate", and frankly, the question wasn't limited to just surrogates. Even if it was , a strong case could be made that the Ambassador was only talking to sessions becuase he was the Trump campaign's National Security Advisory Committee chairman .. not because he was on the SASC.

From your perspective - why wouldn't Sessions be more clear - of course I talk to many people as a senator, but I've spoken with none of them for President trump or similar ?
__________________
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States...nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
TheL8Elvis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:24 PM   #66
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,568
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Now that I've explained why your position is wrong, do you understand the issue properly?

This adherence to toxic pedantry ("he lied, he LIED!!!") is silly and immature. But I'll spell it out just in case. There is a lie that is a misstatement of facts. There is a lie that attempts to mislead. Consider the difference between the two and recognize we are not Vulcans, but human beings.

Do you really want to cripple our national government by swinging the pedant sword? Really?
The definition of a lie is that the person telling it knows it to be untrue. An inadvertent mis-statement of facts due to the teller's ignorance is not a lie. Given the importance and relevance of his testimony, is it logical to assume that Sessions just happened to "forget" that he met with the Russian ambassador twice?? I don't even think that concept has been a central part of his defense, has it? Given the actual wording and the context, it is virtually impossible to believe that Sessions' didn't know the facts and that he intended to mislead. It hardly seems explainable as the result of some innocent human frailty.

Am I claiming that the current evidence is sufficient to convict Sessions of perjury and send him to prison for 10 years? No, but that is not what we are debating here- we do not have that power nor should it be exerted by anyone in the absence of a formal legal investigation and possible trial. But if a similar situation arose with a used car salesman, almost anyone would say- "The guy lied to me!"

I would rather not cripple our government by populating it with boldface liars.

Last edited by Giordano; 2nd March 2017 at 01:26 PM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:25 PM   #67
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,178
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Yeah the war on drugs has been going spectacularily well up to now...
Legalizing at least medicinal weed would be a popular bipartisan move (among the populace) IMO. I noted that Sessions said pot now has more THC, which not all of it does. A friend who uses it medicinally (and recreationally) in SF often prefers the stuff stamped as having less THC.

Trump has already said he thinks medicinal is OK, although that is just as much a violation of the controlled substances act. (Though it tends to "weed out" younger people less likely to be chronically ill). Schedule I drugs by definition have no medical use. I wonder if Trump is capable of seeing how many times his Cabinet members come out publicly with statements that contradict his position.

Sessions reminds me of a chipmunk. Maybe that's why he gets away with things.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:25 PM   #68
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I would rather not cripple our government by populating it with boldface liars.
Or people with extremely poor memories.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:26 PM   #69
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis View Post
I don't but the part of his job. This particular senator just happened to be chairman of the Trump campaign's National Security Advisory Committee.

No one else on the SASC was or is a Trump surrogate, and none of them seem to have had reason to speak with Kislyak.
Is that true? I'd be very interested to see what the Russian ambassador's schedule for a year might be like. I imagine he would have met with all kinds of people for all kinds of reasons. We want him to. We want to be able to interact with foreign governments, it's one of the jobs we task our national government with - international relations. More communication is better.

Somehow we've come to a point where "speaking with Russians" is tantamount to calling ISIL. It isn't.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:27 PM   #70
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,178
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I would rather not cripple our government by populating it with boldface liars.
"Bald-faced" is the idiom though popular usage might change that. [/pedant]
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:28 PM   #71
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive View Post
The entire Trump regime should be arrested, tried, and sentenced for treason.
At least we got that out in the open. Now all we need is a catchphrase equivalent to "Benghazi!"

I didn't like it when they did it to Hillary and I don't much like it now.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:30 PM   #72
Stacko
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,837
Jeff Sessions is going to have a press conference at 4PM EST.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:30 PM   #73
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 43,941
This might be yet another example of how it is not so much the initial problem,but the lying about it and the cover up that get you into trouble.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:35 PM   #74
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
Jeff Sessions is going to have a press conference at 4PM EST.
Place your bets!

I'm all in on "stays" - will I lose my money... again? (I went all in on Hillary. )

ETA: Live stream: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...velations.html

Last edited by marplots; 2nd March 2017 at 01:38 PM.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:36 PM   #75
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 43,941
A number of political commentators are noting that his fellow GOPers are not exactly rushing to defend Sessions. I honestly think think that his war on pot and threatened war on online gambling has something to do with this. Both are big losers for the GOP on the whole, and in the end Congress members are political critters.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:37 PM   #76
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 43,941
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Place your bets!

I'm all in on "stays" - will I lose my money... again? (I went all in on Hillary. )
He stays, but would not be surprised if he dials back some of his controversial stands.like the War On Mary Jane.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:38 PM   #77
Stacko
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,837
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Place your bets!

I'm all in on "stays" - will I lose my money... again? (I went all in on Hillary. )
People usually don't have press conferences to resign.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:38 PM   #78
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,582
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Did Sessions receive a blowjob from the Russian ambassador? No? Well, all is hunky dory then.
Of course not, he gave the ambassador one!!!!!! republickers do what republickers do!!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:39 PM   #79
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,178
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
We want to be able to interact with foreign governments, it's one of the jobs we task our national government with - international relations. More communication is better.
And if Sessions had just said that, or retorted, "I met with Russian government officials during the campaign, do I count?" he would have been fine. The escape clause for Sessions is contact concerning the election vs. contact during the campaign.

Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Somehow we've come to a point where "speaking with Russians" is tantamount to calling ISIL. It isn't.
Constant contact, by numerous U.S. officials, with a close ally of Iran and Assad might be cause for concern. We give Russia a pass for aligning with Iran and maybe that's realpolitik at work.

IMO most Americans are babes in the woods when it comes to dealing with highly manipulative regimes. Wanting to be friends, people could babble about all kinds of things. Russia knows better.

Last edited by Minoosh; 2nd March 2017 at 01:41 PM.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2017, 01:39 PM   #80
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 73,898
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm having a hard time with this whole, "meeting with the Russians" thing. Ambassadors meet with principals in other governments. It's kind of their job.
And yet Sessions did not say, I met with ... but it wasn't about the campaign. Sessions' excuse is mighty thin.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:40 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.