The New Exchange

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



6/14/2017 5:47 am  #1


Jeff Sessions Clams Up in Congress

Jeff Sessions Clams Up in Congress



How many ways are there to fail to answer a question under oath?

Ask Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The last time Mr. Sessions appeared before a Senate committee, during his confirmation hearing in January, he gave false testimony.

“I did not have communications with the Russians,” Mr. Sessions said in response to a question no one asked — and despite the fact that he had, in fact, met with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, at least twice during the 2016 presidential campaign. The omission raised questions not only about his honesty, but also about why he would not disclose those meetings in the first place.

On Tuesday Mr. Sessions returned to answer questions from the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is investigating Russian sabotage of the 2016 election and the Trump campaign’s possible ties to those efforts.

That was the plan, anyway. In fact — and to the great consternation of the Democratic members of the committee, at least — Mr. Sessions was not on board. He arrived in full body armor, testy and sometimes raising his voice to defend what he called his honor against “scurrilous and false allegations” that he had colluded with Moscow.

He also defended his misstatements in January, to the Judiciary Committee, as being taken out of context, and he lowered a broad cone of silence around all his communications with President Trump regarding last month’s firing of James Comey as F.B.I. director, claiming it was “inappropriate” for him to discuss them. Did they involve classified information? No. Was he invoking executive privilege? No, he said, only the president may invoke that. Reminded that Mr. Trump has not done so, he said, “I’m protecting the right of the president to assert it if he chooses.”

Senator Martin Heinrich, Democrat of New Mexico, angrily accused Mr. Sessions of “impeding this investigation” by refusing to respond, but perhaps the attorney general was wise to keep his mouth shut. When he opened it, he often seemed to contradict himself, his staff at the Justice Department, or the president.

The most glaring example was his claim that the letter he wrote supporting Mr. Comey’s dismissal was based on the former director’s missteps in the bureau’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server — even though Mr. Trump himself had almost immediately blown that cover, telling a national television audience that he had the Russia investigation in mind when he decided to fire Mr. Comey.

Mr. Sessions’s explanation would’ve been impossible to swallow anyway, since he, like Mr. Trump, had originally praised Mr. Comey’s actions in the Clinton investigation.

The attorney general also had a strange reaction to Mr. Comey’s plea that he not be left alone with the president again. By his own account, Mr. Sessions seemed less concerned with the president’s highly unusual and inappropriate behavior than he was with Mr. Comey, telling him “that the F.B.I. and the Department of Justice needed to be careful to follow department policies regarding appropriate contacts with the White House.”

So here are a few more questions that Mr. Sessions should answer, but probably won’t.

Why did he not resist when Mr. Trump asked him and others to leave the Oval Office so he could have a private conversation with Mr. Comey? At the very least, why did he not take steps to find out what had happened?

Why does he believe he did not violate the terms of his recusal by taking part in Mr. Comey’s firing? His recusal extended, in his own words, to “any existing or future investigations of any matters related in any way to the campaigns for president of the United States” — which clearly includes the Clinton email investigation.

If his recusal was truly based, as he claimed, on his closeness to the Trump campaign, why not announce it immediately upon his confirmation, rather than wait weeks, until after news of his undisclosed meetings with Mr. Kislyak broke?

And perhaps most pressing: Why, since he agreed with the committee that Russian interference in the election represents a profoundly serious attack on American democracy, has Mr. Sessions never received or read any detailed briefing on that operation?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/opinion/jeff-sessions-clams-up-in-congress.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0


We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists. 
 

6/14/2017 6:13 am  #2


Re: Jeff Sessions Clams Up in Congress

There is quite a bit to think about here.

But, one thing I keep coming back to; this administration's utter lack of curiosity about Russian attempts to interfere in our elections. Interference that our own intelligence agencies describe as real, sophisticated, and ongoing.

Team trump's lack of curiosity, or even denial is either governmental malpractice, or something more sinister


We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists. 
     Thread Starter
 

6/14/2017 6:52 am  #3


Re: Jeff Sessions Clams Up in Congress

I listened to and/or watched much of it.  I came away from it all wondering what the hell was going on here.  Sessions was doing a dance around the tough questions with crap like,  “I’m protecting the right of the president to assert it (executive privilege) if he chooses.”

 

6/14/2017 7:36 am  #4


Re: Jeff Sessions Clams Up in Congress

I watched the "hearing" and, as I've said before, to call these dog & pony shows a "hearing" is a misnomer. They are nothing more than a forum for the reiteration of biased political positions of the two major party's points of view on the subject matter.

That being said, the performance by the attorney general, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, was an embarrassment to him and the administration. When asked simple yes or no questions, he did his best to filibuster his answer in order to use up the questioner's limited time. When the questioner would interrupt him to get on with their questions, Sessions would get irritated and, on at least one occasion, the majority leader of the Senate Intelligence Committee (isn't that an oxymoron?) admonished the questioner to let the AG continue with his "answer".

From my perspective, Sessions contradicted previous statements, referenced apparently unwritten standards within the justice department to avoid answering some questions, invoked a bastardized version of executive privilege in his attempt to avoid answering questions about communication with Trump and others, had remarkable clarity in recalling certain meetings with some individuals while, at the same time, apparently suffered from dementia or a brain fart when asked about certain meetings and the content of conversations that didn't suit his narrative. It was also bothersome to me that Sessions virtually pledged unerring loyalty to the president . . . isn't the justice department supposed to be an equal and independent branch of our government? . . . Shouldn't the AG be aware of that and shouldn't he be most concerned with the application of the rule of law to the situation rather than protecting an individual that may have overstepped their authority?

All in all this hearing did absolutely nothing to clear the air surrounding Russian influence impacting the election, the Comey firing, or possible interference with the investigation, or any collusion with Russians or internal U.S. government collusion/obstruction to hinder any investigation. Sessions was a terrible witness. After the "hearing" ended, I had to take a shower.

Last edited by Rongone (6/14/2017 7:38 am)

 

6/14/2017 11:37 am  #5


Re: Jeff Sessions Clams Up in Congress

Goose wrote:

There is quite a bit to think about here.

But, one thing I keep coming back to; this administration's utter lack of curiosity about Russian attempts to interfere in our elections. Interference that our own intelligence agencies describe as real, sophisticated, and ongoing.

Team trump's lack of curiosity, or even denial is either governmental malpractice, or something more sinister

BINGO ! 

Really makes you wonder. 
 


"Do not confuse motion and progress, A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress"
 
 

6/14/2017 8:26 pm  #6


Re: Jeff Sessions Clams Up in Congress

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—

An Alabama man whose brain was ravaged by severe amnesia is somehow able to function in an extremely demanding legal job, leading neurologists reported on Tuesday.

The man, whom neurologists are calling a “medical mystery,” has performed highly exacting tasks in one of the country’s top legal positions despite having virtually no short- or long-term memory.

Dr. Davis Logsdon, the chairman of the neurology department at the University of Minnesota Medical School, said that the Alabaman’s brain “defies explanation.”

“In all the medical literature, we have never seen an example of someone capable of holding down such a high-powered job while having no memory whatsoever of people he met, things he said, places he has been, or thoughts he has had,” Logsdon said. “It’s the stuff of science fiction."

Logsdon said that his team of neurologists was studying video of the man in the hopes of understanding the paradoxical functioning of his brain, but Logsdon acknowledged that such a task was challenging. “After listening to him talk for hours, your own brain starts to hurt,” he said.

Last edited by Just Fred (6/14/2017 8:28 pm)

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum