LOL. My bad. Once again the idiot left can't see beyond the moment they're trying to seek immediate gratification. There will be future elections and now precedent has been set. No candidate for president, or anyone who may be considered to work in that candidates administration can talk to anyone, about anything, during the campaign.
Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking
- Thread starter vanzandt
- Start date
If we're going to talk about the Logan act from ancient history, we need to consider other historical laws that are still in effect.
The Alien Enemies Act was part of the Alien and Sedition acts that were enacted back in 1798.
"The Alien Enemies Act remained in effect, was revised and codified in 1918 for use in World War I, and was used by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to imprison Japanese, German, and Italian aliens during World War II. Following cessation of hostilities, the act was used by President Harry S. Truman to continue to imprison, then deport, aliens of the formerly hostile nations. In 1948 the Supreme Court determined that presidential powers under the acts continued after cessation of hostilities until there was a peace treaty with the hostile nation. The revised Alien Enemies Act remains in effect today." --wikipedia
Obama has bombed five of the countries that Trump halted immigration from. Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya and Somalia all came under the watchful droning of Barack Obama, in an effort to provide security forAmerica.Jan 30, 2017
So unless Obama created some kind of peace treaty, the Alien Enemies Act should allow Trump to do whatever he wants to the people from these countries.
Obama bombed them, that's a hostile action, Truman threw these kind of people in prison in his admin, the supreme court said it was ok, and there has been no peace treaty.
If we didn't have these cucks in congress that are as lawless as the democrats, impeachment hearings could begin on the judges that pervert our laws.
The Alien Enemies Act was part of the Alien and Sedition acts that were enacted back in 1798.
"The Alien Enemies Act remained in effect, was revised and codified in 1918 for use in World War I, and was used by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to imprison Japanese, German, and Italian aliens during World War II. Following cessation of hostilities, the act was used by President Harry S. Truman to continue to imprison, then deport, aliens of the formerly hostile nations. In 1948 the Supreme Court determined that presidential powers under the acts continued after cessation of hostilities until there was a peace treaty with the hostile nation. The revised Alien Enemies Act remains in effect today." --wikipedia
Obama has bombed five of the countries that Trump halted immigration from. Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya and Somalia all came under the watchful droning of Barack Obama, in an effort to provide security forAmerica.Jan 30, 2017
So unless Obama created some kind of peace treaty, the Alien Enemies Act should allow Trump to do whatever he wants to the people from these countries.
Obama bombed them, that's a hostile action, Truman threw these kind of people in prison in his admin, the supreme court said it was ok, and there has been no peace treaty.
If we didn't have these cucks in congress that are as lawless as the democrats, impeachment hearings could begin on the judges that pervert our laws.
Dear Leader is pleased about this new precedent being set by the fascist left. We can't have anyone, talking to anybody, about anything. Let us move towards one central leader who is worshipped as if he were a god, and god is fickle. What was okay yesterday may not be okay today. You must smile broadly in his company. Applaud and cheer with enthusiasm. Never question or complain. yes my leftist comrades, you are on the right path. You may continue.
Claire McCaskill Claims She’d Never Meet With Russian Ambassador, But Tweets Prove She Has
by Alex Griswold | 9:36 am, March 2nd, 2017
In a pointed tweet Thursday, Democratic Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill attacked Attorney General and her former Senate colleague Jeff Sessions for meeting with the Russian ambassador during the 2016 election, saying she would never meet or call the Russian ambassador.
Follow
Claire McCaskill
✔@clairecmc
I've been on the Armed Services Com for 10 years.No call or meeting w/Russian ambassador. Ever. Ambassadors call members of Foreign Rel Com.
6:06 AM - 2 Mar 2017
There’s, uh, just one problem with that claim. Well, two problems really.
Follow
Claire McCaskill
✔@clairecmc
Off to meeting w/Russian Ambassador. Upset about the arbitrary/cruel decision to end all US adoptions,even those in process.
9:25 AM - 30 Jan 2013
ALSO ON MEDIAITECharlie Sykes on Trump Getting Plaudits for Speech: 'Almost a Battered Pundit Syndrome Going On'
Follow
Claire McCaskill
✔@clairecmc
Today calls with British, Russian, and German Ambassadors re: Iran deal. #doingmyhomework
5:49 AM - 6 Aug 2015
[image via screengrab]
by Alex Griswold | 9:36 am, March 2nd, 2017
In a pointed tweet Thursday, Democratic Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill attacked Attorney General and her former Senate colleague Jeff Sessions for meeting with the Russian ambassador during the 2016 election, saying she would never meet or call the Russian ambassador.
Follow
Claire McCaskill ✔@clairecmc
I've been on the Armed Services Com for 10 years.No call or meeting w/Russian ambassador. Ever. Ambassadors call members of Foreign Rel Com.
6:06 AM - 2 Mar 2017
There’s, uh, just one problem with that claim. Well, two problems really.
Follow
Claire McCaskill ✔@clairecmc
Off to meeting w/Russian Ambassador. Upset about the arbitrary/cruel decision to end all US adoptions,even those in process.
9:25 AM - 30 Jan 2013
ALSO ON MEDIAITECharlie Sykes on Trump Getting Plaudits for Speech: 'Almost a Battered Pundit Syndrome Going On'
Follow
Claire McCaskill ✔@clairecmc
Today calls with British, Russian, and German Ambassadors re: Iran deal. #doingmyhomework
5:49 AM - 6 Aug 2015
[image via screengrab]
606
Sorry But Jeff Sessions Absolutely Did NOT Perjure Himself Under Oath When Asked About Russia
Some of the same liberal law professors and journalists who thought Hillary should be President after lying to Congress about hiding emails and who also praised Clapper’s “independence” after he repeatedly lied to Congress about NSA spying, now attack Attorney General Sessions under a bogus claim of “lying” to Congress. There is no basis to suggest Sessions committed any crime at all for doing his job as a Senator on the Armed Services Committee.
Sessions, as a Senator on the Armed Services Committee, met with over 20 ambassadors in 2016. One of them was the Russian ambassador. There is no evidence, at all, Sessions met with the ambassador to review Trump campaign strategy, or anything of the sort. The suggestion that our Senators should not be meeting with representatives of foreign governments is ludicrous, especially coming from people who championed the Clinton Foundation meeting with foreign governments frequently to fund their Clinton Foundation and personal enrichment.
The criminal law only prohibits lying to Congress under two statutes — 18 USC 1621 ands 18 USC 1001. Section 1621 requires a person “willfully and contrary” to a sworn oath “subscribe a material matter” which is both false and the person knows to be false. Section 1001 is basically the same, without certain tribunal prerequisites: it also requires the government prove a person willfully made a materially false statement. This requires three elements: first, a false statement; second, the false statement be “material”; and third, the false statement be made “knowingly” and “willfully.” A statement is not false if it can be interpreted in an innocent manner. A statement is not material if it is not particularly relevant to the subject of the inquiry. Willfully is a very high standard of proof: it requires the person know they are committing the crime, and do so anyway. None of the three exist as to Sessions.
There was strong evidence Hillary Clinton made false statements to Congress about a range of subjects concerning the emails, and evidence she knew they were false. She still was not prosecuted, and Professors like Laurence Tribe recommended her for the Presidency. There was strong evidence James Clapper lied to Congress about the NSA spying on Americans, and he was not prosecuted, but promoted by President Obama, without complaint from many of these same liberal lawyers, professors and journalists. Yet, these same “lawyers” and “journalists” now attack Sessions for what is manifestly not a criminal act, and for which they never demanded any inquiry of either Clinton or Clapper.
Their only claim against Sessions is that Sessions, while Senator, talked to the Russian ambassador a whopping 2 times in 2016. That’s called doing his job. Senator Franken, during the Attorney General confirmation proceedings, talked about “ties to Russia” and asked if Senator Session had discussed the Trump campaign “with Russian government officials.” Sessions answered he had not. Sessions has no “ties with Russia” and there is no evidence he discussed the Trump campaign with any Russian official. The attempt to conflate Sessions doing his job as a Senator — meeting with ambassadors — as meaning he must have talked about campaign tactics or the campaign at all is patently ludicrous.
Here is the key exchange: Franken asked about “a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.” Sessions answered: “I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.” Anyone reading the actual exchange can see Sessions was referring to no communications “as a surrogate” just as the question’s very long pre-amble specifically referenced the focus of the question to that subject matter. Nothing about Sessions’ answer was false, nor could it be construed to be materially false or willfully false, or even false at all.
Notably, Senator Franken chose not to ask Sessions about his contacts with Russian officials over the years in his duties as a Senator on the Armed Services Committee. Sessions’ first meeting of the Russian ambassador was in public, and likely known to Franken and others. Franken could not have interpreted Sessions’ answer as anything but an answer to the question asked about campaign contacts with Russian government officials, which no evidence supports ever occurring. Indeed, given what Franken knew, one might fairly ask a different question: why did Franken avoid that specific question? Was it because he’s a lousy Senator, like he was a mediocre comedian? Maybe. Or Maybe it’s because Franken knew the answer would undermine Franken’s argument? Or maybe it was because Franken was planning on mis-using the answer to attack Sessions later?
What next? Senator, have you now, or have you ever been, someone who ever talks with Russians? GUILTY! Doing your job is now considered a crime by the same people on the left who excused actual crime by their Presidential candidate and Presidential appointee. This question needs to be asked of the Sessions smear operators: do you have no shame?
Sorry But Jeff Sessions Absolutely Did NOT Perjure Himself Under Oath When Asked About Russia
Some of the same liberal law professors and journalists who thought Hillary should be President after lying to Congress about hiding emails and who also praised Clapper’s “independence” after he repeatedly lied to Congress about NSA spying, now attack Attorney General Sessions under a bogus claim of “lying” to Congress. There is no basis to suggest Sessions committed any crime at all for doing his job as a Senator on the Armed Services Committee.
Sessions, as a Senator on the Armed Services Committee, met with over 20 ambassadors in 2016. One of them was the Russian ambassador. There is no evidence, at all, Sessions met with the ambassador to review Trump campaign strategy, or anything of the sort. The suggestion that our Senators should not be meeting with representatives of foreign governments is ludicrous, especially coming from people who championed the Clinton Foundation meeting with foreign governments frequently to fund their Clinton Foundation and personal enrichment.
The criminal law only prohibits lying to Congress under two statutes — 18 USC 1621 ands 18 USC 1001. Section 1621 requires a person “willfully and contrary” to a sworn oath “subscribe a material matter” which is both false and the person knows to be false. Section 1001 is basically the same, without certain tribunal prerequisites: it also requires the government prove a person willfully made a materially false statement. This requires three elements: first, a false statement; second, the false statement be “material”; and third, the false statement be made “knowingly” and “willfully.” A statement is not false if it can be interpreted in an innocent manner. A statement is not material if it is not particularly relevant to the subject of the inquiry. Willfully is a very high standard of proof: it requires the person know they are committing the crime, and do so anyway. None of the three exist as to Sessions.
There was strong evidence Hillary Clinton made false statements to Congress about a range of subjects concerning the emails, and evidence she knew they were false. She still was not prosecuted, and Professors like Laurence Tribe recommended her for the Presidency. There was strong evidence James Clapper lied to Congress about the NSA spying on Americans, and he was not prosecuted, but promoted by President Obama, without complaint from many of these same liberal lawyers, professors and journalists. Yet, these same “lawyers” and “journalists” now attack Sessions for what is manifestly not a criminal act, and for which they never demanded any inquiry of either Clinton or Clapper.
Their only claim against Sessions is that Sessions, while Senator, talked to the Russian ambassador a whopping 2 times in 2016. That’s called doing his job. Senator Franken, during the Attorney General confirmation proceedings, talked about “ties to Russia” and asked if Senator Session had discussed the Trump campaign “with Russian government officials.” Sessions answered he had not. Sessions has no “ties with Russia” and there is no evidence he discussed the Trump campaign with any Russian official. The attempt to conflate Sessions doing his job as a Senator — meeting with ambassadors — as meaning he must have talked about campaign tactics or the campaign at all is patently ludicrous.
Here is the key exchange: Franken asked about “a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.” Sessions answered: “I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.” Anyone reading the actual exchange can see Sessions was referring to no communications “as a surrogate” just as the question’s very long pre-amble specifically referenced the focus of the question to that subject matter. Nothing about Sessions’ answer was false, nor could it be construed to be materially false or willfully false, or even false at all.
Notably, Senator Franken chose not to ask Sessions about his contacts with Russian officials over the years in his duties as a Senator on the Armed Services Committee. Sessions’ first meeting of the Russian ambassador was in public, and likely known to Franken and others. Franken could not have interpreted Sessions’ answer as anything but an answer to the question asked about campaign contacts with Russian government officials, which no evidence supports ever occurring. Indeed, given what Franken knew, one might fairly ask a different question: why did Franken avoid that specific question? Was it because he’s a lousy Senator, like he was a mediocre comedian? Maybe. Or Maybe it’s because Franken knew the answer would undermine Franken’s argument? Or maybe it was because Franken was planning on mis-using the answer to attack Sessions later?
What next? Senator, have you now, or have you ever been, someone who ever talks with Russians? GUILTY! Doing your job is now considered a crime by the same people on the left who excused actual crime by their Presidential candidate and Presidential appointee. This question needs to be asked of the Sessions smear operators: do you have no shame?
Sessions, under fire, recuses himself from probe of Trump-Russia contacts
Michael Isikoff
Chief Investigative Correspondent
Yahoo NewsMarch 2, 2017
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, facing sharp criticism over his failure to disclose two meetings with the Russian ambassador during last year’s campaign, said today he would recuse himself from any investigation into Russian contacts with the Trump campaign.
“I should not be involved in investigating a campaign I had a role in,” Sessions said at a hastily called press conference at the Justice Department.
The embattled attorney general said he had been already planning to take that step, after consulting with top Justice Department ethics advisors, even before the Washington Post reported Wednesday night that he had failed to tell the Senate Judiciary Committee about the two meetings he had last year with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Sessions, in response to a question during his confirmation hearing about reports of “a continuing exchange of information” between Russian officials and the Trump campaign, volunteered that he “did not have communications with the Russians.” Sessions, who was a senator at the time, was also a key advisor to Trump during the campaign...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sessions...probe-of-trump-russia-contacts-232324297.html
Michael Isikoff
Chief Investigative Correspondent
Yahoo NewsMarch 2, 2017
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, facing sharp criticism over his failure to disclose two meetings with the Russian ambassador during last year’s campaign, said today he would recuse himself from any investigation into Russian contacts with the Trump campaign.
“I should not be involved in investigating a campaign I had a role in,” Sessions said at a hastily called press conference at the Justice Department.
The embattled attorney general said he had been already planning to take that step, after consulting with top Justice Department ethics advisors, even before the Washington Post reported Wednesday night that he had failed to tell the Senate Judiciary Committee about the two meetings he had last year with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Sessions, in response to a question during his confirmation hearing about reports of “a continuing exchange of information” between Russian officials and the Trump campaign, volunteered that he “did not have communications with the Russians.” Sessions, who was a senator at the time, was also a key advisor to Trump during the campaign...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sessions...probe-of-trump-russia-contacts-232324297.html