I’m sure everyone would like ol’ Beauregard to take his polygraph first.
PS…When investigators turn a member of a criminal enterprise into a singing canary, the term is Confidential Informant, not leaker.
Give 'ol Beau two minutes on that polygraph and he’d ruin it.
What’s the difference between leakers and whistleblowers? This is a move a couple steps forward of Obama’s prosecuting whistleblowers.
Yeah baby! You go, Jeff. Hah hah!
I don’t think Sessions has thought this through very well. If he proceeds then some of the White House staff will resign out of fear or on the principle of not being polygraphed against their will. It will ensure further chaos in the administration. As for journalists, they can just refuse and lose their access .
Purging your own ranks, now what kind of governmental system does that sound like?
What else would you expect from our legitimately insane, great leader!
True, especially if Jeff was asked the question: are you a racist?
Our racist garden gnome is at it again. He knows that without Trump, he’d be playing golf. Anything to remain relevant.
Gollum want OTHERS to take a polygraph?
What’s good for the gnome is good for the groper. Both should take polygraphs in the Oval office with TV cameras rolling for all the world to see what flagrant and inveterate prevaricators look and act like.
HAhahahahahah. Yeah, check the staff changing the bed sheets to see if they leak truth. The criminals are checking the lowly workers serving them. It’s not bad, it’s evil.
I’m well aware of false-positives and the like; and, through a letter to the editor of a major newspaper in my state, I had a hand in stopping one town’s police department from routinely witch-hunt polygraphing a certain subset of citizens.
But, in my experience, having to take a polygraph for a government position, or for a corporate position where one would be working closely with certain government agencies is not at all unusual; and, you are entirely correct that one can simply refuse, if one is concerned about the outcome. I do think it’s far more likely that people with something to hide (as innocuous as that might be…like being a frequent, off work hours, MJ user) are more likely to decide to not take a polygraph, than it would be for someone to be wrongly classified by a false positive.
So, although I think Sessions should be fired from his AG position for, at the very least, incompetence and inaction, I don’t have a problem with the executive permitting the conducting of polygraphs within its set of employees; especially, in circumstances like the incident when Trump, during a closed meeting, informed the Russians of an ISIS plot to blow up airliners with bombs concealed in laptop computers. There was no reason why the Russians, Brits, Aussies, French, Chinese, Germans, or any half-rational foreign government should not have been privately made aware of this threat. The real crime here was the Washington Post deciding to publish this highly sensitive information, knowing full well that it would likely put an Israeli intelligence asset at risk, which is exactly what this particular leak, via its administration leaker, did. In this instance, I believe the Washington Post should have been indicted for leaking classified information, as should have the leaker, whomever that might have been.
No one in the White House should take a polygraph until Trump, Kushner, Kelly, Ivanka, and all of the Cabinet take one.
Sessions is to Trump as Himmler is to Hitler. Lets just hang them now and save everyone a lot of grief.
After the polygraph, what would be the follow-up as the leaks continued? Licensed journalists?