It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sessions didn’t disclose meetings with Russian officials on security clearance form

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Sessions didn’t disclose meetings with Russian officials on security clearance form

It's time to revoke Jeff Sessions' security clearance and kick him out of the AG spot. He lied on his application by failing to disclose meetings with Russian officials, and the way an application works is if you misrepresent yourself then it is invalid and possibly even illegal.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions did not reveal meetings with Russian officials when he applied for his security clearance to serve as the nation’s highest-ranking law enforcement official.

Sessions came under fire earlier this year for not disclosing to the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearing that, as the senator from Alabama, he met twice with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the presidential election when he was also serving as an adviser to the president. In March, Sessions recused himself from investigations related to the 2016 presidential campaign after The Washington Post reported the two meetings.

That same information was omitted from Sessions’s security clearance form, which is known as an SF-86, as first reported Wednesday night by CNN.

Lying on a security clearance form, even if it is a lie of omission, is unacceptable. This is a national security issue and he needs to be removed from office immediately. No second chances.




posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Does he get two scoops of ice cream too?


+2 more 
posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot

Who #ing cares? This is more important than some frivolous news story.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Actually your unsubstantiated allegation is less important than two scoopgate



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot

Lying on a security clearance form is less important than an ice cream story? Are you nuts?

PS: You don't believe WaPo? Here's the Hill. Deny some ignorance for a change and don't just blindly dismiss something you find to be inconvenient.
edit on 25-5-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:38 AM
link   
But the FBI told him it was "OK" !!

Must have been a set-up.




posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I think he was told he didn't need to report meetings as a Senator but only the ones as a campaign representative.
Just saying. Even the dems in the house seem to think this is reasonable.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
I think he was told he didn't need to report meetings as a Senator but only the ones as a campaign representative.
Just saying. Even the dems in the house seem to think this is reasonable.

No. They aren't.

Democratic lawmakers demanded Mr. Sessions’s resignation on Wednesday. “He’s lied under oath,” Senator Kamala Harris, Democrat of California, wrote on Twitter. “He’s misled on security clearance forms. It’s simple — he should not be the Attorney General.”

This is a serious crime and the head of our justice department shouldn't be getting an exemption for properly filling out a security clearance form. We've already seen what happens when the Trump admin is lax on security clearance measures in the past with Flynn. Sessions needs to go.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
This is a national security issue and he needs to be removed from office immediately. No second chances.



In a statement on March 1, Sessions said, "I never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign. I have no idea what this allegation is about. It is false."[94][95][96] According to Sessions, he talked with Russia's ambassador about the Ukraine and terrorism.[97] US Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said that, "There was absolutely nothing misleading about his answer. He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign – not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee ... Last year, the Senator had over 25 conversations with foreign ambassadors as a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, including the British, Korean, Japanese, Polish, Indian, Chinese, Canadian, Australian, German and Russian ambassador


en.wikipedia.org...

Bit tough demanding his removal from office!... now if he deleted subpoenaed evidence about his meeting while a member of the armed services committee... we might have a problem.. maybe.. even then he still might get off!



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: whywhynot

Lying on a security clearance form is less important than an ice cream story? Are you nuts?

PS: You don't believe WaPo? Here's the Hill. Deny some ignorance for a change and don't just blindly dismiss something you find to be inconvenient.


Your Hill link only refers to the CNN report which refers to the WP report which has no evidence. More sloppy reporting at best or fake news at worst.

Your unsubstantiated allegation is that Sessions committed an error of omission on his SF-86. The way you would begin to substantiate your allegation would be to produce his SF-86. Can you do that? No? Then it is unsubstantiated and makes for a worthless post.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:49 AM
link   
But what if it wasn't his "intent" to fill the form out wrong?




posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: whywhynot

Lying on a security clearance form is less important than an ice cream story? Are you nuts?

PS: You don't believe WaPo? Here's the Hill. Deny some ignorance for a change and don't just blindly dismiss something you find to be inconvenient.

Dude you could just put the link to the google news search that has every major outlet on the planet and people will still scoff at it. Me included.
Let me give you an example...
Did a simple search into the author of the article in your OP.

Sari Horwitz, a 27-year veteran, three-time Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for The Post, a woman almost universally liked and respected here, violated that standard twice within a week, copying and pasting material from the Arizona Republic on March 4 and March 10 in online stories (published in print on March 5 and 11) about Jared Lee Loughner, the man accused of shooting Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in January. As a result, she was suspended from The Post for three months without pay.

WAPO
These people are not genuine ethical reporters.
Every source you cling to or cite I can take less than 5 minutes to discredit.
One would think you all would eventually learn this after the sky has not fallen for the umtheenth time.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Don't get your knickers in a knot. I agree. Sessions should never have been appointed to begin with.






posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: lordcomac

The larger point is how do we even know that he filled out the form wrong?



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Is he supposed to disclose every single one of the hundreds to thousands of foreign official he met as a member of congress? Or just the Russian meetings set up by the Obama state department cause your made up Russian fantasies?

Definitely more interested in the Ice Cream story
edit on 25-5-2017 by PepeTalk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot


Your unsubstantiated allegation is that Sessions committed an error of omission on his SF-86. The way you would begin to substantiate your allegation would be to produce his SF-86. Can you do that? No? Then it is unsubstantiated and makes for a worthless post.

Except no one is denying it. You are just trying to stick your head in the sand because it's bad news for your side of the partisan aisle.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: JAY1980

Just fishing for excuses so you don't have to believe. Confirmation bias 101.



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: PepeTalk

Yes. Those are the rules. If it is too hard, then he shouldn't be applying for the job.
edit on 25-5-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

coming from the left, on this issue

hahahahahahahaha

did you obtain these strict interpretaions of matters of national security recently?
you guys couldnt care less last summer....

oh and please prove his "intent" to mislead anyone as well


lolololol
what a joke
edit on 25/5/2017 by shooterbrody because: poor spelling



posted on May, 25 2017 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: PepeTalk

Yes. Those are the rules. If it is too hard, then he shouldn't be applying for the job.


So you're more familiar with the SF-86 security protocol than the FBI investigator they spoke to that was running the background check. Thanks for clearing that up



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join