AG Sessions in huge conflict of interest speech

[someoneyouknow]

It is well known Attorney General Jeff Sessions has a history of anti-gay, anti-black rhetoric as well as tacit support for white supremacists. So it was no surprise when he readily agreed to give a speech to an anti-LGBT Christian group at which he spurred on their efforts to demonize, castigate and promote hate against people who are born a certain way.

At least that's what we think he said because neither Attorney General Sessions, nor the Justice Department, are going to release his remarks.

But that isn't the worst problem Sessions is facing. This group, Alliance Defending Freedom (i.e. defending the right of Christians to impose their religion on everyone else and openly discriminate) has a case before the Supreme Court in which the Justice Department is a party. This group is defending a baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple claiming religious freedom. Oddly, if a gay baker refused to bake a cake for a Christian couple, claiming moral conviction, this same group would also go to court.

That a public servant would make a speech and not allow their remarks be known to the public is disturbing enough, but to do so at a time when the two parties are to appear before the Supreme Court is simply mind-boggling. It's almost as if another form of collusion is taking place.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/12/politics/jeff-sessions-alliance-defending-freedom-summit/index.html

 

[ChloeTzang]

Oh Jay-sus, another non-story from the fake news media. What next? Trump didn't eat Kellogg's cereal for breakfast? Shock! Horror! Consternation!

 

[someoneyouknow]

Oh Jay-sus, another non-story from the fake news media. What next? Trump didn't eat Kellogg's cereal for breakfast? Shock! Horror! Consternation!

So you're saying it's acceptable for the remarks of a government official, one of the highest in the land, to be hidden from public view? You're fine with that?

Then you cannot say one word about Hillary Clinton giving a speech to Wall Street firms as a private citizen and those remarks not being released.

As you would say, that is also a non-story.

 

[ChloeTzang]

So you're saying it's acceptable for the remarks of a government official, one of the highest in the land, to be hidden from public view? You're fine with that?

Then you cannot say one word about Hillary Clinton giving a speech to Wall Street firms as a private citizen and those remarks not being released.

As you would say, that is also a non-story.

Totally agree. As long as there's no conflict of interest

 

[phrodeau]

It was a non-story when Loretta Lynch chatted with Bill Clinton in private. Ain't that right?

 

[ChloeTzang]

It was a non-story when Loretta Lynch chatted with Bill Clinton in private. Ain't that right?

Conflict of interest. Not a speech. Loretta and Bill. Just the two of them? My SO wants some of that pipeweed you smokin' dude

 

[phrodeau]

Conflict of interest. Not a speech. Loretta and Bill. Just the two of them? My SO wants some of that pipeweed you smokin' dude

Sure, after you prove that Sessions gave that speech.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Sure, after you prove that Sessions gave that speech.

What speech? Chloe smiles. Huh?

 

[phrodeau]

What speech? Chloe smiles. Huh?

Nope, ain't telling..., USA

 

[BotanyBoy]

At least that's what we think he said

Uh hua...

defending the right of Christians to impose their religion on everyone else and openly discriminate.

How come it's only imposing their religion when Christians do it to one of (D)s sacred oxen?

This group is defending a baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple claiming religious freedom.

Good for them hopefully they beat the communist shit heads trying to force them to run their business in a manner that violates their religious views.

Oddly, if a gay baker refused to bake a cake for a Christian couple, claiming moral conviction, this same group would also go to court.

Because religious freedom is for everyone, not just gay, trans, Muslim Democrats.

That a public servant would make a speech and not allow their remarks be known to the public is disturbing enough,

ONLY WHEN (R)'s DO IT!!!

Totally ok for (D)'s though......

So you're saying it's acceptable for the remarks of a government official, one of the highest in the land, to be hidden from public view? You're fine with that?

Yep. Privacy is not an exclusive right for Democrats...they haven't legislated themselves that level of elitism yet.

Then you cannot say one word about Hillary Clinton giving a speech to Wall Street firms as a private citizen and those remarks not being released.

Sure I can the same way you and the other (D)'s flip shit over everything (R)'s do but give (D)'s a complete pass on.

Oh and I don't think Alliance Defending Freedom is anywhere near as diabolical or powerful as Wall St. and they certainly didn't pay Sessions 700k to swing by and say what's up for brunch.

http://www.thedailyrash.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/secretary-of-state-hillary-rodham-clinton-laughs-as-she-speaks-to-the-22fortune-most-powerful-women-summit22-wednesday-oct-6-2010-in-washington.jpg

 

[phrodeau]

I feel sure that Sessions was only scouting out potential Supreme Court nominees for President Trump to nominate next chance he gets.

 

[someoneyouknow]

Uh hua...

Sure I can the same way you and the other (D)'s flip shit over everything (R)'s do but give (D)'s a complete pass on.

It's so cute you're so confused you think I'm a Democrat.

Oh and I don't think Alliance Defending Freedom is anywhere near as diabolical or powerful as Wall St. and they certainly didn't pay Sessions 700k to swing by and say what's up for brunch.

Oddly, being a private citizen means you can be paid any amount by anyone else for whatever they want you to do. That's how things work.

It doesn't work the same way when you're a public official. What you do and say is public record, and going out of your way to hide what you do only leads to the inevitable.

 

[phrodeau]

Corinne Weaver at Fox News is saying that ABC, NBC, CNN and Teen Vogue have all smeared the Alliance Defending Freedom by labeling them a hate group, based on the assessment of the Southern Poverty Law Center. She claims that the SPLC is an "agenda-driven liberal fund-raising machine." No evidence or rebuttal of the SPLC's position is offered. Instead, this is what passes for journalistic research at Fox News:

The ADF, founded in 1994, has been advocating for the right to freely practice Christian values in American society. As quoted on its website, “Alliance Defending Freedom defends religious freedom and opposes all attempts to compel people to compromise their beliefs or retreat from civil and political life as the price for following their faith.”

That’s the hate speech aimed directly at the LGBTQ community, apparently.

Here is the SPLC webpage on the ADF, packed with member quotes and examples of actions aimed directly against LGBTQ groups.
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/alliance-defending-freedom

 

[ChloeTzang]

Corinne Weaver at Fox News is saying that ABC, NBC, CNN and Teen Vogue have all smeared the Alliance Defending Freedom by labeling them a hate group, based on the assessment of the Southern Poverty Law Center. She claims that the SPLC is an "agenda-driven liberal fund-raising machine."

She is of course incorrect. The SPLC is a left wing hate group that's inspired at least two terrorist attacks.

 

[jaF0]

Was Jefferson Beauregard wearing this?

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads/monthly_04_2008/post-130-1208875549.jpg

 

[phrodeau]

She is of course incorrect. The SPLC is a left wing hate group that's inspired at least two terrorist attacks.

Did you read that in World Net Daily?

 

[BotanyBoy]

It's so cute you're so confused you think I'm a Democrat.

Fine....use whatever fancy label you want for your idea of the perfect nanny state but I generally see you trashing (R) socialist and supporting (D) socialist.

Nothing about any of our interactions has ever even come close to being a classical liberal, libertarian, capitalist or anarchist.

So....Democrat.

If you want to clarify I'd be more than happy to keep that in mind.

But if not I'll just consider your hatred for everything (R)/Conservative/Christian/Traditionally M'arican including capitalism and liberty as you being a Democrat.

Oddly, being a private citizen means you can be paid any amount by anyone else for whatever they want you to do. That's how things work.

Only if you're an elite....otherwise you need all sorts of licensing, permits and other bullshit meant to keep the blue collar riff raff out of the upper echelons of society in order to go get paid. Love those regulations!

It doesn't work the same way when you're a public official. What you do and say is public record

Yea it does and clearly it's not as players at all levels in both parties get their private moments regardless of how damning, shady and vile it looks.

The only thing that changes is who's currently outraged and who's pretending their political icon who got caught being shady is a fucking saint.

and going out of your way to hide what you do only leads to the inevitable.

A bunch of shit talk and witch hunts for the sake of headlines "investigations".

 

[ChloeTzang]

Did you read that in World Net Daily?

No, that's what Alex said to say. Seriously, you don't know about SPLC? They're a scam at best. Even the name is a joke

 

[phrodeau]

No, that's what Alex said to say. Seriously, you don't know about SPLC? They're a scam at best. Even the name is a joke

Oh, the pipeweed fan.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Oh, the pipeweed fan.

No, the Infowars guy. You know, THAT Alex.

 

[magicalmoments]

Oh Jay-sus, another non-story from the fake news media. What next? Trump didn't eat Kellogg's cereal for breakfast? Shock! Horror! Consternation!

I think he has a McMuffin for breakfast, supporting American industry.

 

[ChloeTzang]

I think he has a McMuffin for breakfast, supporting American industry.

McMuffin? OMG. Still, I guess we have to support our petrochemical industry as best we can. And the preservatives and additives should keep him up and running for the full two terms. And ensure embalming is easier. I'm kind of envisaging something like Lenin's mausoleum in Red Square. There lies the great Supreme Leader in a glass topped coffin, preserved for all eternity so that the adoring masses can gaze on the great Trump's mortal remains while outside the motorcade sweeps by and the adoring masses chant Ivaaaan-ka ... Ivaaaaan-ka. Oooops, sorry, I was rambling