Sen Schumer needs to be put under oath to explain this meeting with Putin

[usmbguest5318]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian? If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

 

[jc456]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

 

[bripat9643]

What plans were they making to throw the election?

What an idiot Trump is, it just get worst and worst. In 03 Putin made the rounds to countries, Schumer was not up for re election and Bush was President. How utterly stupid is Trump and how utterly stupid are those who fall for the crap he peddles.

Trump is stupid because Schumer met with Putin?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

Well, the "so what" of it derives from the fact that Russia is not a U.S. ally and it from there depends on what was discussed, and the people involved aren't exactly forthcoming about that seeing as they have each begun from a position of having denied the existentiality of interactions.and relationships.

 

[jc456]

What plans were they making to throw the election?

What an idiot Trump is, it just get worst and worst. In 03 Putin made the rounds to countries, Schumer was not up for re election and Bush was President. How utterly stupid is Trump and how utterly stupid are those who fall for the crap he peddles.

Trump is stupid because Schumer met with Putin?

 

[Penelope]

Typical Trump sycophant. Schumer has no ties to Russia except meeting him. What makes Session's omission so damning is Trump's ties to Russia.

how do you know? let's see all of his visits with them. pull them all out investigate it.

what about this?

https://m-secure.wsj.net/video/2012...affe1/032712newscoreobamagaffe1_v2_ec664k.mp4

Donald Jr. said as much in 08.

 

[jc456]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

Well, the "so what" of it depends on what was discussed, and the people involved aren't exactly forthcoming about that seeing as they have each begun from a position of having denied the existentiality of interactions.and relationships.

Well go get a warrant

 

[bripat9643]

What plans were they making to throw the election?

What an idiot Trump is, it just get worst and worst. In 03 Putin made the rounds to countries, Schumer was not up for re election and Bush was President. How utterly stupid is Trump and how utterly stupid are those who fall for the crap he peddles.

why, isn't it a tie to Russia? isn't that the story line going on? seems you are concerned if you don't want it investigated. let's investigate all of this russia shit. bring it on Dems? let's see who's been in the sack with Russia over the decades.

Who questioned NATO and said good things about Russia. Trump. Not Clinton.

ROFL! That has to be the lamest example of "reasoning" I've ever seen in this forum.

 

[jc456]

Typical Trump sycophant. Schumer has no ties to Russia except meeting him. What makes Session's omission so damning is Trump's ties to Russia.

how do you know? let's see all of his visits with them. pull them all out investigate it.

what about this?

https://m-secure.wsj.net/video/2012...affe1/032712newscoreobamagaffe1_v2_ec664k.mp4

Donald Jr. said as much in 08.

Huh?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

Well, the "so what" of it depends on what was discussed, and the people involved aren't exactly forthcoming about that seeing as they have each begun from a position of having denied the existentiality of interactions.and relationships.

Well go get a warrant

That may have happened. Do you have reason to think the FBI would disclose that it has obtained warrants prior to acting upon them?

 

[LaDexter]

Chuck Schumer is one of America's biggest problems. He is the Lawyer Lobby, never missing a chance to take each and every issue and turn it into new "revenue" for the lawyers. He was 100% for W's treasonous "terror" BS because like many CHOSEN from NY, Chuck was never in danger, and his portfolio in mid 2001 was absolutely loaded with defense stocks, oil stocks, and the long bond...

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
What an idiot Trump is, it just get worst and worst. In 03 Putin made the rounds to countries, Schumer was not up for re election and Bush was President. How utterly stupid is Trump and how utterly stupid are those who fall for the crap he peddles.

So Schumer was plotting with Putin to crash the American economy, then?

Standard Disclaimer: Yes, these conspiracy theories are pretty dumb, especially the one the fascist democrats are spewing about Sessions.

 

[bripat9643]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

So if any non-government official has contact with a Russian, that is somehow sinister?

You snowflakes have gone off the edge.

 

[Penelope]

The Dems started this witch hunt. The best tactic is to reflect it back at them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is the GOP strategy, which is why I'm no longer a conservative politically.

 

[jc456]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

Well, the "so what" of it depends on what was discussed, and the people involved aren't exactly forthcoming about that seeing as they have each begun from a position of having denied the existentiality of interactions.and relationships.

Well go get a warrant

That may have happened. Do you have reason to think the FBI would disclose that it has obtained warrants prior to acting upon them?

So the FBI is getting a warrant for Russia?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

Well, the "so what" of it depends on what was discussed, and the people involved aren't exactly forthcoming about that seeing as they have each begun from a position of having denied the existentiality of interactions.and relationships.

Well go get a warrant

Well go get a warrant

Why, when dealing with the people who are privileged to serve the U.S. in the highest offices and in roles that require the utmost integrity should that even be necessary? Why should the people involved not just answer honestly and/or volunteer the information because they know it's what's being asked about?

If your spouse were looking for something and you knew where it was, would you make them ask you about it, or would you volunteer the information? The "Russia" issue is substantively no different, except that the scope and gravitas of the matter is vastly greater.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

Well, the "so what" of it depends on what was discussed, and the people involved aren't exactly forthcoming about that seeing as they have each begun from a position of having denied the existentiality of interactions.and relationships.

Well go get a warrant

That may have happened. Do you have reason to think the FBI would disclose that it has obtained warrants prior to acting upon them?

So the FBI is getting a warrant for Russia?

I have no idea what the FBI is doing.

 

[bripat9643]

The Dems started this witch hunt. The best tactic is to reflect it back at them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is the GOP strategy, which is why I'm no longer a conservative politically.

No one believes you were ever a conservative, snowflake.

 

[bripat9643]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

Well, the "so what" of it depends on what was discussed, and the people involved aren't exactly forthcoming about that seeing as they have each begun from a position of having denied the existentiality of interactions.and relationships.

Well go get a warrant

Well go get a warrant

Why, when dealing with the people who are privileged to serve the U.S. in the highest offices and in roles that require the utmost integrity should that even be necessary? Why should the people involved not just answer honestly and/or volunteer the information because they know it's what's being asked about?

If your spouse were looking for something and you knew where it was, would you make them ask you about it, or would you volunteer the information? The "Russia" issue is substantively no different, except that the scope and gravitas of the matter is vastly greater.

That's hilarious coming from someone who voted for the biggest douche bag in history.

 

[jc456]

Why is it so hard for people to see that the issue is not merely that people met with or talked to Putin or any other Russian, but rather that they did and when asked about it, they deny having done so, and that behavior in turn calls into question what transpired during the interactions such that denying they happened was considered necessary, especially, but not solely, insofar as the Americans involved weren't empowered to interact on behalf of the U.S. with any Russian. If the contact was so innocently innocuous, why deny that it happened or voluntarily assert that it didn't happen?

What people are saying is so fking what?

Well, the "so what" of it depends on what was discussed, and the people involved aren't exactly forthcoming about that seeing as they have each begun from a position of having denied the existentiality of interactions.and relationships.

Well go get a warrant

Well go get a warrant

Why, when dealing with the people who are privileged to serve the U.S. in the highest offices and in roles that require the utmost integrity should that even be necessary? Why should the people involved not just answer honestly and/or volunteer the information because they know it's what's being asked about?

If your spouse were looking for something and you knew where it was, would you make them ask you about it, or would you volunteer the information? The "Russia" issue is substantively no different, except that the scope and gravitas of the matter is vastly greater.

So how do you get Russia input to corroborate stories? Or are you talking wire tapping?