Sessions refuses to discuss conversations with Trump on Russia

[webfact]

Sessions refuses to discuss conversations with Trump on Russia

By Sarah N. Lynch and Lisa Lambert

 

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions gestures as he testifies before a Senate Judiciary oversight hearing on the Justice Department on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., October 18, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions refused on Wednesday to answer lawmakers' questions about his discussions with President Donald Trump on Russia and denied lying to Congress about his own contacts with Russians during the 2016 election campaign.

 

In often testy exchanges with Senate Democrats, Sessions denied misleading them when he said during his Senate confirmation hearing earlier this year that he had not met with Russian officials during the campaign.

 

"I conducted no improper discussions with Russians at any time regarding the campaign," Sessions told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russia's alleged meddling in the election and possible collusion by Trump aides dominated the five-hour oversight hearing on Wednesday. Sessions also said Mueller has not interviewed him and sought to explain Trump's decision to fire the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in May, which the president has said was related to interference allegations.

 

A Republican former senator from Alabama and the top adviser to Trump's campaign on national security issues, Sessions had to recuse himself from investigations into alleged Russian interference after it was revealed in March that he met with Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak at least twice in 2016.

 

The Washington Post reported in July that U.S. intelligence agencies picked up intercepts in which Kislyak told the Kremlin he had held substantive discussions with Sessions about Trump's positions on U.S.-Russia relations.

 

Sessions said on Wednesday he could not recall specific details of the conversation.

 

"I don’t think there was any discussions about the details of the campaign," he said. "It could have been that in that meeting in my office or at the convention ... some comments were made about what Trump’s positions were. I think that’s possible.”

 

Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy told Sessions many committee members believe the attorney general gave "false testimony" when he previously denied meeting with Russians.

 

Sessions countered that the question related only to matters specific to campaign interference, and told Leahy he had answered it truthfully. "I believe my answer was correct."

 

He also repeatedly said he was barred from discussing his confidential conversations with Trump. Those refusals could fuel Democrats' frustration with the administration over what they say is its inadequate cooperation with investigations into the Trump campaign's dealings with Russia.

 

Moscow has denied interfering in the election and Trump has said there was no collusion.

 

Trump drew sharp criticism when he fired former FBI Director James Comey in May and then said he considered the agency's Russia probe while making the decision.

 

Sessions said he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had recommended dismissing Comey over a different investigation into the use of a private server by Trump's election opponent, Democrat Hillary Clinton.

 

Comey overstepped his authority in announcing the Clinton investigation was concluded, Sessions said, and "that was a basis that called for a fresh start at the FBI."

 

He would not say whether his discussions with Trump about Comey touched on the Russia probe.

 

Earlier this year, Sessions' tenure as attorney general was in doubt as Trump repeatedly criticized him, especially for recusing himself from the Russia probe.

 

But Sessions adamantly defended the president on Wednesday, backing his controversial changes to immigration and policing programs as well as his ban on visitors travelling from several majority-Muslim countries.

 

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch and Lisa Lambert; Editing by Alistair Bell and Lisa Shumaker)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-10-19

[FreddieRoyle]

Well here we go again. Liberals will be "russian" to an early grave if this madness keeps up. Just accept it, your candidate ran a terrible campaign and lost the election. If it makes you feel better, you can blame unicorns, global warming or the Russians, but hopefully deep down even the maddest liberal understands the principle of more votes winee election. Russian facebook ads were and are irrelevant(and fictional).

 Just when CNN had called off the hounds and moved onto some other gibberish we get this Russia red herring rearing its rotten head. 

 

 

[zaphod reborn]

1 hour ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Well here we go again. Liberals will be "russian" to an early grave if this madness keeps up. Just accept it, your candidate ran a terrible campaign and lost the election. If it makes you feel better, you can blame unicorns, global warming or the Russians, but hopefully deep down even the maddest liberal understands the principle of more votes winee election. Russian facebook ads were and are irrelevant(and fictional).

 Just when CNN had called off the hounds and moved onto some other gibberish we get this Russia red herring rearing its rotten head. 

 

 

Congressional hearings are only for show.  The real extent of the scandal will come to light when the indictments against Manafort and Flynn are unsealed by Mueller and they flip on Trump. 

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

2 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Well here we go again. Liberals will be "russian" to an early grave if this madness keeps up. Just accept it, your candidate ran a terrible campaign and lost the election. If it makes you feel better, you can blame unicorns, global warming or the Russians, but hopefully deep down even the maddest liberal understands the principle of more votes winee election. Russian facebook ads were and are irrelevant(and fictional).

 Just when CNN had called off the hounds and moved onto some other gibberish we get this Russia red herring rearing its rotten head. 

 

 

Unbelievable how blindly some will follow this treasonous con man. I cant wait until all of the evidence is presented and this guy and his cronies are charged with what is surely the most serious offense EVER committed by any president EVER!!

 

Of course you and your brain washed minions will continue to believe your sociopathic, habitual liar of a leader and scream fake news despite all of the facts.

 

I would just like to see how you hypocrites would have reacted if Obama had done anything even remotely similar to this.

 

Edited October 19, 2017 by ALLSEEINGEYE
spelling

[craigt3365]

6 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Well here we go again. Liberals will be "russian" to an early grave if this madness keeps up. Just accept it, your candidate ran a terrible campaign and lost the election. If it makes you feel better, you can blame unicorns, global warming or the Russians, but hopefully deep down even the maddest liberal understands the principle of more votes winee election. Russian facebook ads were and are irrelevant(and fictional).

 Just when CNN had called off the hounds and moved onto some other gibberish we get this Russia red herring rearing its rotten head. 

 

 

Potential crimes have been committed.  Luckily, many Republicans are supporting these investigations.  Sad you don't see the significance of this.  It needs to be addressed.

 

P.S. bringing up the election loss gets old. 

[mtls2005]

In his best southern belle accent...waving his lace fan...in his finest ball gown (assuming they have a size that small)...

 

"Oh, I do declare Mr. Franken, you've got me all in a tizzy."

 

"When I said I had no 'relations' with the Russians, I meant I didn't actually have sex with them."

 

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2017 by mtls2005

[riclag]

5 hours ago, ALLSEEINGEYE said:

Unbelievable how blindly some will follow this treasonous con man. I cant wait until all of the evidence is presented and this guy and his cronies are charged with what is surely the most serious offense EVER committed by any president EVER!!

 

Of course you and your brain washed minions will continue to believe your sociopathic, habitual liar of a leader and scream fake news despite all of the facts.

 

I would just like to see how you hypocrites would have reacted if Obama had done anything even remotely similar to this.

"

"I would just like to see how you hypocrites would have reacted if Obama had done anything even remotely similar to this."

 

 I can only speak on behalf of this deplorable .Unfortunately that would be impossible seeing that it would be off topic.

[boomerangutang]

Sessions is as sleazy as a worm dipped in motor oil - but perhaps not as sleaze-filled as Trump Sr.

 

 

[mtls2005]

"No, Sen Leahy, I did not have 'relations' with the Russian ambassador."

 

"Does oral count? Especially if I don't have to get down on my knees."

 

Not sure if he went to law school, he comes across as a complete moron, but the bar exam in Alabama probably consists of a game of hangman, with a very detailed drawing of a lynching of a black man.

 

 

 

[Scott]

A post with the aberrant spelling of a politician has been removed along with replies.  

[zaphod reborn]

Manafort:  "I need to get to Trump".  The story of why Manafort was hired by Trump as his campaign manager.

 

[FreddieRoyle]

On 10/19/2017 at 5:42 PM, craigt3365 said:

Potential crimes have been committed.  Luckily, many Republicans are supporting these investigations.  Sad you don't see the significance of this.  It needs to be addressed.

 

P.S. bringing up the election loss gets old. 

although presumably droning on about reds under the bed isn't getting old???

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, FreddieRoyle said:

although presumably droning on about reds under the bed isn't getting old???

How far back in the past are you living? News Flash! The Soviet Union is long gone.

[craigt3365]

2 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

although presumably droning on about reds under the bed isn't getting old???

Where does it say that?  This is serious stuff.  Sad some don't think so.

[CaptHaddock]

Sessions should be held in contempt of Congress.  The Congress has an oversight function for the Dept. of Justice.  In the absence of a claim of executive privilege, which has been sustained by the courts, Sessions has no basis on which to refuse to answer questions.

[boomerangutang]

On 10/19/2017 at 1:02 PM, zaphod reborn said:

Congressional hearings are only for show.  The real extent of the scandal will come to light when the indictments against Manafort and Flynn are unsealed by Mueller and they flip on Trump. 

I'd like to agree with you, but can't quite agree with your adjective 'real' preceding 'extent.'

 

I think Mueller's team will tether in their horses when it comes to most of Trump's (and his immediate cohorts') law-breaking.  Mueller is under a lot of political pressure, some of it self-induced, to limit the scope of his investigation.  He will err on the side of conservatism.

 

[boomerangutang]

27 minutes ago, CaptHaddock said:

Sessions should be held in contempt of Congress.  The Congress has an oversight function for the Dept. of Justice.  In the absence of a claim of executive privilege, which has been sustained by the courts, Sessions has no basis on which to refuse to answer questions.

You're right.  Sessions is such a lap dog for Trump that he figures everyone assumes there is 'executive privilege' on nearly everything.  Executive privilege has to be declared by the executive himself - on specific issues.  

 

As a comparison:   if a Latino man with tattered clothes walks into a police station in San Diego, it can be assumed he is asking for political asylum, but other things can also be assumed.  He only starts the application for political asylum process if/when he states clearly that's what he wants.

 

[CaptHaddock]

7 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

You're right.  Sessions is such a lap dog for Trump that he figures everyone assumes there is

'executive privilege' on nearly everything.  Executive privilege has to be declared by the executive himself - on specific issues. 

 

 

Sessions stated the basis of his refusal.  He refused because at some time in the future Trump might claim executive privilege for those discussions, therefore he can't reveal them now.  This is novel legal theory that is comically bogus.  He deserves credit for stating it with a straight face.