RUSSIA/РОССИЯ THREAD—ASSANGE CHRGD W/ SPYING—DJT IMPEACHED TWICE-US TREASURY SANCTS KILIMNIK AS RUSSIAN AGNT

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
305,928
Reputation
-34,254
Daps
616,210
Reppin
The Deep State
Getting grilled by a black woman...this is the shyt of nightmares for Sessions. Homeboy staring at her wandering why she's allowed to speak to him.
Bruh, EVERY black person know when a white person gets that rigid spine and what time it is.

He's not deferring SH!T to her cause he's trying to maintain superiority. They think we do don't know that we're on to them.

 

tru_m.a.c

IC veteran
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
31,188
Reputation
6,810
Daps
90,576
Reppin
Gaithersburg, MD via Queens/LI
Explain breh, I think my sarcasm detector is broken...

:jbhmm:Explain fam.
The AG basically claiming under oath he's old and suffers from memory loss is a good look? :dahell:

1/3 of the questions he answered with I don't recall...
Sure, sure. It really depends on what you expected from this hearing and if you believe Comey and the leaks.

Let's settle one thing real quick, if there is evidence of Sessions meeting with any Russian nationalist or Russian operatives, only Sessions' testimony IN COMBINATION WITH THE EVIDENCE, can lead to a perjury charge.

Sessions wins every argument among the Republican base when he calls into question the validity of the leaked "evidence". Why? Because the evidence that's leaked never shows evidence of him communicating with any Russian. Case and point, if we photoshopped this picture to say the guy in the brown blazer in this pic was Kislyak, we could get every left leaning forum on the net to believe us in 24hours.



Jeff sessions played that angle the entire afternoon. "I don't know" and "I can't recall" are statements that avoid a perjury charge.

Why is that important? Because the republican base is NOT going to call for the resignation of one of their own over claims of incompetence. Please. Pipe dream. So as long as you don't admit guilt, and as long as you don't incriminate Trump, your job is safe. Comey was fired because his silence incriminated Trump. Everyone is hiding behind a pseudo-executive privilege because if they don't they will be fired.

Which leads to my second reason for Jeff Sessions coming out of this unscathed. The pseudo-executive privilege is a dare to congress. They're calling the democrats bluff. I'm not sure what the procedural rules are, but I'm sure you need a majority vote within the committee to hold someone in contempt. What Republican is pressing Sessions or anyone else over the pseudo-executive privilege? Martin Heinrich hit the nail on the head. Sessions only has 3 options: Answer, Answer in a closed session, or invoke executive privilege (which he can't because it's not his right). But once you call him out on it, IT'S UP TO YOU TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. If you don't, you're just hooting and hollering to create a spectacle for the democratic base.

Thirdly, the line of questioning today was weak. I don't need 3 democratic senators to ask Sessions if he's invoking executive privilege. So you've just wasted time. Only one person needs to do that. What we need you to do is confirm play by play timelines with Comey. The line of questioning actually allowed Sessions to blame Comey for putting himself in that situation. How do you allow that? Why don't you force the AG to declare his role and responsibilities as the boss and therefore defend his ability to lead the DOJ? So he stated he did a self-recusal in the middle of a democrats time. So why not focus on legal requirements of a self-recusal, official departmental procedures, verification of sources who were aware, etc. Lankford (R) covered that mistake for Sessions.

This was a dead end testimony.

By the way, as I say this, reports are coming in that the White House was impressed by Sessions testimony.
 

Breh13

Smh.
Supporter
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
13,109
Reputation
3,501
Daps
67,354
Sure, sure. It really depends on what you expected from this hearing and if you believe Comey and the leaks.

Let's settle one thing real quick, if there is evidence of Sessions meeting with any Russian nationalist or Russian operatives, only Sessions' testimony IN COMBINATION WITH THE EVIDENCE, can lead to a perjury charge.

Sessions wins every argument among the Republican base when he calls into question the validity of the leaked "evidence". Why? Because the evidence that's leaked never shows evidence of him communicating with any Russian. Case and point, if we photoshopped this picture to say the guy in the brown blazer in this pic was Kislyak, we could get every left leaning forum on the net to believe us in 24hours.



Jeff sessions played that angle the entire afternoon. "I don't know" and "I can't recall" are statements that avoid a perjury charge.

Why is that important? Because the republican base is NOT going to call for the resignation of one of their own over claims of incompetence. Please. Pipe dream. So as long as you don't admit guilt, and as long as you don't incriminate Trump, your job is safe. Comey was fired because his silence incriminated Trump. Everyone is hiding behind a pseudo-executive privilege because if they don't they will be fired.

Which leads to my second reason for Jeff Sessions coming out of this unscathed. The pseudo-executive privilege is a dare to congress. They're calling the democrats bluff. I'm not sure what the procedural rules are, but I'm sure you need a majority vote within the committee to hold someone in contempt. What Republican is pressing Sessions or anyone else over the pseudo-executive privilege? Martin Heinrich hit the nail on the head. Sessions only has 3 options: Answer, Answer in a closed session, or invoke executive privilege (which he can't because it's not his right). But once you call him out on it, IT'S UP TO YOU TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. If you don't, you're just hooting and hollering to create a spectacle for the democratic base.

Thirdly, the line of questioning today was weak. I don't need 3 democratic senators to ask Sessions if he's invoking executive privilege. So you've just wasted time. Only one person needs to do that. What we need you to do is confirm play by play timelines with Comey. The line of questioning actually allowed Sessions to blame Comey for putting himself in that situation. How do you allow that? Why don't you force the AG to declare his role and responsibilities as the boss and therefore defend his ability to lead the DOJ? So he stated he did a self-recusal in the middle of a democrats time. So why not focus on legal requirements of a self-recusal, official departmental procedures, verification of sources who were aware, etc. Lankford (R) covered that mistake for Sessions.

This was a dead end testimony.

By the way, as I say this, reports are coming in that the White House was impressed by Sessions testimony.

Committee was already useless when you have POS Republicans covering for them. Giving narratives for Sessions to agree to.

Although saying I don't recall is bad optics it works as it did with many other hearings in many other admins.

It's BS how they bring up some vague stature to weasel out of answering anything. Especially for a supposed lawyer like Sessions to be forgetful of most of these laws is astounding.

Still Sessions came out of that not fully positive. It wasn't the confident assured testimony of Comey.

Also for the AG of the United States to not be briefed on the Russian investigtion is something else.

His biggest mess is how the Comey firing went down.

At least he confirmed most of Comey's timelines.

Also the Trump being happy about it doesn't mean much.
 
Last edited:

Meta Reign

I walk the streets like, ''say something, n!gga!''
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
3,219
Reputation
-3,536
Daps
6,587
Reppin
Franklin ave.
I watched the whole hearing. Sessions did very well. Sometimes I really don't know what world you dudes live in. You dudes live in a world where the media runs every fiber of your being.

For the record I've consistently been right about the out come of these things. I was right that Trump would be elected (doubled my coli cash on it:ehh:). I was right that the "grab her by the puccy" comments weren't going to take him down. I was right that the Comey testimony was a flop. . . But you dudes will just throw ad Homs.

What bugs me out the most??? . . . Is that I think Trump, is a trash bag, Jeff Sessins an even bigger one but I know a deep state con when I see one. . . You guys don't.
 

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
87,507
Reputation
3,571
Daps
155,436
Reppin
Brooklyn

Black Panther

Long Live The King
Supporter
Joined
Nov 20, 2016
Messages
13,515
Reputation
10,118
Daps
70,626
Reppin
Wakanda
Sure, sure. It really depends on what you expected from this hearing and if you believe Comey and the leaks.

Let's settle one thing real quick, if there is evidence of Sessions meeting with any Russian nationalist or Russian operatives, only Sessions' testimony IN COMBINATION WITH THE EVIDENCE, can lead to a perjury charge.

Sessions wins every argument among the Republican base when he calls into question the validity of the leaked "evidence". Why? Because the evidence that's leaked never shows evidence of him communicating with any Russian. Case and point, if we photoshopped this picture to say the guy in the brown blazer in this pic was Kislyak, we could get every left leaning forum on the net to believe us in 24hours.



Jeff sessions played that angle the entire afternoon. "I don't know" and "I can't recall" are statements that avoid a perjury charge.

Why is that important? Because the republican base is NOT going to call for the resignation of one of their own over claims of incompetence. Please. Pipe dream. So as long as you don't admit guilt, and as long as you don't incriminate Trump, your job is safe. Comey was fired because his silence incriminated Trump. Everyone is hiding behind a pseudo-executive privilege because if they don't they will be fired.

Which leads to my second reason for Jeff Sessions coming out of this unscathed. The pseudo-executive privilege is a dare to congress. They're calling the democrats bluff. I'm not sure what the procedural rules are, but I'm sure you need a majority vote within the committee to hold someone in contempt. What Republican is pressing Sessions or anyone else over the pseudo-executive privilege? Martin Heinrich hit the nail on the head. Sessions only has 3 options: Answer, Answer in a closed session, or invoke executive privilege (which he can't because it's not his right). But once you call him out on it, IT'S UP TO YOU TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. If you don't, you're just hooting and hollering to create a spectacle for the democratic base.

Thirdly, the line of questioning today was weak. I don't need 3 democratic senators to ask Sessions if he's invoking executive privilege. So you've just wasted time. Only one person needs to do that. What we need you to do is confirm play by play timelines with Comey. The line of questioning actually allowed Sessions to blame Comey for putting himself in that situation. How do you allow that? Why don't you force the AG to declare his role and responsibilities as the boss and therefore defend his ability to lead the DOJ? So he stated he did a self-recusal in the middle of a democrats time. So why not focus on legal requirements of a self-recusal, official departmental procedures, verification of sources who were aware, etc. Lankford (R) covered that mistake for Sessions.

This was a dead end testimony.

By the way, as I say this, reports are coming in that the White House was impressed by Sessions testimony.


iD0Exez.gif
 
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
176,393
Reputation
22,259
Daps
579,048
Reppin
49ers..Braves..Celtics
@tru_m.a.c he was caught lying in a few exchanges and the Comey firing and everything to do with the Comey firing is pretty clear cut obstruction of justice by the President. I don't know if there was Russian collusion, I think it's likely that the administration is stonewalling because there's other shyt going on on the business end with Russia that they don't want revealed.

Problem is the Dems don't have the man power or enough strong Dems in Washington right now to be able to close this case. They need to put Flynn and some of these other guys under intense pressure and hope they flip.

But at the end of the day, I don't think any of that will happen unfortunately. I think someone like Sessions may step down eventually but the only way to get Trump is to show up at the polls in numbers net November.
 

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
87,507
Reputation
3,571
Daps
155,436
Reppin
Brooklyn
As far as the McCain line of questioning

1. McCain quizes Sessions on his interactions/meeting with Russia. Sessions recalls discussions with Kislyak that I don't think he previously disclosed when he was a senator.
McCain doesn't recall the committee they were on that Sessions was very involved in Russia discussions.
Sessions starts to say he doesn't recall anything after walking into a burning house and closing the door.

2. McCain brings up active Russian spying inside the US and ability to disrupt power grids.... Sessions starts ticking things off that we need to do after previously saying he's not familiar/briefed on any Russia issues. Oochie Wally or One Mic?
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
305,928
Reputation
-34,254
Daps
616,210
Reppin
The Deep State


Most Trump real estate now sold to anonymous buyers
Nick Penzenstadler , Steve Reilly and John Kelly , USA TODAY
Since President Trump won the Republican nomination, the majority of his companies’ real estate sales are to secretive shell companies that obscure the buyers’ identities, a USA TODAY investigation has found.

Over the last 12 months, about 70% of buyers of Trump properties were limited liability companies – corporate entities that allow people to purchase property without revealing all of the owners’ names. That compares with about 4% of buyers in the two years before.

USA TODAY journalists have spent six months cataloging every condo, penthouse or other property that Trump and his companies own – and tracking the buyers behind every transaction. The investigation found Trump’s companies owned more than 430 individual properties worth well over $250 million.

Since Election Day, Trump’s businesses have sold 28 of those U.S. properties for $33 million. The sales include luxury condos and penthouses in Las Vegas and New York and oceanfront lots near Los Angeles. The value of his companies' inventory of available real estate remains above a quarter-billion dollars.

Profits from sales of those properties flow through a trust run by Trump’s sons. The president is the sole beneficiary of the trust and can withdraw cash any time.

The increasing share of opaque buyers comes at a time when federal investigators, members of Congress and ethics watchdogs are asking questions about Trump's sales and customers in the U.S. and around the world. Some Congressional Democrats have been asking for more detail about buyers of Trump’s domestic real estate since USA TODAY’s initial report.

Their concern is that the secretive sales create an extraordinary and unprecedented potential for people, corporations or foreign interests to try to influence a President. Anyone who wanted to court favor with the President could snap up multiple properties or purposefully overpay, without revealing their identity publicly.

The real estate cache, which Trump has never fully revealed and is not required by law to disclose, offers unique opportunity for anyone to steer money to a sitting President. The increase in purchasers shielded by LLCs makes it far more difficult to track who is paying the President and his companies for properties ranging in price from $220,000 to $10 million – or more.

The clear post-nomination shift since last year to more shell-company purchases is unique to sales by Trump’s companies, even in his own towers and neighborhoods. Condos owned by others in the same buildings, and sold during the same time period, were bought by LLCs in no more than 20% of the transactions. In some areas, the share was far less.

“If what’s going on is somebody is buying something from The Trump Organization to buy favor, there’s no way you’d ever figure out who that person is or what favor they’re trying to buy,” said Jack Blum, a Washington attorney specializing in offshore tax evasion and financial crime and former staff lawyer for two U.S. Senate committees.

The reason for the shift is unclear. The White House refers all questions about Trump's businesses to The Trump Organization, which would not answer questions about the sales.

Experts in real estate and corporate law say there are many reasons to create an LLC and use it to buy property. Some buyers, including celebrities, foreign political dissidents and even police officers, may use them to protect privacy. Investment groups use them to purchase properties in partnership.

The method is more common among the wealthy or famous in the buying of multimillion-dollar properties. For instance, President Obama and his wife are behind Homefront Holdings LLC, a corporation registered in Delaware which in May purchased the family’s home in the Kalorama neighborhood of Washington D.C. for $8.1 million, according to district property records.

tweeted a picture of Eric Trump, thanking him for visiting his family's home, weeks before the sale, Chowdhury repeatedly asked a reporter not to reveal his purchase.

“Because these are all LLC owners," he said, "and I don’t want the rest of the world (to) know, hey, I’m the owner of these properties.”
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
23,536
Reputation
3,700
Daps
102,379
Reppin
Detroit
I honestly don't understand how anyone can think the AG answering a third of the questions with "I don't recall" in an attempt to avoid perjury is a good look...

It's truly baffling to me...

The bar is so low (and double standards are so crazy) for this administration that pretty much any day where there's not a new scandal is seen as a W. :francis:
 
Top