This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/18/us/politics/sessions-senate-judiciary-committee-hearing.html
The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 7 | Version 8 |
|---|---|
| Sessions Refuses to Discuss His Conversations With Trump About Comey or Russia | Sessions Refuses to Discuss His Conversations With Trump About Comey or Russia |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| • Attorney General Jeff Sessions is testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee for the first time, eight months into his tenure as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer. | • Attorney General Jeff Sessions is testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee for the first time, eight months into his tenure as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer. |
| • Mr. Sessions told lawmakers he would not discuss his conversations with President Trump, citing executive privilege, a tack he has taken before that angered Democrats because Mr. Trump has not invoked the privilege. | • Mr. Sessions told lawmakers he would not discuss his conversations with President Trump, citing executive privilege, a tack he has taken before that angered Democrats because Mr. Trump has not invoked the privilege. |
| • Do not expect Mr. Sessions to talk much about the Justice Department’s Russia investigation. He has recused himself from overseeing it because of his role as a campaign adviser to Mr. Trump. | • Do not expect Mr. Sessions to talk much about the Justice Department’s Russia investigation. He has recused himself from overseeing it because of his role as a campaign adviser to Mr. Trump. |
| Here is the latest from Washington: | Here is the latest from Washington: |
| Mr. Sessions said he would not talk about his conversations with Mr. Trump unless and until the president decided to waive executive privilege, which provides a legal basis for keeping their discussions secret from Congress. | Mr. Sessions said he would not talk about his conversations with Mr. Trump unless and until the president decided to waive executive privilege, which provides a legal basis for keeping their discussions secret from Congress. |
| “Consistent with a longstanding policy and practice of the executive branch, I can neither assert executive privilege, nor can I disclose today the content of my confidential conversations with the president,” Mr. Sessions said, adding that he could not waive that privilege himself. “As a result, during today’s hearing and under these circumstances today, I will not be able to discuss the content of my conversations with the president.” | “Consistent with a longstanding policy and practice of the executive branch, I can neither assert executive privilege, nor can I disclose today the content of my confidential conversations with the president,” Mr. Sessions said, adding that he could not waive that privilege himself. “As a result, during today’s hearing and under these circumstances today, I will not be able to discuss the content of my conversations with the president.” |
| When he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee in June, Mr. Sessions had refused to answer several questions about his conversations with Mr. Trump regarding the Russia investigation and the president’s firing of James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director. Mr. Sessions told lawmakers that it would be “inappropriate” to detail those discussions because those matters were potentially covered by executive privilege. | When he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee in June, Mr. Sessions had refused to answer several questions about his conversations with Mr. Trump regarding the Russia investigation and the president’s firing of James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director. Mr. Sessions told lawmakers that it would be “inappropriate” to detail those discussions because those matters were potentially covered by executive privilege. |
| The move angered Democrats because Mr. Trump had not invoked the privilege. Last week, all nine Democrats on the committee sent Mr. Sessions a letter saying they either wanted him to answer questions that he refused to answer in June, or that they expected Mr. Trump to formally invoke the privilege to keep those matters secret. | The move angered Democrats because Mr. Trump had not invoked the privilege. Last week, all nine Democrats on the committee sent Mr. Sessions a letter saying they either wanted him to answer questions that he refused to answer in June, or that they expected Mr. Trump to formally invoke the privilege to keep those matters secret. |
| “With respect to potential assertions of executive privilege on behalf of the president, we wish to put you on notice that any reasonable period of abeyance on many of the issues about which you will be asked has long elapsed,” they wrote. | “With respect to potential assertions of executive privilege on behalf of the president, we wish to put you on notice that any reasonable period of abeyance on many of the issues about which you will be asked has long elapsed,” they wrote. |
| In a testy exchange, Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, pressed Mr. Sessions to say whether he had been interviewed by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel who is investigating possible links between Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and the Trump campaign, as well as whether Mr. Trump committed obstruction of justice by firing the former F.B.I. director, James B. Comey. | In a testy exchange, Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, pressed Mr. Sessions to say whether he had been interviewed by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel who is investigating possible links between Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and the Trump campaign, as well as whether Mr. Trump committed obstruction of justice by firing the former F.B.I. director, James B. Comey. |
| Mr. Sessions responded by telling the senator that he would have to ask Mr. Mueller, prompting Mr. Leahy to growl: “I’m asking you.” Mr. Sessions eventually answered “no,” and when Mr. Leahy pressed him further, he reiterated, “The answer’s no.” | Mr. Sessions responded by telling the senator that he would have to ask Mr. Mueller, prompting Mr. Leahy to growl: “I’m asking you.” Mr. Sessions eventually answered “no,” and when Mr. Leahy pressed him further, he reiterated, “The answer’s no.” |
| Mr. Sessions later told Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, that Mr. Mueller had not contacted his office about a potential interview. | Mr. Sessions later told Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, that Mr. Mueller had not contacted his office about a potential interview. |
| Mr. Sessions also pushed back against Mr. Leahy, who accused Mr. Sessions of misleading Congress when he said during his confirmation process that he did not have contacts with Russians during the 2016 campaign. In fact, Mr. Sessions met several times with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak. | Mr. Sessions also pushed back against Mr. Leahy, who accused Mr. Sessions of misleading Congress when he said during his confirmation process that he did not have contacts with Russians during the 2016 campaign. In fact, Mr. Sessions met several times with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak. |
| Mr. Sessions said that he had interpreted questions about contacts, based on their context, as being about campaign-related conversations. He also asserted that he never had “a meeting with any Russian officials to discuss any kind of coordinating campaign efforts.” | Mr. Sessions said that he had interpreted questions about contacts, based on their context, as being about campaign-related conversations. He also asserted that he never had “a meeting with any Russian officials to discuss any kind of coordinating campaign efforts.” |
| Mr. Sessions also sidestepped a question by Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota, about whether it would be “problematic” for Mr. Trump to issue a pre-emptive pardon to someone of interest to Mr. Mueller’s investigation before the special counsel finished his work. | Mr. Sessions also sidestepped a question by Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota, about whether it would be “problematic” for Mr. Trump to issue a pre-emptive pardon to someone of interest to Mr. Mueller’s investigation before the special counsel finished his work. |
| “Well, the pardon power is quite broad,” Mr. Sessions said. “I’ve not studied it. I do not know if that would be appropriate or not.” | “Well, the pardon power is quite broad,” Mr. Sessions said. “I’ve not studied it. I do not know if that would be appropriate or not.” |
| Mr. Sessions did not shed new light on his role in Mr. Trump’s abrupt firing of Mr. Comey, again invoking the president’s right to private conversations when pressed by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the committee’s top Democrat. | Mr. Sessions did not shed new light on his role in Mr. Trump’s abrupt firing of Mr. Comey, again invoking the president’s right to private conversations when pressed by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the committee’s top Democrat. |
| Instead, Mr. Sessions reiterated that Mr. Trump had asked earlier that both he and Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, make a recommendation about Mr. Comey’s future in writing. He said they had objected to how Mr. Comey had run the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information while secretary of state. Mr. Comey ultimately recommended she not be charged but harshly criticized her behavior, calling her “extremely careless.” | Instead, Mr. Sessions reiterated that Mr. Trump had asked earlier that both he and Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, make a recommendation about Mr. Comey’s future in writing. He said they had objected to how Mr. Comey had run the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information while secretary of state. Mr. Comey ultimately recommended she not be charged but harshly criticized her behavior, calling her “extremely careless.” |
| “I don’t think it’s been fully understood the significance of the error Mr. Comey made on the Clinton matter,” Mr. Sessions said. And after Mr. Comey told lawmakers during a hearing that he felt the matter was properly handled and that he would act in the same way again, Mr. Sessions said, it was clear to him that the F.B.I. needed a “fresh start.” | “I don’t think it’s been fully understood the significance of the error Mr. Comey made on the Clinton matter,” Mr. Sessions said. And after Mr. Comey told lawmakers during a hearing that he felt the matter was properly handled and that he would act in the same way again, Mr. Sessions said, it was clear to him that the F.B.I. needed a “fresh start.” |
| Mr. Sessions said he could neither confirm nor deny that Mr. Trump had raised concerns to him about the Justice Department’s investigation into Russia’s election interference when discussing Mr. Comey. | Mr. Sessions said he could neither confirm nor deny that Mr. Trump had raised concerns to him about the Justice Department’s investigation into Russia’s election interference when discussing Mr. Comey. |
| “That calls for a communication that I have had with the president and I believe it remains confidential,” Mr. Sessions said. | “That calls for a communication that I have had with the president and I believe it remains confidential,” Mr. Sessions said. |
| The most hostile exchange during the hearing came between Senator Al Franken, a Democrat of Minnesota, and Mr. Sessions, over what Mr. Franken described as the attorney general’s evolving descriptions of his interactions with Russians during the presidential campaign. | The most hostile exchange during the hearing came between Senator Al Franken, a Democrat of Minnesota, and Mr. Sessions, over what Mr. Franken described as the attorney general’s evolving descriptions of his interactions with Russians during the presidential campaign. |
| Mr. Sessions and Mr. Franken, once Senate colleagues, repeatedly interrupted each other, read old quotations aloud to make their points and argued for more time to talk in an exchange that ultimately did little to shed light on any ties between Mr. Sessions and Russians. | Mr. Sessions and Mr. Franken, once Senate colleagues, repeatedly interrupted each other, read old quotations aloud to make their points and argued for more time to talk in an exchange that ultimately did little to shed light on any ties between Mr. Sessions and Russians. |
| As Mr. Sessions answered, Mr. Franken tried to keep questioning him. | As Mr. Sessions answered, Mr. Franken tried to keep questioning him. |
| “No, you had a long time, Senator Franken. I’d like to respond,” Mr. Sessions said. | “No, you had a long time, Senator Franken. I’d like to respond,” Mr. Sessions said. |
| “They are going to cut me off so I want to ask you some questions,” Mr. Franken responded, referring to committee rules about time limits for questions and answers. | “They are going to cut me off so I want to ask you some questions,” Mr. Franken responded, referring to committee rules about time limits for questions and answers. |
| “Without having a chance to respond,” Mr. Sessions said. “Give me a break.” | “Without having a chance to respond,” Mr. Sessions said. “Give me a break.” |
| At one point, Mr. Grassley, the chairman, told Mr. Franken he had three more minutes to ask questions, prompting a protest from Mr. Sessions, whom Mr. Grassley rebuked. | At one point, Mr. Grassley, the chairman, told Mr. Franken he had three more minutes to ask questions, prompting a protest from Mr. Sessions, whom Mr. Grassley rebuked. |
| “Hey, let me just deal with Senator Franken,” Mr. Grassley said. | “Hey, let me just deal with Senator Franken,” Mr. Grassley said. |
| Mr. Franken finished his questioning in three minutes and six seconds, which included one last interruption from Mr. Sessions. | Mr. Franken finished his questioning in three minutes and six seconds, which included one last interruption from Mr. Sessions. |
| The law that forms the basis for the government’s warrantless surveillance program, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, is set to expire at the end of the year unless Congress extends it. Under questioning from the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, Mr. Sessions emphasized that the Trump administration continued to oppose the primary change proposed to the law: requiring the F.B.I. to get a warrant to search the repository of emails intercepted under that program for something involving an American criminal suspect. | The law that forms the basis for the government’s warrantless surveillance program, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, is set to expire at the end of the year unless Congress extends it. Under questioning from the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, Mr. Sessions emphasized that the Trump administration continued to oppose the primary change proposed to the law: requiring the F.B.I. to get a warrant to search the repository of emails intercepted under that program for something involving an American criminal suspect. |
| “Mr. Chairman, it is not legally required, in my opinion, to have a warrant requirement,” Mr. Sessions said, noting that the targets of the surveillance under the program were people abroad, who are not protected by the Constitution. “I don’t not believe that we could carry out the responsibilities that we are expected to do with a warrant requirement for any of the 702 type material.” | “Mr. Chairman, it is not legally required, in my opinion, to have a warrant requirement,” Mr. Sessions said, noting that the targets of the surveillance under the program were people abroad, who are not protected by the Constitution. “I don’t not believe that we could carry out the responsibilities that we are expected to do with a warrant requirement for any of the 702 type material.” |
| Mr. Grassley’s counterpart in the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia, has sponsored a bill, the USA Liberty Act, that would impose a warrant requirement for F.B.I. agents, working on ordinary criminal cases, to search for and use Americans’ emails collected without a warrant. | Mr. Grassley’s counterpart in the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia, has sponsored a bill, the USA Liberty Act, that would impose a warrant requirement for F.B.I. agents, working on ordinary criminal cases, to search for and use Americans’ emails collected without a warrant. |
| Mr. Sessions also faced questions from Democrats about how the federal government on his watch has curtailed the Obama-era approach to enforcing anti-discrimination laws, especially protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. | |
| On Oct. 6, for example, Mr. Sessions issued sweeping guidance to federal agencies and prosecutors, instructing them to take the position in court that people and organizations may claim broad exemptions from nondiscrimination laws on the basis of religious objections. Critics said the guidance would open the door to justifying a wide range of acts of discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. | On Oct. 6, for example, Mr. Sessions issued sweeping guidance to federal agencies and prosecutors, instructing them to take the position in court that people and organizations may claim broad exemptions from nondiscrimination laws on the basis of religious objections. Critics said the guidance would open the door to justifying a wide range of acts of discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. |
| A day earlier, the Justice Department reversed the federal government’s stance on whether the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans workplace discrimination on the basis of sex, provides protections for transgender people. Mr. Sessions issued a memo to the department instructing officials to take the position in court that the act does not bar acts of workplace bias against people based on their gender identity. | A day earlier, the Justice Department reversed the federal government’s stance on whether the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans workplace discrimination on the basis of sex, provides protections for transgender people. Mr. Sessions issued a memo to the department instructing officials to take the position in court that the act does not bar acts of workplace bias against people based on their gender identity. |
| “This is a challenging issue, when you have said you do not want to discriminate and people are discriminating in the name of their own religious liberty,” Mr. Durbin said. “It is a real challenge for us to reconcile those.” | |
| Mr. Sessions said that his department was trying to consider both religious beliefs and participate in “commercial exchanges.” | |
| “The balance needs to be properly struck, and I think we have,” he said. | |
| Mr. Sessions, the face of the administration’s tough posture toward immigration enforcement, defended the legal basis for its decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA, saying that the department had determined the program as implemented has not been legally justified. | Mr. Sessions, the face of the administration’s tough posture toward immigration enforcement, defended the legal basis for its decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA, saying that the department had determined the program as implemented has not been legally justified. |
| “The Department of Justice cannot just wipe out whole sections of the American law and just say we will not enforce it after Congress has passed such a law,” Mr. Sessions said of the Obama-era program. It permitted people who grew up in the United States after being brought illegally to the country as children to stay and lawfully work. | “The Department of Justice cannot just wipe out whole sections of the American law and just say we will not enforce it after Congress has passed such a law,” Mr. Sessions said of the Obama-era program. It permitted people who grew up in the United States after being brought illegally to the country as children to stay and lawfully work. |
| Mr. Sessions said he could not discuss whether he had had conversations with the attorney general of Texas, Ken Paxton, a Republican, or other Republican attorneys general who had threatened to sue before the administration said it would end the program. | Mr. Sessions said he could not discuss whether he had had conversations with the attorney general of Texas, Ken Paxton, a Republican, or other Republican attorneys general who had threatened to sue before the administration said it would end the program. |
| Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois and a longtime advocate for the young immigrants, known as dreamers, was not pleased and cited Mr. Sessions’s previous role as a senator on the committee and frustration with witnesses who were not as forthcoming as he would have liked. | Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois and a longtime advocate for the young immigrants, known as dreamers, was not pleased and cited Mr. Sessions’s previous role as a senator on the committee and frustration with witnesses who were not as forthcoming as he would have liked. |
| “This would have been just about the moment when Senator Sessions of Alabama would have blown up,” he said. | “This would have been just about the moment when Senator Sessions of Alabama would have blown up,” he said. |
| The program’s fate is in the lap of Congress, which has until March to come up with a solution for its participants. In exchange, the administration has issued a set of immigration demands that it wants to be a part of any legislative deal, including the construction of a border wall, the hiring of 10,000 immigration agents and tougher asylum laws. | The program’s fate is in the lap of Congress, which has until March to come up with a solution for its participants. In exchange, the administration has issued a set of immigration demands that it wants to be a part of any legislative deal, including the construction of a border wall, the hiring of 10,000 immigration agents and tougher asylum laws. |