Mac1958
Diamond Member
This is why I don't burn a lot of time dealing with partisans on either end of the spectrum.you are parsing words. He met with the Russians and said he didn't- thats itAs a surrogate. Why are you choosing to ignore the word BOTH GUYS USED?Did he not say that he had no communications with the Russians?The exchange, in context this time, and the context is painfully obvious:
Franken: CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week that included information that quote, ‘Russian operatives claimed to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.’ These documents also allegedly say quote, ‘There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump's surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.’
Now, again, I'm telling you this as it's coming out, so you know. But if it's true, it's obviously extremely serious and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?
Sessions: 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 the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it.
.
We both know why.
.
No, he's pointing out the REASONABLE interpretation, rejecting your partisan viewpoint.
The intellectual dishonesty becomes tedious.
.