Deplorable

He did use his own personally raised campaign funds to travel to the Republican Convention. I'm not sure what that proves. He's still allowed to conduct Senate business away from Washington while using his own money. He's not only on the clock when he's using government money for his travels. The issue with Hillary was that she set up a private server to get around freedom of information requests and was only found out when a person who she had running an off the books intelligence operation after being banned from official government service by Obama was hacked. We then find out that most of the emails on this server were deleted and Hillary was caught in numerous lies regarding what the server was for. That's different than using an unsecure AOL account, which isn't illegal for the Indiana governor as long as he retains all the emails for record keeping. Again, I probably wouldn't have voted for Pence. If it's found out that he was attempting to conduct illegal activity and hide that activity by using a second email account, get rid of him.

You're misunderstanding the article. He used his own campaign funds to travel to a political event. That's what the funds are for. The issue being raised is that it was after a speech at the Republican Convention where he made small talk with the Russian ambassador.

He didn't break a law unless they find out he was deleting emails to avoid Freedom of Information oversight. Incompetence and corruption are two different things. There's also the issue of whether he was warned multiple times. I'm not a big Pence fan anyways.

Why? Seems reasonable that the Russian ambassador would like to have a talk and give their side of things the day after the Ukrainian ambassador had a meeting.

I'm honestly baffled as to why I can't accept a perfectly reasonable explanation from someone. I obviously occasionally play a role in this thread, but I can't see how my position on this topic is anything other than reasonable. I don't deliver pizza. I drive a cab and deliver Chinese food.

Consider: HIs meeting with the Russian ambassador in his office was the day after he met with the Ukrainian ambassador. Is it more likely that they were plotting how Russia could help Trump's victory or talking about Crimea?

One of the meetings was just small talk after a public speech. As for the other, I don't think there would be a recorded transcript of a meeting in an office. This wasn't an official hearing. If they did talk about the campaign Sessions could just say they didn't and hide behind his office as the reason for the meeting. There's no reason to hide the meetings. What Sessions says makes the most sense. The question was framed around possible coordination between agents of the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Sessions said he didn't do that and had no knowledge of that. Just so you know, there seems to be 100% support for Sessions from the right wing outside of the usual Never Trumpers. This isn't going to be an issue long term absent new evidence saying Sessions spoke with the Russians about the campaign. I'd be willing to make a wager with any of you about this.

Right. That's why I believe him. The only explanation that makes any sense is the one that he's giving. There is no cover up. He meant that he didn't meet with anybody from Russia regarding Trump's campaign and now the Democrats are trying to bring him down based solely on an imprecise use of language.

That's my point. It would all make no sense to cover up. What makes the most sense is that Sessions was saying he'd never met with the Russians regarding the Trump campaign. That's really the only thing that makes sense considering that he had multiple public meetings with the Russian ambassador in his job as Senator. What also makes sense is that Mr. Sessions is a scary, scary Attorney General to those on the left and they would do anything to discredit him. See Mrs. McCaskill's lies about how people on their committee would never meet with the Russian ambassador as part of their job. Ooops, we know of at least twice that she did based on tweets and pictures.

I don't think he lied. Then I was responding to the people who earlier in this thread said it was perjury. I think that even under the worst circumstance for Sessions, that he was intentionally misleading the Senate, he has a valid defense under perjury case law. I don't think that he needs this defense. Go watch the actual exchange. Then consider that Sessions had reasonable reasons for meeting the Russian ambassador. Once was the day after he met the Ukrainian ambassador and was about Crimea. There were other people at the meeting. Once was after a public speech that was attended by many ambassadors and he made small talk afterwards. Almost everyone on his Senate committee has met with numerous ambassadors as part of their job, including the Russian ambassador. Why would he lie? It makes sense based on the line of questioning that Sen. Franken was referring to his capacity as part of the Trump campaign, not his capacity as a Senator.

We now know the real reason Joe Biden decided not to run. He claimed it was due to mourning his son Beau's death. It's come out that Beau's widow is dating Hunter Biden, Joe's other son. Hunter is still married, but separated. The timeline on when his new relationship started is unclear. Hunter's wife is claiming in divorce filings that he's been blowing through all their money on prostitutes and drugs since their separation. She's asking a judge put a hold on his assets. Hunter was kicked out of the military while Joe was Vice President over his cocaine use. I'm sure the Clinton mafia gently let Joe know that politics isn't a nice sport.

No, I'm saying that I watched the exchange and I listened to Sessions explanation. I think what he's saying makes more sense than him lying about something that was public record and he had a legit reasoning behind with witnesses to what was said at the meeting. I was just pointing out that even if you believe the worst about what he was saying, it's not legally perjury.

Easily the funniest part of this is Dem Sen. Claire McCaskill fucking up big time in her haste to indict Sessions.

Sessions didn't lie. Even if he was intentionally misleading the committee, which it's pretty clear he wasn't given the structure of the question, it's not legally perjury if you can offer a reasonable explanation for your answer. That is settled case law and lawyers know how to answer questions when they are under oath. Anybody thinking that Sessions is gone shows a lack on insight into American politics or an existence in some sort of bubble. Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, was caught lying to Congress. He said in testimony that he had only recently found out about Operation Fast and Furious, which allowed guns into the hands of Mexican cartels that were later used to murder Americans. Documents later came to light showing that he had known about the operation for months. Here's Jeff Sessions interview with Tucker C

If Atlanta keeps this up they can steal Seattle's crown as no. 1 MLS soccer city.

Well, here's why the MLS will never, ever really be a mainstream sport in the US.

A good hamburger is better anyways.

That's how I would eat steak. Also, that article shows him personally handing a $100 bill to the bus boy. That would be in addition to whatever tip he left the waiter and is not customary, so we can put to bed the claims from earlier that he doesn't tip when appropriate.

This is from a month ago so I don't know if there's an update, but sheisty activity from Sacramento owners. http://deadspin.com/sacramentos-mls-bid-possibly-derailed-by-last-second-ow-1791856813 If you want to follow MLS, I suppose that's fine. Stay away from the rest unless you have a really good reason.

It wasn't a normal briefing from which CNN was excluded. There are meetings with groups of journalists based on politics by every administration. Did you see the first link where Fox News was specifically excluded from a briefing on Benghazi due to Obama being unhappy with their reporting on the matter? As for the normal briefings, all administrations decide who is let in. I don't think Breitbart had a normal seat at the Obama press conferences, but they do under Trump. Were they excluded by Obama?

I'm not exactly sure what he's talking about regarding people not seeing a judge. It might be that people detained at the border are now sent right back across. Obama changed it so that unless the border agent physically saw the person cross the border the suspect had to see a judge. That generally meant a court date and release into the country until then. Before Obama if you were caught soaking wet 3 steps from the Rio Grande with no papers and no good story they could send you right back across even if they didn't see you physically cross the river.

I said that American citizens were not barred from the country. You can be detained when reentering the country. I have on multiple occasions. A couple times crossing from Canada while they ripped apart my car and searched my computer. Another time flying from Japan to Guam. I was the only American on the flight and was the only one detained for questioning. I'm not Muslim so I don't get to go cry to the news every time it happens.

Don't fall for anything the mainstream media is saying. CNN went on the air and called it "Unamerican." https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/why-exclude-fox-news-from-benghazi-intel-briefing/2012/11/05/0d7c47fc-2696-11e2-9972-71bf64ea091c_blog.html?utm_term=.561240963d38 Why exclude Fox News from Benghazi intel briefing? Guess what news outlet wasn’t front and center? On Friday evening, Fox News anchor Bret Baier had this to say: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-hosts-spotted-visiting-obama-white-house/ On Tuesday afternoon, four of MSNBC’s primetime hosts were seen entering the West Wing for a meeting with President Obama. The network’s 8 p.m. host Ed Schultz tweeted out that the group was meeting with the president to discuss the impending “fiscal cliff”: http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2013/05/22/liberal-columnists-quietly-visiting-white-house/ NPR’s Ari Shapiro posted an interesting Tweet on May 21. He discovered that a cadre of well-known lefty columnists and journalists visited the White House together, three of whom he mentioned by name. Shapiro reported that Jonathan Capehart and Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, and Josh Marshall of the left-wing website TalkingPointsMemo.com were attending a meeting together at the White House. http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2013/11/21/obama-woos-liberal-journalists/ On Thursday, Fox News’ Ed Henry tweeted that MSNBC hosts Ed Schultz and Lawrence O’Donnell, as well as Ezra Klein of theWashington Post and Fox News’ Juan Williams, had been invitedfor a private off-the-record chat with President Obama. Obama’s signature program, Obamacare, has been flailing in the press for weeks, and Obama apparently believes that it is about time to reshift the narrative: http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/03/obama-holds-off-the-record-session-with-columnists-203519 President Obama met with a group of journalists Wednesday

Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly goes to Guatemala and gets scorched earth. In a direct talk to the people he basically said not to try and come illegally to the US. He pointed out that you will be extorted and if you are a female you will be raped while traveling through Mexico. They all know this already. He made it clear that nothing but deportation awaits at the end of the journey now.

Three people arrested based on his last video regarding the plans to attack a Trump inauguration ball.