Posted on 11/14/2017 10:10:29 AM PST by TigerClaws
Jeff Sessions on Tuesday said there was “not enough evidence” to appoint a special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton, a day after reports surfaced that the attorney general had authorized senior prosecutors at the Department of Justice to evaluate an inquiry into the Clinton Foundation.
Testifying before the House judiciary committee, Sessions also appeared to push back on Donald Trump’s repeated insistence that the FBI should focus on investigating Clinton as opposed to potential collusion between his own presidential campaign and Russia.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
You are a quality freeper.
I’ve been blasting Sessions since he started this morning... for his lack and etc... but I did not hear him say your quote. He said almost that, but not exactly.. can you point to where his exact words were on a special prosecutor?
(I heard him say that “looks like” was not enough evidence... however there are crimes that are not hearsay or “looks like” and he did not answer that one when Mr Jordan was asking the questions. The difference between saying he would not have a special counsel for “looks like”, and actually considering a special counsel as we speak, for evidence he has... are 2 different situations. He has already told congress he is considering investigating what he has been asked to do, with evidence that has been thrust on this reluctant AG. I’ve been sorely disappointed in Sessions this morning.. but I don’t think he ruled out anything... he was just not too friendly to our Mr Jordan this morning and it didn’t set well with many of us.)
___
Right.....
I give up.
“Not enough evidence to investigate” means that he stalled long enough for it to be destroyed.
My name is Bond, James Bond.
Hi, my name is Sessions, Useless Sessions.
Okay, I’m confused by this.
I thought Jeff Sessions had now decided to have prosecutors in the DOJ, look into the uranium deal to see whether or not a Special Counsel is needed?
In fact, on Jay Sekulow’s program today, he was explaining the proper steps that have to be taken in appointing a Special Counsel.
Jay said that the AG has to give the matter to DOJ prosecutors, and THEY will determine whether or not a Special Counsel is required.
So why would Sessions get ahead of that inquiry?
Why would he make that determination for the prosecutors?
Does “the Guardian” quote Sessions correctly, because I know that this is a far left rag, publication.
Where are the coffee shop waitresses in Sessions’s home town when you need them?
Nice of you to say, BTW.
______
I agree.
But on the other hand, Goofy Ole Uncle Jeff is more than willing to throw Roy Moore under the bus...
_______
Where did she get them. I forget.
He was a Senator. A Senator with an FBI file. He is compromised, being black mailed is the accusation, that he has been warned some information will be released that will ruin him.
“Remember The Rosenbergs?”
I saw the movie they did on this couple... “Guilty of Treason” and it has stayed with me all my life. It was a movie... some things were changed... If I remember right, they hung them in the movie.. Treason should be considered today with what is going on.. and the media would have a royal hissy fit.. but we are lacking in anyone facing consequences in our government circles and it will only get worse with ignoring it all.
Bkmk
__
That just may be true. I've wondered how they got that list so long over the years.
PLEEEEZE resign today, Sessions !
______
......... must be the only dry place in the swamp.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.