Let me get this straight.

Sessions would not answer many questions because he wanted to protect the confidentiality of his conversations with the President. But Trump did not claim executive privilege for his staff on the testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation. Session said he was aware that exec priv was not instituted by the White House, but he wanted to guard the President's right to make that decision later.

Sooooooo.............If the President refuses to claim executive privilege, then Sessions doesn't answer because he is protected Trump's ability to make that decision in the future.
If the President does claim executive privilege then Sessions doesn't have to answer because of the privilege. According to Sessions, either way he may refuse to answer.

WHAT? Who thought up that moronic logic? What are these people so determined to hide? Do they think the American public are imbeciles?

Here comes subpoenas from the Special Prosecutor. Donald, Jeff, Jared, Mike, may I introduce you to Mr. Mueller!

That's a silly post.

A poster without knowledge.

Originally Posted by Guest

Let me get this straight.

Sessions would not answer many questions because he wanted to protect the confidentiality of his conversations with the President. But Trump did not claim executive privilege for his staff on the testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation. Session said he was aware that exec priv was not instituted by the White House, but he wanted to guard the President's right to make that decision later.

Sooooooo.............If the President refuses to claim executive privilege, then Sessions doesn't answer because he is protected Trump's ability to make that decision in the future.
If the President does claim executive privilege then Sessions doesn't have to answer because of the privilege. According to Sessions, either way he may refuse to answer.

WHAT? Who thought up that moronic logic? What are these people so determined to hide? Do they think the American public are imbeciles?

Here comes subpoenas from the Special Prosecutor. Donald, Jeff, Jared, Mike, may I introduce you to Mr. Mueller!

And you sound indignant like this is unusual? I guess you did not watch the Holder hearing or Hillary's hearing. Just two examples of this not being something new. Or, is it that you feel that ONLY Republicans are set to higher standards? It certainly seems that way.

Get over it,

[QUOTE=Guest]That's a silly post.[/Q

Silly? How so? Or do you use "silly" to describe anything with which you do not agree, but have no reasonable response?

Originally Posted by Guest

A poster without knowledge.

So I have no knowledge, but you provide no response to my question. You can't run from the truth forever.

Originally Posted by Guest

Let me get this straight.

Sessions would not answer many questions because he wanted to protect the confidentiality of his conversations with the President. But Trump did not claim executive privilege for his staff on the testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation. Session said he was aware that exec priv was not instituted by the White House, but he wanted to guard the President's right to make that decision later.

Sooooooo.............If the President refuses to claim executive privilege, then Sessions doesn't answer because he is protected Trump's ability to make that decision in the future.
If the President does claim executive privilege then Sessions doesn't have to answer because of the privilege. According to Sessions, either way he may refuse to answer.

WHAT? Who thought up that moronic logic? What are these people so determined to hide? Do they think the American public are imbeciles?

Here comes subpoenas from the Special Prosecutor. Donald, Jeff, Jared, Mike, may I introduce you to Mr. Mueller!

The problem as I see it is that the "moronic logic" as you label it has bi-partisan application.

As a private citizen I am as concerned about the truths pertaining to Fast & Furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi, HRC potential security breaches via personal e-mail servers, Clinton Charitable Foundation, The allegations of the DNC's rigging of primary presidential campaign, Loretta Lynch's and the DOJ activities that appear to amount to an arm of the Clinton presidential campaign, Lynch's meeting with Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac, the activities of the intelligent agencies during Obama 8 years as president...............

I want all truths. Do you?

Personal Best Regards:

Originally Posted by RubiTHECon

The problem as I see it is that the "moronic logic" as you label it has bi-partisan application.

As a private citizen I am as concerned about the truths pertaining to Fast & Furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi, HRC potential security breaches via personal e-mail servers, Clinton Charitable Foundation, The allegations of the DNC's rigging of primary presidential campaign, Loretta Lynch's and the DOJ activities that appear to amount to an arm of the Clinton presidential campaign, Lynch's meeting with Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac, the activities of the intelligent agencies during Obama 8 years as president...............

I want all truths. Do you?

Personal Best Regards:

First of all...you're lying.

You've done nothing but try to spin/excuse EVERY SINGLE criticism of Chump.

But on another note, be careful of what you wish for.

Report: President Trump is now under investigation for obstruction of justice - Vox

For most of this year, we now know, President Donald Trump’s repeated insistence that he wasn’t under investigation in the Russia scandal was in fact true.

It’s not true anymore, according to a new report by the Washington Post.

Reporters Devlin Barrett, Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima, and Sari Horwitz wrote Wednesday evening that special counsel Robert Mueller is now probing “whether President Trump attempted to obstruct justice” — an investigation they say began just days after Trump fired FBI Director James Comey.

Specifically, they write, “five people briefed” say that Mueller’s team will soon interview Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers, along with Rogers’s former deputy, who recently left the government.

A spokesperson for Trump’s personal lawyer issued a statement that conspicuously did not deny the story, merely saying, “The FBI leak of information regarding the President is outrageous, inexcusable, and illegal.”

Instead of discussing over and over investigations that took place and were conducted OVER YEARS with a Republican congress, and even with all that lead to nothing, let's talk about the news of TODAY. I and every American would love to discuss a Trump agenda, except of course for the last poster who wants to reopen conducted investigations that spanned years, but our President is hell bent on destroying the American presidency.

In FIVE months, he has managed to fire 3 Justice department folks because they were investigating HIM, which appears to trigger him.

He has not asked or addressed the Russian government trying to influence our elections at all. Fact is, he has only asked about HIS situation, and actually has demeaned the USA investigative bodies..yes, all of them (also our justice system, our media, but that is not what this is about).

He has laid out the possibility of firing the newest investigator (Moeller), actually in the last 24 hours his minions have become the attempt to destroy him publicly. See the link on that below.

Now all the attention was on Comey, who he is still trying to destroy, but it turns out he is not the only person involved. Director of National Intelligence Coates and National Security Director Rogers have much to say.

First, tonight's big breaking news......

"The special counsel overseeing the investigation into Russia’s role in the 2016 election is interviewing senior intelligence officials as part of a widening probe that now includes an examination of whether President Trump attempted to obstruct justice, officials said.

The move by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III to investigate Trump’s conduct marks a major turning point in the nearly year-old FBI investigation, which until recently focused on Russian meddling during the presidential campaign and on whether there was any coordination between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Investigators have also been looking for any evidence of possible financial crimes among Trump associates, officials said."

Special counsel Robert Mueller is investigating Donald Trump for possible obstruction of justice, officials say - The Washington Post

And that thing about whether Trump might fire his FOURTH investigator in Five months.....


[B]
"Republican lawmakers have a warning for President Donald Trump: Don’t mess with Robert Mueller.

Some Trump allies have begun agitating for Trump to fire the man appointed just last month as a special counsel to oversee the Justice Department’s investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election."[/B]

Republicans to Trump: Hands off Mueller - POLITICO

For me, the issue facing our country internally is restoring our presidency

I might add that Atty Gen Sessions better get himself a good lawyer also...

"There was a lot Jeff Sessions couldn't quite guarantee Tuesday.

The attorney general told the Senate Intelligence Committee 16 times in his blockbuster hearing that he couldn't "recall" a particular detail. That was in addition to eight instances in which he did not "know" the answer to a question posed by a member of the panel, five instances in which he did not "believe," four times he did not "think," and twice each that he did not "have" or "remember" what the senator in question was looking for."

Most important takeaway from Jeff Sessions' testimony was what he refused to say - Business Insider

This is a big deal simply because Grassley has been an ally of Trump and he could have stopped this.


"The Senate Judiciary Committee is planning on opening an investigation into the events surrounding President Donald Trump’s firing of former FBI Director James Comey, The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.

The investigation could potentially examine whether the president interfered in the ongoing Russia investigation by moving to fire Comey.

“The Judiciary Committee has an obligation to fully investigate any alleged improper partisan interference in law enforcement investigations,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said in a letter announcing the move."

Comey firing to be investigated by Senate panel, new report says | Fox News

More on the investigation:

Report: Robert Mueller investigating Donald Trump for obstruction

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Guest

I might add that Atty Gen Sessions better get himself a good lawyer also...

"There was a lot Jeff Sessions couldn't quite guarantee Tuesday.

The attorney general told the Senate Intelligence Committee 16 times in his blockbuster hearing that he couldn't "recall" a particular detail. That was in addition to eight instances in which he did not "know" the answer to a question posed by a member of the panel, five instances in which he did not "believe," four times he did not "think," and twice each that he did not "have" or "remember" what the senator in question was looking for."

Most important takeaway from Jeff Sessions' testimony was what he refused to say - Business Insider

Yet, you people will stand behind Hillary Clinton when she had the same answers. And then had the audacity to pretend that she didn't know what "wiping a computer clean" meant!!

Total DOUBLE STANDARD!

[QUOTE=Guest]

Originally Posted by Guest

That's a silly post.[/Q

Silly? How so? Or do you use "silly" to describe anything with which you do not agree, but have no reasonable response?

No CW...........just wanted to see who posted.

[QUOTE=Guest]

Originally Posted by Guest

No CW...........just wanted to see who posted.

Well, it was me.