HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Jeff Sessions - respond...

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:18 PM

Jeff Sessions - responds to Senate Judiciary today - digging deeper

...snip...

Attorney General Jeff Sessions sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee Monday to "supplement” testimony given during his confirmation hearings in January, in which he said “I did not have communications with the Russians.”

In fact, Sessions met twice with the Russian ambassador to the United States during the 2016 presidential campaign, despite denying any contact to Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) during his confirmation hearings.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sessions-letter-judiciary-committee

“I did not mention communications I had had with the Russian Ambassador over the years because the question did not ask about them,” Sessions wrote in it, referring to his response to Franken’s question.

“I do not recall any discussions with the Russian Ambassador, or any other representative of the Russian government, regarding the political campaign on these occasions or any other occasions," he added later.

This letter should be classified under oath - ?????

16 replies, 5388 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to asiliveandbreathe (Original post)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:22 PM

1. He "doesn't recall" becausing he is lying. Color me unsurprised. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asiliveandbreathe (Original post)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:25 PM

2. What an attempt at obfuscation!

 

It simply doesn't matter what he was asked. He voluntarily said he had no contact with Russians! That's perjury!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:30 PM

4. That's correct - and now the issue is the question??? oh dear -

Let's just call it the big dig! and digging and d...

“I did not mention communications I had had with the Russian Ambassador over the years because the question did not ask about them - in the letter no less..this doesn't even make sense..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asiliveandbreathe (Original post)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:27 PM

3. You ask a good question

I wonder if the letter is under oath. If they find out he did talk to the ambassador about the campaign, then they really have him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #3)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:42 PM

8. Reading a comment at link - they suggest it is not under oath..

still searching - but the comments at link are very interesting..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asiliveandbreathe (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 09:52 PM

15. Then the only thing this paper is good for

is rolling a big fat doobie and blowing the smoke in Sessions' face.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #15)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 09:58 PM

16. By all means - however, see comment here #9 -

Sounds like written statement is under oath...and, the statement is sessions blowing smoke in our face..perhaps he should take it up! Might change his mind - especially now!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asiliveandbreathe (Original post)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:33 PM

5. Sessions volunteered that he'd never met with them. The question doesn't matter.

Like an idiot on the stand trying to over prove his innocence he stated, outside of the question, that he hadn't met with any Russians. That was a lie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asiliveandbreathe (Original post)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:39 PM

6. Sessions is not real bright.

After many years away, I returned to Alabama in 1993.
Sessions was already the junior senator from the state.
I have no idea how he got elected, what his power/money base was or is, or whatever.
He is a lightweight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Reply #6)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:42 PM

7. He sold his soul...

so that he could play a puppet for a pathological liar and an unstable narcissist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asiliveandbreathe (Original post)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:43 PM

9. Giving false information to Congress is a felony, *whether under oath or not*. There are 2 ...

separate statutes that come into play here. Section 1621 relates to false testimony under oath, which is perjury. Section 1001 covers testimony which is not under oath:

§ 1001. Statements or entries generally(a) Except as otherwise provided in this sec-tion, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdic-tion of the executive, legislative, or judicialbranch of the Government of the United States,knowingly and willfully— 1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by anytrick, scheme, or device a material fact; 2) makes any materially false, fictitious, orfraudulent statement or representation; or 3) makes or uses any false writing or docu-ment knowing the same to contain any mate-rially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statementor entry

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2014-title18/pdf/USCODE-2014-title18-partI-chap47-sec1001.pdf


An explanation of this from CNBC: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/07/what-happens-if-you-lie-to-congress.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Princess Turandot (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:46 PM

11. Thank you so much....PT....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Princess Turandot (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:49 PM

12. This is the guy who says "sorry! The LAW is the LAW" re: putting millions of pot smokers in prison

regardless of whether or not their states have voted to legalize.

Apparently it is vitally important that the letter of that law be enforced fully, resources and logic be damned.

But, you know, Perjury before congress we can probably fudge a bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #12)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:52 PM

14. Totally agree - perhaps if he was to sample some right now -

he would determine it was a good thing....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to asiliveandbreathe (Original post)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:44 PM

10. That's quite an odd response, considering that the response that got him into trouble

was not responsive to the question asked.

“I did not mention communications I had had with the Russian Ambassador over the years because the question did not ask about them,” Sessions wrote in it, referring to his response to Franken’s question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #10)

Mon Mar 6, 2017, 08:50 PM

13. He is still trying to prevent the need for recusal - his original

response - indeed trouble..All he had to do was say he would recuse himself..

.NOW - as you say, quite an odd response....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread