Sessions Pushes Back Against Republican Calls For Clinton, Comey Special Counsel

Jeff Sessions testimony before the House Judiciary Committee was about as contentious as many observers probably expected, with Sessions jousting with lawmakers who pressed him about troubling omissions in his previous testimony.

But nestled among questions about Sessions’ campaign-season interactions with Russian officials and former Trump campaign national security adviser George Papadopoulos, one lawmaker asked Sessions whether a report that the DOJ said it would approve AT&T’s proposed takeover of Time Warner only if the latter agreed to sell CNN was accurate. Sessions responded that it wasn't.

“I don’t think I’m able to accept as accurate news reports that have come out,” he said when asked if the president or anyone at the White House had asked him about the acquisition.

The news outraged some Democrats, who accused Trump of improperly using his influence to punish the network, which he has frequently decried as “fake news”. Trump had insinuated during the campaign that he might try to block the deal if he won the presidency.

Sessions refused to say exactly what would be required for the AT&T-Time Warner deal to win approval.

When asked later by another lawmaker if the White House had attempted to interfere, or had reached out to the DOJ about the deal. Sessions said that he couldn't answer questions involving the White House's communications with the Justice Department.

Last night, the Washington Post reported that Sessions had asked prosecutors to look into whether certain prominent Democrats and Obama-era federal law-enforcement officials should be investigated for a range of purported misdeeds.

During the testimony, several Republican reps pushed Sessions to confirm that he would appoint the special counsel, something Sessions declined to do since he said to do so would reveal the existence of an ongoing investigation.

Instead, in a heated exchange with Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Gordon, Sessions  pushed back on the immediate need for a second special counsel to investigate Clinton.

It would take "a factual basis that meets the standard of a special counsel" for the Justice Department to make such an appointment, Sessions said.

"We will use the proper standards and that’s the only thing I can tell you, Mr. Jordan," Sessions said. "You can have your idea but sometimes we have to study what the facts are and to evaluate whether it meets the standards it requires."

It would take "a factual basis that meets the standard of a special counsel" for the Justice Department to make such an appointment, Sessions told Gordon.

Jordan suggested that the Clinton campaign and the DNC broke the law by paying for the infamous “Trump dossier” via Clinton lawyer Marc Elias and not disclosing the true purpose of those funds to the FEC.

"And it sure looks like the FBI was paying the author of that document and it sure looks like a major political party was working with the federal government to then turn an opposition research document - the equivalent of some National Enquirer story - into an intelligence document take that to the FISA Court so they could then get a warrant to spy on President Trump’s campaign."

"That’s what it looks like and I’m asking you, in addition to all the things we know about James Comey in 2016, doesn’t that warrant naming a second special counsel?"

Sessions at first demurred, noting that Comey is no longer the director of the FBI and praising the current director, Chris Wray. But pressed further by Jordan -"He's not here today, Attorney General Sessions, and you are" - Sessions appeared to throw cold water on the immediate need for a special counsel.

"I would say 'looks like' is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel," he said sharply. He added that it would be "wrong" to use the powers of the DOJ for political purposes.

"The Department of Justice can never be used to retaliate politically against opponents. That would be wrong."

Asked early in the testimony about his previous public comments that he was not aware of any contacts between Trump campaign associates and the Russians - comments that have since been proven incorrect because Sessions attended a March meeting with George Papadopoulos where the latter said he could arrange a meeting between then-candidate Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Sessions said that during his confirmation hearing, Papadopoulos’s comments had slipped his memory.

Furthermore, Sessions said on Tuesday he now recalls the meeting with then-candidate Donald Trump and aides where campaign connections to Russia were discussed.

Sessions, addressing the House Judiciary Committee, said he recalled the March 2016 meeting where foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos was present, “But I have no clear recollection of the details of what he said during that meeting."

Later, Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries pressed Sessions about an interview he did with Lou Dobbs where he criticized Hillary Clinton for telling the FBI she didn’t remember certain details during its investigation of her alleged mishandling of classified information. During the interview, Sessions told Dobbs that conveniently failing to remember could constitute perjury.

Jeffries asked if he believed the intentional failure can constitute as a criminal act?

Sessions said yes.

He later said the implication that he lied by saying he didn't recall those comments was unfair, and harshly rebuked Jeffries, a Democrat who represents parts of Brooklyn.

Most of the most controversial subjects have been well-trod at this point, but Sessions’ testimony has not yet ended. You can watch along below:



dlfield Tue, 11/14/2017 - 13:26 Permalink

Okay, fine.  Since that would be wrong, let's investigate how the prior adminstration used the Justice Department for political retaliation.

Manthong J S Bach Tue, 11/14/2017 - 13:51 Permalink

/* Style Definitions */
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
Get rid of that system SOB……………

In reply to by J S Bach

JimmyJones Shemp 4 Victory Tue, 11/14/2017 - 15:35 Permalink

I got to admit I am pissed and maybe I am missing something since I am not a lawyer and not a DC politician.  How the heck can we expect our soldiers to fight for "Freedom" for the equal application of law, for justice, for what we are told "our way of life".  When its absolutely obvious that there are TWO sets of Rules.  Once for us and one for the Clinton/Bush Crime family.   I am pissed and I now encourage all of those serving the US military to not renew their service contracts once they are up.  They are fighting for nothing of real value if we don't do something about these criminals.  All of these jerks swore an oath to Up hold and defend the Constitution.  Most of them at this point are guilty of Treason in my opinion. 

In reply to by Shemp 4 Victory

NAV JimmyJones Tue, 11/14/2017 - 16:52 Permalink

All of these "jerks" are beholden only to Israel and the Deep State. "When Benjamin Netanyahu, liar and war criminal, spoke before Congress, and was given 26 standing ovations by these pathetic little puppets, who call themselves our elected Representatives, they were watched by AIPAC spies to see which one of those pathetic little puppets needed punishment for not jumping up fast enough 26 times (Dale Walker)."And the FBI has never broken off its relationship with the ADL. The last speech FBI director James Comey made before being fired, was to the ADL, "an organization he praised as indispensable to the FBI's work." In that speech, Comey called the Holocaust "the most significant event in history." As part of the ADL's influence over the FBI, Comey "assured the ADL that the FBI would continue to 'require every new FBI special agent and intelligence analyst in training to visit the Holocaust Museum [because] we want them to learn about abuse of power on a breathtaking scale (Culture Wars).'"As you say, "Treason!"The people knew why they wanted Trump. It's time for him to realize why he was given the job.

In reply to by JimmyJones

philipat NAV Tue, 11/14/2017 - 17:56 Permalink

It looks increasingly likely that Sessions has been compromised in some way.If the issue is that DOJ should not be used for retaliation against political opponents, OK then go after Obama, Holder, Lynch, Rice, Power etc, where such behavior has already been proven.But this is NOT about political retaliation it is about the rule of law and "All men being equal under the law". There is prima facie evidence that serious crimes, including treason, have been committed by Clinton and an investigation is not only warranted, it is essential to respond to the widespread concerns of we the people.If Sessions will not do it, thanks Jeff and enjoy your "retirement"?Where the fuck is Sessions.....

In reply to by NAV

NihilistZerO___ J S Bach Tue, 11/14/2017 - 14:12 Permalink

Sessions is playing a role so when the indictments are announced it doesn't seem political. Why do y'all think Hillary and McCain are wearing the EXACT same Orthopedic boot on their right legs now? Perhaps hiding LE tracking devices? There are over 800 sealed Federal Indictments in Los Angeles, DC and it's suburbs. The Storm is here lads. We've been waiting all our lives for some justice. It's happening.

In reply to by J S Bach

WillyGroper JimmyJones Tue, 11/14/2017 - 16:48 Permalink

the corruption like everything else was incremental.if the head of the snake is chopped off, i imagine it too will be incremental.those of us that have had it up to our eyeballs may not get the degree of justice we're hopeful for. the FACT of 40 not running for re-election is a big tell of just how many are compromised & now presumed to have switched sides to save their hide.  if the whole kit n kaboodle were taken down at once, it would be total anarchy.   so what appears to be a measured approach is prolly the least disruptive, if there is such a thing given the circumstances. personally, if/when this shakes out, i will take immense pleasure in watching skulls turn to red mist of the nattering nabobs i've tried to this point, w/o the mil i can see it swinging either direction.

In reply to by JimmyJones

Syrin NihilistZerO___ Tue, 11/14/2017 - 14:41 Permalink

I have read the same thing, and for people who might not be aware, acoording to the stuff I have read, it's rare to have 2-3 sealed indictments in place at any given time, and there are literally hundreds filed across the country.   Still, I don't trsut Sessions AT ALL.  I have also read Mueller is working for Trump to take down the democrat chain of command with the RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA just being a diversionary front to keep the media happy.  I am skeptical, but lets hope 4chan is right  AGAIN.

In reply to by NihilistZerO___

Dontblamethegoat NihilistZerO___ Tue, 11/14/2017 - 15:10 Permalink

I hope you are right, but ...I hope you are holding your breath waiting for those indictments .... for all we know they are for home schoolers violating their kids rights to be brainwashed into good NWO muppets. Keep holding your breath ... that way you wll pass out and be spared the shock of learning the indictmants have nothing at all to do with draining the swamp.

In reply to by NihilistZerO___

Thought Processor Dontblamethegoat Tue, 11/14/2017 - 15:51 Permalink

  Sealed indictments seem to be real.  Things are getting curiouser and curiouser.Word is (from diff. sources) that there is a huge network being taken down consisting of: Murder, Human Trafficking, Racketeering, Voter Fraud, and more.......... But like everyone else on here, I'll believe it when I see it.  But if these rumors are anywhere near accurate we are in for quite the shit storm.

In reply to by Dontblamethegoat

waterfinder NihilistZerO___ Tue, 11/14/2017 - 15:21 Permalink

The Clintons will never, ever be prosecuted and, even if they get investigated, we will see some token effort for show like what Comey did.  They hold a lot of strings on both sides of the aisle in the D.C. swamp, so unless we get rid of everyone that is beholden to the Clintons - something I don't think will happen for a long time - they will keep getting off scot-free.  I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong on this, but until it happens, don't get your hopes up.

In reply to by NihilistZerO___

Thought Processor waterfinder Tue, 11/14/2017 - 15:43 Permalink

  I wonder if Hillary has negotiated a deal of some sort (that would suck).  Podesta Group, and Podesta's are done.  Shady funding has been cut off at the source (Saudi's in the Ritz jail, but it was likely the impounding of their funds / assets that they were after).  Everyone else involved in U.S. is now a flight risk.  There is evidence of an internal war being waged inside the Government (for some time now obviously), essentially white hats vs. black hats.  Deep State vs. the U.S. Constitution.  Good vs. Evil. 

In reply to by waterfinder

Katos J S Bach Tue, 11/14/2017 - 17:12 Permalink

That would start with the Bush Family crime cabal! Bush SR has been in control of our media, THE CIA and our government since he ran the CIA back in the 70'S!! He has used his powerful " CARLYLE GROUP " TO manipulate the CIA WHO MANIPULATES the media, who TAKE orders from the state department! He had also filled our government with pedophiles, satanist, GLOBALISTS, perverts AND diviates! Barbara BUSH, ALIESTER CROWLEYS DAUGHTER, has taught her OCCULTIC MAJIX TO WASHINGTON AND JOLLYWEIRD, WHERE "DO AS THOU WILT" HAS BECOME THE SWAN SONG OF PREDATORS ON BOTH COASTS!

In reply to by J S Bach

NoDebt Looney Tue, 11/14/2017 - 13:36 Permalink

"several Republican reps pushed Sessions to confirm that he would appoint the special counsel, something Sessions declined to do since he said to do so would reveal the existence of an ongoing investigation."Wait...... fucking WHAT??  Does that make any sense to anybody?  Isn't saying that in and of itself revealing the existence of an ongoing investigation?  Or maybe what he means is that by doing nothing it's actually proof that he's doing something.This dude has to go.  Worthless as tits on a bull. 

In reply to by Looney

Two-bits NoDebt Tue, 11/14/2017 - 13:48 Permalink

Congress: You. You can't lie. So tell me, puppet, where is Seth Rich?Sessions: Uh, hmm, well, uh, I don't know where he's not.Congress: You're telling me you don't know where Shrek is?Sessions: It wouldn’t be inaccurate to assume that I couldn’t exactly not say that it is or isn’t almost partially incorrect.Congress:- So you do know where he is?Sessions: Oh, on the contrary. I'm possibly more or less not definitely rejecting the idea that in no way with any amount of uncertainty that I undeniably...Congress: Stop it!Sessions: or do not know where he shouldn’t probably be, if that indeed wasn’t where he isn’t. Even if he wasn’t at where I knew he was, that’d mean I’d really have to know where he wasn't.

In reply to by NoDebt

eclectic syncretist NoDebt Tue, 11/14/2017 - 13:50 Permalink

Well I say settle down for just a bit more time gentlemen. This is the part where we give Mueller some line to run on, and when his time is up and he has to play his hand, that will be the time to have this sword of Damocles that is currently hanging over him come down. Mueller is a rat on a fumigated ship with nowhere to go, and only hopes to delay as long as possible.

In reply to by NoDebt