What the Sessions Obsession Traches me about President Trump

[sartre play]

Immediately after the election President Trump, rightly in my opinion, dismissed the idea of following through on his campaign promise to lock her up as being "too divisive " for our country. Coupled with the massive distraction from getting policies in place, it made sense to think of the country first.

So what's changed now? The only thing that I can see is that he is angry about his family and himself being in the crosshairs. And because he is angry it now appears that he no longer cares about divisiveness. Put simply, in an effort to save his own family he is throwing the country into turmoil. For no good reason. No policies will get passed if the old crow Hillary is in jail. It will just create more division.

Not too noble if you asked me. It shows me the essence of what the man values before our country. And I am sickened by my vote.

I see it a case of him fighting fire with fire. He offered an olive branch by saying he would not prosecute her for the good of the country but clearly the Dems have not accepted his offer. I can understand the temptation to rescind the gesture and start up a bunch of investigations against those that have declared themselves his enemy. If anti-trumppers dont like the rules they should not be playing as dirty as they have been.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

What would the dems have to do with trump saying lock her up. then don't lock her up, and back to lock her up?

 

[easyt65]

Again, you're just repeating FOX News talking points. Your assertions have no basis in fact.

From ABC, Canuck...

Benghazi Talking Points Had 12 Versions

"When it became clear last fall that the CIA's now discredited Benghazi talking points were flawed, the White House said repeatedly the documents were put together almost entirely by the intelligence community, but White House documents reviewed by Congress suggest a different story.

ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.

White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.

That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said about the talking points in November.

"Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. "

1. THE WHITE HOUSE, BARAK OBAMA, AND HILLARY CLINTON LIED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

2. The CIA testified they DID send a report during the attack making it clear this was a terrorist attack.

3. Hillary Clinton and her State Department stripped ever reference to terrorism, every reference to a terrorist attack, every reference to Al Qaeda involvement, and every reference to the fact that the CIA had been warning them for months - that Hillary and Obama DID know about the pending attacks yet still left Americans there in Benghazi to needlessly die - out of the documents / the final FALSE / DOCTORED report they gave Congress.

So STFU about 'Fox News', about how 'Obama and Hillary did not Lie'. You don't know what the hell you are talking about. You are spewing left-wing talking points designed to protect Obama and Hillary.

The EVIDENCE that DID come out showed Obama and Hillary LIED, failed to keep Americans safe, needlessly allowing 4 Americans to die.

 

[Flopper]

Trump's treatment of Jeff Sessions is disgusting. It's abuse, plain and simple.

Man, my opinion of Canucks just keeps going down and down every time you post.

Sessions has proven he is weak, easily intimidated, has no initiative, and has to be kicked in the ass to get do his job.

It has been months since he was made US AG, and in that time he allowed himself to be bullied into un-necessarily recusing himself from a case / issue he should be supervising, failed to act on the deluge of criminal leaks coming out of Washington, sat back and did nothing - allowing the Keystone Capitol Cops take over and lead a federal Espionage / Blackmail case against the US involving Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Hillary Clinton, and potentially other Democrats in Congress.

What Trump has done is put Sessions on public notice. Instead of sitting back and keeping the American people in the dark about what he is thinking - as 'the most transparent President evuh' did - Trump is letting people know his thoughts on Sessions. So far Trump is 'spot on'. Sessions, again, has been a weak, timid, easily intimidated US AG whose decision-making has been extremely faulty / suspect.

Trump's public a$$-chewing of Sessions finally spurred Sessions into action...and it let Sessions know what happens from here on out is up to HIM (Sessions). If he continues to fail he will deservedly be gone. Though in a rough manner, Trump did Sessions the 'courtesy' of letting him know where he stands - consider it a public job performance review.

That's not your style? Too bad - you are not the President. Hell, you're not even an American.

Amid questions over his contact with the Russian ambassador in 2016 Sessions, did exactly what he should have done by leaving any Justice Department Russian investigation in the hands of the deputy attorney general.

Trump is an idiot for making the statements he made about Sessions, one his oldest and strongest supporters. Sessions gave up a Senate Seat he won by a landslide and that he had held for 10 years to serve in the Trump administration, big mistake.

 

[easyt65]

Amid questions over his contact with the Russian ambassador in 2016 Sessions, did exactly what he should have done by leaving any Justice Department Russian investigation in the hands of the deputy attorney general.

Why would the right thing to do as the US AG be to leave such a critical case for the Deputy US AG to deal with when there was no conflict of interest or issue that would require him to do so?

While I respect your right to have your opinion, IMO it is a dumb one.

 

[Dim Bulb]

Does anyone think this stupid thread and thought is original. You can be assured that this is how these bloated stupid hypocrites are now being directed by the media to think. This is how they are preparing and how they will all shout.

Meanwhile, their half black skinny marxist is still on a world tour undermining all of the presidents actions and their kuuunt criminal is constantly saying shit too. Not to mention the daily barrage of fake news (all of them have been caught) regarding the so called collusion. Every fucking day and remember these jackals admitted it is all nothing burgers. They are committed to make sure Trump does not succeed, and even if he does, they report that he is a complete failure.

Just like they are doing. Deliberately ignoring the accomplishments and attacking him for perceived failures. The same press mind you that ignored nearly 100 of broken promises by their half black messiah. It is a concerted effort on part of the establishment as well the left wing media, along with the entire globalist movement.

Now, Trump is FINALLY fighting back, and they are instructing these pathetic scumbags like the OP to call him a divider?

BLACK LIVES MATTER? Go fucking yourselves you stupid left wing hypocritical morons. You are proven wrong over and over again. You are all fucking losers. You are all nothing but robots. You are nothing.

Get ready, cause it is going to get a lot worse for you.

You and easy are typical liberals. Resort immediately to personal attacks without frankly knowing much about the poster. These investigations take a lonnnnnnnng time to get anywhere. I am neither a "snowflake," a "liberal" or a hypocrite. I'm just a guy who likes to think for himself. And what I see in the President's unconscionable subjugation of national interests to personal interests.

 

[jillian]

Immediately after the election President Trump, rightly in my opinion, dismissed the idea of following through on his campaign promise to lock her up as being "too divisive " for our country. Coupled with the massive distraction from getting policies in place, it made sense to think of the country first.

So what's changed now? The only thing that I can see is that he is angry about his family and himself being in the crosshairs. And because he is angry it now appears that he no longer cares about divisiveness. Put simply, in an effort to save his own family he is throwing the country into turmoil. For no good reason. No policies will get passed if the old crow Hillary is in jail. It will just create more division.

Not too noble if you asked me. It shows me the essence of what the man values before our country. And I am sickened by my vote.

surely you don't expect nobility from a sexual predator?

 

[Trouble13]

Immediately after the election President Trump, rightly in my opinion, dismissed the idea of following through on his campaign promise to lock her up as being "too divisive " for our country. Coupled with the massive distraction from getting policies in place, it made sense to think of the country first.

So what's changed now? The only thing that I can see is that he is angry about his family and himself being in the crosshairs. And because he is angry it now appears that he no longer cares about divisiveness. Put simply, in an effort to save his own family he is throwing the country into turmoil. For no good reason. No policies will get passed if the old crow Hillary is in jail. It will just create more division.

Not too noble if you asked me. It shows me the essence of what the man values before our country. And I am sickened by my vote.

I see it a case of him fighting fire with fire. He offered an olive branch by saying he would not prosecute her for the good of the country but clearly the Dems have not accepted his offer. I can understand the temptation to rescind the gesture and start up a bunch of investigations against those that have declared themselves his enemy. If anti-trumppers dont like the rules they should not be playing as dirty as they have been.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

What would the dems have to do with trump saying lock her up. then don't lock her up, and back to lock her up?

The dems mantra since trump was elected is impeach him and if they uncover any criminal activity I suspect lock him up will be added to that cry. Whats the problem with Trump demanding the same scrutiny of his opponets as they have of him?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[Flopper]

Amid questions over his contact with the Russian ambassador in 2016 Sessions, did exactly what he should have done by leaving any Justice Department Russian investigation in the hands of the deputy attorney general.

Why would the right thing to do as the US AG be to leave such a critical case for the Deputy US AG to deal with when there was no conflict of interest or issue that would require him to do so?

While I respect your right to have your opinion, IMO it is a dumb one.

Simple because Sessions has an involvement in the case. Overseeing any investigation in which you have any involvement could taint the investigation. This not only protects Sessions but the Trump administration. What Trump wants is an exoneration beyond doubt for himself and his family and that would not happen if Sessions was overseeing the investigation.

I suppose Trump wants Sessions in place if it's necessary to fire Mueller in order to isolate himself. Now with Sessions out of the picture, that order would have to come from Trump.

 

[jillian]

It wasn't me or Obama or Hillary that said it would be divisive. It was President Trump. Which makes your entire argument a non sequitur.

No, actually it does not, because I just voiced my disagreement with what Trump said. he was wrong to do so. If he actually told any member of the government to STOP investigations against Hillary then he committed obstruction of justice / investigations.

Wouldn't that be ironic, if Democrats finally 'GOT TRUMP' by charging him with Obstruction of Justice' by stopping the criminal investigations of Hillary Clinton?!

blah blah blah blah blah

 

[jillian]

Immediately after the election President Trump, rightly in my opinion, dismissed the idea of following through on his campaign promise to lock her up as being "too divisive " for our country. Coupled with the massive distraction from getting policies in place, it made sense to think of the country first.

So what's changed now? The only thing that I can see is that he is angry about his family and himself being in the crosshairs. And because he is angry it now appears that he no longer cares about divisiveness. Put simply, in an effort to save his own family he is throwing the country into turmoil. For no good reason. No policies will get passed if the old crow Hillary is in jail. It will just create more division.

Not too noble if you asked me. It shows me the essence of what the man values before our country. And I am sickened by my vote.

I see it a case of him fighting fire with fire. He offered an olive branch by saying he would not prosecute her for the good of the country but clearly the Dems have not accepted his offer. I can understand the temptation to rescind the gesture and start up a bunch of investigations against those that have declared themselves his enemy. If anti-trumppers dont like the rules they should not be playing as dirty as they have been.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

What would the dems have to do with trump saying lock her up. then don't lock her up, and back to lock her up?

The dems mantra since trump was elected is impeach him and if they uncover any criminal activity I suspect lock him up will be added to that cry. Whats the problem with Trump demanding the same scrutiny of his opponets as they have of him?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

no, lock him up is what you freaks of nature want to do to your opponents.

but the man is incompetent and probably criminal... certainly corrupt.

 

[easyt65]

...the man is incompetent and probably criminal... certainly corrupt.

...which is why the seditious incompetent snowflakes have been unable to find / present any evidence to support their claims while managing to expose their own crimes and criminals...

...from Hillary to Barry to Lynch to Comey to Clapper to Brennan to Podesta to Harry Reid to Julian Castro to Abedin to Rice to Wasserman-Schultz...

...espionage, violations of both FOIA and Fedral Records Act, Influence Peddling, illegal sharing of classified, illegal leaking of classified, felony espionage, blackmail, illegal unmasking...

There is enough on the Democrats to destroy, disband, and label the DNC anything from a criminal syndicate to enemies of the state and lock most away for a long time...

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I am not a partisan. I'm a Canadian

Canadian - not even an American. That explains it - you don't know what the F* you're talking about.

Instead of reading 'world reports' you should have actually watched the Investigations. You should have seen the Obama administration officials testify under oath that they DID know about the threat of a Middle East-wide attack on US Embassies on 9/11/12, that they DID know about the AQ leader's call for an assassination of Stevens in retaliation for the death of a Benghazi AQ leader due to an Obama drone strike, they DID know of the 2 terrorist attacks leading up to 9/11/12, they DID know how Stevens asked for additional security more than 50 times, they DID reject all of those requests, they DID take away part of his security detail right before 9/11/12 and AFTER the 2 terrorist attacks, and they DID know about the other nations pulling their people out and refused to do so.

YOU claimed they did not know some of this until AFTER the investigation which is completely WRONG. You, like (UN-)American snowflakes claim Hillary was not a failure even though she allowed 4 Americans to NEEDLESSLY die. So, that is a measure of success for F*ed up Canuck snowflakes, too huh?!

I made no claims of what was learned in the investigations whatsoever. But I did read up on the reports as they were issued.

That you're STILL spouting FOX News talking points says that you didn't read the reports at all.

1. In advance of the 10th anniversary of 9/11, the State Department issued a warning to all US diplomatic outposts throughout the world, and in particular, they issued a strong warning those in the ME, to be on high alert.

2. Ambassador Stevens was warned NOT to go to Benghazi because of unrest and terrorist activity in the area - a warning HE chose to ignore.

3. In the months preceding the attack, numerous security upgrades were made to the compound, including stronger fencing, improved lighting, and other work. However, with Congress cutting the State Department security budget by 30%, not everything requested was completed.

4. US forces were too far away to effect a rescue once the attack started. There was no "stand down" order. One of the outcomes of this attack was that US military are now stationed closer to hot spot areas so that they can come to the aid of Americans under attack.

7 Benghazi investigations could find no fault with Obama or Clintons handling of this tragedy.

It is also to be noted that 80 people died in attacks on diplomatic outposts under George W. Bush and there wasn't one Congressional investigation to make sure it never happened again.

Couple of points regarding the above.
Stand-down' story ignores critical facts about effort to save Americans in Benghazi
The above effort to white wash the Obama administration was done by the extremely well known BIASED Politifact.org which is owned by the non-profit
group Poynter Institute owner of the ST. Petersburg, FL Times known by those of us living here as Pravda West!
This will not alter Dragonlady's extremely biased and honestly uninformed position but there are several points she mentions ALL without any sourcing I might point out!
Evidence shows no Benghazi stand-down order to defy
For example.. semantics was the differential according to Politifact.
All the evidence suggests that if the phrase "stand down" was used by officials — and there's debate about that —
it was said only once in an effort to buy time to get intelligence information and equipment to a security team that was justifiably chomping at the bit to respond.
Testimony in the House Select Committee on Benghazi report shows there was no stand-down order to defy because there was never an order to not intervene in the unfolding disaster. The "stand-down" story contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.
The reality is there were troops ready to go BUT for political reasons ONLY... they were told to "WAIT"...
That's one differential Dragonlady won't agree with.
But here is one that NO ONE can dispute!
Susan Rice on 5 network shows blaming the video. All of this showing that Hillary and Obama think 100% all the time is this politically expedient...NOT what is best for America!
Her blaming a video telling a mother of one of the Benghazi dead Americans it was a video knowing full well it was a TERRORIST ATTACK!
Political expediency though (was just less then 8 weeks before re-election and remember Obama was counting on "Osama is dead" i.e. terrorism) no longer a
concern and with Benghazi identified BEFORE the election as a terrorist attack?
Would not be politically savvy. Hence the lie it was a video that had Susan Rice on 5 network shows blaming the video.
Hillary Clinton One night earlier, wrote an email at 11:12 pm to Chelsea Clinton reporting that two State Department officials had been killed in Benghazi by “an Al Queada-like group.”
Hillary Told Chelsea Truth About Benghazi, But Not American People

YET the proof is Hillary and Obama put the blame on in her words..
"Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet"

Charles Woods, father of CIA operative Tyrone Woods, told talk show host Glenn Beck on Oct. 25, 2012, that Clinton said to him, "We will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted."

In 2015, three years later, Woods shared with Fox News diary notes he took after meeting Clinton, Obama and other officials. "I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand. And she said we are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of my son," the entry said in full.

And again what does Politifact do in calling the families liars and supporting Clinton/Obama's administration?
In conclusion
It is impossible to know with certainty what Clinton told these families in brief conversations at a private reception only three days after Benghazi. Some, but not all, family members who have spoken to the media said Clinton mentioned a video or protests in their meeting. Some said she didn’t mention a video.
Clinton says she did not.
If she did say something about the video, would it have been an intentional lie?
It’s very possible that this is one of the many conflicting pieces of intelligence that the administration was working with at the time.
There simply is not enough concrete information in the public domain for Rubio or anyone to claim as fact that Clinton did or did not lie to the Benghazi families.
What did Hillary Clinton tell families in Benghazi case?
And Obama further along with Susan Rice blamed the video for weeks... 8 weeks to be exact BEFORE the election as another "Trick" Tactic to fool voters!
Obama Has Touted Al Qaeda’s Demise 32 Times since Benghazi Attack By Fred Lucas | November 1, 2012 | 4:16 PM EDT
Obama Has Touted Al Qaeda’s Demise 32 Times since Benghazi Attack

Having contempt for the court of partisan bickering, I reject both sides' talking points. Sissy Stevens wanted privacy so he could sample the boytoys on the Arab Street. If he deserves respect anywhere, it is only from LGBT as one of its martyrs.

Did you know that Stevens was a Gayist? Partisans are always fed inadequate information by their cult leaders. Have you even seen the video?