Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) is in the most trouble ever regarding an unconscionably melodramatic email he wrote to his friend, Ponzi scheme person Allen Stanford. “I love you and I believe in you,” is what Sessions told Allen, who had at that point just been arrested for $7 billion worth of fraud. Now, someone please award $7 billion stolen dollars to Sessions’ press secretary, logician-empress Emily Davis, who has come up with the following Ponzi scheme of rhetoric in order to explain the correspondence: “Sessions believes that its contents resemble language he would use to communicate with a person in crisis to encourage right decisions and prevent further tragedy.” Ho ho ho, except, this is not the first time that Sessions has pretended he is not friends with Allen Stanford, his actual best friend with whom he goes on fun vacations!

So back awhile ago, this year sometime, the news reported that $41,000 of those $7 billion Ponzi dollars was given to Pete Sessions. And again, this same Emily Davis character was like, Pete Sessions does not know Allen Stanford personally. She said this despite Pete Sessions having honeymooned with Stanford in Antigua, as proven by photos published by the Antiguan government of Sessions and Stanford quarreling over preschool applications and listening to Astral Weeks together, on a boat.

So more regarding this latest thing:

Davis said Stanford ‘had everyone fooled’ and that Sessions has worked to recover investors’ money.

“The congressman maintains the position that Mr. Stanford should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” the statement said.

This resembles language Emily Davis would use to communicate information pertaining to a person in crisis to encourage right decisions and prevent further tragedy.


Donate with CCDonate with CC


  1. Could anyone tell me what language I should use if my goal was to communicate information pertaining to a person in crisis to encourage poor decisions and incite further tragedy?

    Because I’d sure like to deploy that language in Sen. Session’s way right now.

  2. “The congressman maintains the position that Mr. Stanford should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law…”

    Sounds like BDS&M-speak for an aching, lonely bottom who’s missing the Caribbean pipe.

  3. [re=486108]Katydid[/re]: Maybe, or maybe not. If an erogenous zone has a billion dollars connected to it, a Republican congressman’s mouth is soon to follow, heterosexuality notwithstanding.

  4. Speaking of lying, hypocritical Republican fuckwads, does anybody mind if I hack into Wonkette and deface Malkin’s goddammed fugly hate-inducing face?

    I’ve never commented on Wonkette ads before, and I know I’m risking the banhammer, but every time I hit F5 and see that hairy twat my blood pressure rises and I want to kill someone.

    This is not good for my karma, people, and I haven’t done illegal drugs since my kid was born, and I no longer know where to get any. Now that the kid is 16, I suppose she’d be my best contact, but I’m slightly squeamish about asking her to score some weed for me. But my squeamishness gets lowered every goddammed time I see that twat Malkin’s fucking goddammed face.

    So. Anybody object to me hacking Wonkette, just to blingee Malkin’s fugly face?

  5. [re=486120]Katydid[/re]: I wonder about oppo presentation. It reminds me of ol’ Ben Franklin. See, back then, it was dangerous to be atheist, so they had this near-beer called Deism. And Ben read a supposed denunciation of Deism, and it was so incapably done (how do you lose an argument when you argue both sides?) that he became a Deist. So, maybe by showing all these teabagger twits online and on MSNBC, the idea is secretly to push the brand.

    Have you noticed how much screen time is wasted on Olbermann and Rachel over fatuous fascists?

  6. [re=486120]Katydid[/re]: And the show they’re advertising isn’t coming on until January 3, so we may be stuck with that face for most of the next week.

    Still, it’s like the old SarahPac ads, or the ones with the ghastly skeletal Coulter visage – it’s funny to see Wonkette getting money from the wignuts when none of the audience here is going to buy/watch any of their books/shows.

  7. If I ventured in the slipstream
    Between the viaducts of your dreams,
    Where the mobile steel rims cracked
    And the ditch and the back road stopped–
    Could you find me? Would you kiss my eyes?
    Lay me down in silence easily…
    To be born again*!

    *that is, granted immunity in return for my testimony against Pete Sessions

  8. Is Sessions in the closet or just pretending to be? Because being fiercely loyal to someone right up until other people find out sure sounds like closet behavior to me.

    [re=486107]user-of-owls[/re]: That would be, “I’m praying to The LORD that he looks after men of power such as yourself and allows you to use this as an opportunity for growth.”

  9. You all don’t get it. Rep. Sessions is rightful not concerned how Sanford got his money. He is properly concerned how all those Caribbean Blacks that got swindled got theirs.

  10. [re=486107]user-of-owls[/re]: Could anyone tell me what language I should use if my goal was to communicate information pertaining to a person in crisis to encourage poor decisions and incite further tragedy?

    Just say “Just be a good republican!” or “Do what John Boehner would do”.

  11. Dear Allen,

    Are you still in crisis? I don’t love you so go ahead and make some bad decisions — fork over all the money you’ve still got stashed wherever and then think seriously about committing some further tragedy.


  12. “I love you and I believe in you,” is generally what Republican Texans say in their “private” prayers to their Jesus-God, which I guess makes Congers Man Sessions effusions to a man of money appropriate and understandable.

  13. [re=486143]SayItWithWookies[/re]: [re=486147]Sparky McGruff[/re]: Thank you both, I’ll carefully consider your suggestions. As it stands right now, though, I’m thinking either, “What would Mark Sanford do?” or “Keep on fucking that chicken.”

  14. [re=486120]Katydid[/re]: Here is the perfect solution: Put your mouse cursor directly over her face in the picture. If you are lucky, the icon turns into a hand, so you can pretend to pick her nose for a while. Then click, and two good things happen. First, she disappears. Hooray! Second, Wonkette earns money, to pay Ken and Riley and all the rest of the gang.

    Just close your browser promptly then, or your eyes may start to bleed.

  15. [re=486130]Bowdoin[/re]: You may be right. Last fall I used to watch Olbermann and Maddow, but now I can’t bear it. I think they do their shtick for the same reasons Fox News does – to give people what they want to hear. I think GE lets them because GE wants to push a rightwing war agenda, and they know Olbermann and Maddow have no real impact, and they’re the only way MSNBC can win any audience away from Fox.

    Years ago I was a writer and then a producer for CNN in Atlanta, and, honestly, they didn’t push any political agenda. This was before Fox News, and CNN reigned.

    My one regret from my time at CNN is that I didn’t make a copy of a videotape that circulated, semi-secretly, among the staff with outtakes of the anchors. The ones of Robert Novak were priceless. He was the biggest prick you could imagine. There were so many outtakes of him going off on guests, storming off the set, and having huge tantrums. Evans would just sit there calmly and roll his eyes. One time Novak was screaming at someone and his teeth fell right out of his mouth. Oh, do I wish I had taken a copy of that tape.

  16. This is not my hand. This is not a cookie jar.

    I believe that its contents resemble cookies I would use to snack upon when caught with my hand in a cookie jar, since cookies lead to bad decisions and further fattening of the butt cheeks, while engorging the lower intestines with bullshit.

  17. [re=486132]JMP[/re]: This is true, but I click on the wingnut ads a million times more, because I like it when the wingnuts have to pay Wonkette the monies.

  18. [re=486120]Katydid[/re]: Katy, while you are at it can you re-touch the picture of the gay guy against gay marriage as I find his angelic gay-ness quite irksome.

  19. [re=486189]thesheriffisnear[/re]: FWIW, I had posted a story about that Chaffetz asshole on, and some commenters indicated that he radiates the gay. It hadn’t occurred to me, but for some reason, I have no absolutely no gaydar. My lesbian daughter keeps trying to teach me, but I just ain’t got it. Hell, last fall I was watching Rachel Maddow for a month before it occurred to me that she might be gay. I asked my kid, she glanced at the TV, and said, “oh God yes.”

    I think it’s because I just don’t care, my kid thinks it’s because I’m hopelessly pathetic at everything. But she’s 16, she’s supposed to think that.

    OK, I’ll stop posting serious comments now. Sorry, everyone.

  20. [re=486104]memzilla[/re]: Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) is, alas, not Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL). Alas, because Jeff Sessions is a more well-known, but perhaps not greater, douchebag than Pete.

  21. [re=486205]Katydid[/re]: You mean to tell me in this day and age a 16-year-old lesbian does not know of Rachel Maddow? Has to check the screen for a reading?

    Ask her about Gertrude Stein. Go on.

  22. [re=486161]Katydid[/re]: Right. Some of the best-known rebels were only riding the wave. Like, McCarthy apparently had no interest in communism at all until he saw the reaction of the crowds to his shopping list. (And how dumb the public was to allow him to take his show on the road for years without naming a single valid name.) And you know Marc Antony was cool with the conspiracy until he happened to hold up Caesar’s rented tux and noted the wailing of the mob. And one of the Brit spies charged with treason for broadcasting for the nazis during WWII had one sole interest, and that was nationalizing insurance trusts.

    As for Rachel and Olbermann, they say the revolution will not be Comcast.

  23. I had no idea that being a pol’s PR flack was so fucking easy. Where do I sign up for a bullshit job that just lets me say a bunch of words in any random order whenever people ask why my boss is licking a criminal’s asshole in public?

  24. [re=486281]Halloween Jack[/re]: Jack, you’d have to go back to Eric Roberts in Star 80 or the James Woods character in Casino. Alarming!!!

  25. Confused..didn’t Sessions call for a Taliban-like insurgency against Black Obama and his evil health care? I thought the Taliban kills fags?

  26. That would be the same Allen Stanford that Sheer “Am i An Idiot?” InSannity shilled for? Remember: InSannity advertised Stanford’s name was “good as Gold!” You betcha!

    BTW: He didn’t have everyone fooled. Just the rubes blinded by greed who failed to perform the most elementary due diligence…

  27. Maybe Emily Davis should have said that Pete Sessions had no business connections with Stanford but only sent him that message because they had been lovers for so many years. And then Sessions can light his cock on fire.

Comments are closed.

Previous articleThese Are The Underpants Of An Ineffective Terrorist
Next articleNew Year’s Eve, Wonkabout Style