It was not “inaccurate” at all.
I heard the questioning and thought Sessions answered Al Franken’s question. This looks like a trap set up by democRATs.
McCarthy has gone off the deep end. I say this, sadly, as a former fan.
He needs to visit with Jay Sekulow...or Tom Fitton...either one will happily explain Sessions answers/non issue to Andy.
Nonsense
“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
MccArthy usually gets it right, here he has got it wrong. Why now Andrew? Never mentioned the question by Al Franken he was answering to. Why? Correct me if I am wrong.
It was very accurate. He answered the questions specifically asked.
If he’d volunteered he’d met the ambassador in other capacities it would have bogged down the confirmation.
It was tactically smart to have not volunteered info that was not asked for, given the Democrat’s goals of obstructing confirmation.
Get over it democrats. There was no “intent”. Remember that word that got hillary off the hook?
More junk news from this junk heap!
Not correct. His testimony was accurate and honestly stated.
If you are ever in a lawsuit where you are to be placed upon the stand, you will be instructed by your atty to answer the question ‘yes’ or ‘no’ whenever possible, to answer ONLY the question that is asked and to volunteer no additional information. This is 100% universal.
So if someone asks you “did you eat an apple last Thursday” your answer is “yes” or “no”. It is not “yes, I selected an apple from a bowl sitting on my kitchen counter, washed it off in the sink, and dabbed it with a towel. I bit into it and it was very satisfying. After I finished the apple, I took the core with the seeds, walked over to the wastebasket, opened the lid, and dropped the core into the garbage. I rinsed my hands in the sink and then I dried my hands on a towel. I then left the kitchen, walked to my office, and resumed my work.”
The difference? You should not supply any information that you imagine will be “helpful” or “descriptive”.
Sessions was asked “did you speak to the Russky whomever about the campaign” and the answer is, properly, “no”. He was NOT asked “did you have any contact whatsoever with the Russians before the election and if so, what did you discuss?” in which case the answer might have been “yes, I met on a few occasions with the Amb as part of my duties as Senator and we discussed blah blah and blah but I never discussed the election with him either as a Trump supporter or as a whisper candidate for AG.
Sessions bowed to the Demonrats, and now they own him. He might as well resign now, for all the good he’ll be to Trump or the country. This man is not cut from the same cloth as Trump is. You never, never, NEVER capitulate to your enemies. Only two days after Trump OWNED the entire Congress, this cuck has to let the Demonrats into the house? Goodbye, Sessions. Hope Trump gets an AG that will FIGHT.
His testimony was inaccurate but not willfully false.(Sessions)
And the Cucks keep on clucking.
Who in their right mind would print a headline like that to DEFEND somebody.
Not inaccurate. If Attorney General Sessions feels the need to recuse himself, then he should have more time to prepare the cases against the Clintons. Then he can prepare the sedition case against Obama and Soros. Then he can go after the pizza ring.
More fake news from the NeverTrump camp.
I read this awhile ago, it’s not comforting in how they say it but I guess, per Andrew McCarthy, the law would be on his, Sessions, side, so that would be good.
My friend applied for a professional license, he “concealed” a minor misdemeanor offense, he just said “that happened a long time ago” and didn’t include it. Nothing happened on a records check. This with Sessions reminds me a bit of that.
In fact, the actual question was, if as AG, you find out the things in the CNN report were true, what would you do? That was the question and Sessions said I’m unaware of any such activities.
Source
- Jeff Sessions is an honest man. He did not say anything wrong. He could have stated his response more accurately, but it was clearly not intentional. The whole narrative is a way of saving face for Democrats losing an election that everyone thought they were supposed to win. The Democrats are overplaying their hand. They lost the election and now, they have lost their grip on reality. The real story is all of the illegal leaks of classified and other information. It is a total witch hunt!
NR blows goats. Conservatives are less concerned about this nonsense than the serious matter of: when are women Olympians going to start competing naked again?