[nathanbedford]

But it is all just more “fake news.” A chance greeting at a public event, and a Senate meeting in the course of his official duties, do not add up to anything, and the full transcript — also omitted by the Times — makes it clear Sessions told the truth.

This is obviously an attempt by the Democrats and their allies in the media to further undermine the Trump administration. Any submission by any Republican administration ever for a special prosecutor or an independent prosecutor would be the equivalent of political Russian Roulette. Witness what occurred to Scooter Libby in the absurd Plame investigation. Note how Obama stonewalled all calls for independent prosecutors when his attorney general was meeting secretly with Bill Clinton. The Democrats know the danger of a special prosecutor and they were simply not going to tolerate one so long as they had power for investigation into the IRS or any cause. They had the advantage of the media covering for them whereas the Republicans have the media against them. Worse, the Republicans have quislings like John McCain and Lindsey Graham undermining what should be the Republican position.

This article is not "fake news" but it is part of a political witch hunt. It is an absurdity to dignify it with calls for a special prosecutor as McCain and Graham have done, the administration must at all costs Stonewall.

All that being said, Jeff Sessions as a senator, as a former attorney general, as a former federal attorney ought to have known better than to be sloppy in his testimony. Having rendered the testimony he should have fact checked everything he said and corrected the record by way of a written submission to the committee. He could have been in no doubt the malicious intent of the likes of Al Franken and he should have been better on his guard.

The Breitbart article opines that the transcript shows that Attorney General Sessions is telling the truth. It does not, it simply provides an alternative explanation which is enough, certainly enough to withstand any calls for a special prosecutor. The language in the Franklin question is ambiguous enough for the Attorney General to claim that he was telling the truth as he understood it. As to the written answer to the committee's question, the answer, as far as any evidence concerned, is true. Again offering enough exculpatory explanation to withstand any demands for a special prosecutor or even for a recusal by Jeff sessions.

The absurdity of this whole Russian affair outclasses even the absurdity of the Plame investigation. But the point is that the Democrats have demonstrated a singular ability to do grave damage to an administration on trumped up charges (no pun intended) and the Republicans have demonstrated a degree timidity that may be a hangover from Watergate. It is time to shake it off and ridicule the absurdity of the Democrats and label their campaign a compensation for Teddy Kennedy's treachery where real disloyalty with the Russians occurred.

As Bull Halsey said, "attack, repeat, attack!"

[MagnoliaB]

To make a long story short, if we didn’t need a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary’s use of an unsecured bargain basement bathroom server to keep and use for classified information and investigating the Clinton’s use of the State Department to enrich their personal foundation, then we sure as hell don’t need one for this.

[billyboy15]

“The Breitbart article opines that the transcript shows that Attorney General Sessions is telling the truth. It does not,...”
***********************************************************

Really? Was not the question regarding Sessions contact (if there was any) in the specific context of whether the 2016 election was a topic of discussion? That is what I read in the quotes from the testimony.

Please explain your position that the Senator was not truthfully answering the question asked.

[Lazamataz]

I agree, however, the attacks must be much more powerful:

- A series of investigations on McCainiac and that faggy little Lindsey, esp. #PizzaGate.

- Bust Obama out, outright, for his 50 to 100 felonies, to include treason for supporting ISIS.

- Bust Clinton out, outright, for her 20 to 50 felonies, to include treason for release of SIGINT information.

Serious s***, not pattycake stuff.

[sargon]

But the point is that the Democrats have demonstrated a singular ability to do grave damage to an administration on trumped up charges (no pun intended) and the Republicans have demonstrated a degree timidity that may be a hangover from Watergate.

I have to disagree regarding "grave damage". The Democrats are damaging themselves more than anything else, and if there ever is some real reason to have a special prosecutor, they will not be able to get one, due to their hysterically crying of "wolf!" every single day.

Despite all the attacks, the administration is not suffering grave damage, because the Establishment and Media (but I repeat myself) have absolutely no credibility at this point. They are a laughingstock, and the American people see right through their transparent faux outrage.

It is time to shake it off and ridicule the absurdity of the Democrats.

That is what's occurring, and it's becoming more and more of a consensus.

The Democrats are a joke, and, as annoying as these constant attacks might be, they are only destroying themselves...

[right way right]

Yes, what you said.