WEBVTT - Sessions Prepares Testimony For Intelligence Committee (Audio)

0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:04.640
<v Speaker 1>Former FBI Director James Comey's testimony last Thursday garnered headlines

0:00:04.720 --> 0:00:07.880
<v Speaker 1>through the weekend the weekend this week, it's the highest

0:00:07.920 --> 0:00:10.880
<v Speaker 1>law enforcement official in the country will be testifying before

0:00:10.920 --> 0:00:14.480
<v Speaker 1>the Senate Intelligence Committee. Attorney General Jeff Sessions will be

0:00:14.520 --> 0:00:17.799
<v Speaker 1>in for some tough questioning tomorrow about the extent of

0:00:17.840 --> 0:00:21.360
<v Speaker 1>his contacts with Russian officials, his involvement in the firing

0:00:21.400 --> 0:00:25.400
<v Speaker 1>of Comey, and questions of perjury, and Sessions has requested

0:00:25.440 --> 0:00:28.320
<v Speaker 1>that his testimony be a public hearing. A little over

0:00:28.360 --> 0:00:31.760
<v Speaker 1>a week ago, Democratic Senators Patrick Leahy and Alf Franken

0:00:31.800 --> 0:00:35.960
<v Speaker 1>revealed they had asked then FBI Director Comey to investigate

0:00:36.040 --> 0:00:40.960
<v Speaker 1>Sessions for perjury stemming from his confirmation hearing testimony. Democratic

0:00:41.040 --> 0:00:43.720
<v Speaker 1>Senator Richard Blumenthal has said if there is proof that

0:00:43.840 --> 0:00:48.040
<v Speaker 1>Sessions had a third meeting with Russian Ambassador Sergey kiss Leak,

0:00:48.200 --> 0:00:54.120
<v Speaker 1>he should resign. He testified falsely, he then corrected the

0:00:54.160 --> 0:00:58.880
<v Speaker 1>record under oath, so this failure to disclose would be

0:00:58.960 --> 0:01:04.360
<v Speaker 1>in effect a second instance of non truthfulness and I

0:01:04.360 --> 0:01:08.160
<v Speaker 1>believe would require his resignation. Our guests are two professors

0:01:08.200 --> 0:01:12.840
<v Speaker 1>from Fordham Law School, Andrew Kent and Jed Sugarman. Andrew

0:01:13.000 --> 0:01:16.639
<v Speaker 1>Sessions was originally scheduled appear before the House and Senate

0:01:16.680 --> 0:01:21.120
<v Speaker 1>Appropriation Subcommittee. He decided he wanted to appear before the

0:01:21.160 --> 0:01:24.800
<v Speaker 1>Senate Intelligence Committee, and he also decided that he wanted

0:01:24.800 --> 0:01:28.880
<v Speaker 1>it to be public testimony. Is that a surprise to you.

0:01:30.200 --> 0:01:33.480
<v Speaker 1>Sessions as apparently canceled three times on going back to

0:01:33.520 --> 0:01:37.199
<v Speaker 1>the Hill ever since his confirmation hearing, reportedly because he's

0:01:37.319 --> 0:01:40.920
<v Speaker 1>been concerned about getting grilled by Democrats about his misstatements

0:01:40.959 --> 0:01:43.880
<v Speaker 1>about Russia. Um. What what I read was that he

0:01:43.920 --> 0:01:47.400
<v Speaker 1>had he had initially asked for the Intelligence Committee session

0:01:47.400 --> 0:01:50.640
<v Speaker 1>today to be closed, but the pressure from Democrats on

0:01:50.680 --> 0:01:52.920
<v Speaker 1>the committee led it to be an open one. UM.

0:01:53.000 --> 0:01:55.920
<v Speaker 1>So I think he probably would rather not testify publicly,

0:01:56.480 --> 0:01:59.120
<v Speaker 1>but it looks like he's going to have to. And

0:01:59.240 --> 0:02:04.400
<v Speaker 1>Jed start with the encounters with the Russians. And you

0:02:04.520 --> 0:02:08.000
<v Speaker 1>heard what Senator Blumenthal said. He had told lawmakers that

0:02:08.120 --> 0:02:11.360
<v Speaker 1>his January confirmation hearing that he hadn't met with the Russians.

0:02:11.639 --> 0:02:14.880
<v Speaker 1>Then he corrected his testimony. Now there are questions about

0:02:14.960 --> 0:02:19.920
<v Speaker 1>possible additional encounters. Is it perjury if he did have

0:02:20.000 --> 0:02:23.440
<v Speaker 1>additional encounters? Well, I think it I think it. I

0:02:23.480 --> 0:02:26.280
<v Speaker 1>actually think it was perjury and false testimony. Back in January,

0:02:26.639 --> 0:02:29.000
<v Speaker 1>if you look at the sequence of events of precisely

0:02:29.040 --> 0:02:32.160
<v Speaker 1>what happened in January, he was first asked by Senator

0:02:32.160 --> 0:02:36.919
<v Speaker 1>Franken a general question about Russian contacts of the campaign,

0:02:36.960 --> 0:02:40.280
<v Speaker 1>and he changed He answered a question he wasn't asked,

0:02:40.360 --> 0:02:43.800
<v Speaker 1>which is to say he didn't have any Russian contacts. Now,

0:02:44.360 --> 0:02:47.120
<v Speaker 1>then what happened was he had an opportunity to and

0:02:47.160 --> 0:02:49.160
<v Speaker 1>if it happens all the time, people will look at

0:02:49.160 --> 0:02:51.920
<v Speaker 1>their testimony and said, you know what, I said something misleading.

0:02:52.120 --> 0:02:54.840
<v Speaker 1>He had that opportunity, and in fact, Senator lay He

0:02:54.919 --> 0:02:57.799
<v Speaker 1>asked him a question, did you have any meetings about

0:02:57.840 --> 0:03:02.000
<v Speaker 1>the campaign? The sixteen campaign? And he just answered flatly no.

0:03:02.360 --> 0:03:05.320
<v Speaker 1>And it turns out that it was only by stretching

0:03:05.360 --> 0:03:09.560
<v Speaker 1>by by UM I think misinterpreting those questions that he

0:03:09.680 --> 0:03:12.600
<v Speaker 1>is able to um make any kind of claim that

0:03:12.639 --> 0:03:14.360
<v Speaker 1>he didn't lie. I think when you take those two

0:03:14.400 --> 0:03:17.560
<v Speaker 1>events together, he already misrepresented. So let me say that

0:03:17.680 --> 0:03:20.560
<v Speaker 1>one is a question of perjury, but there's another statute

0:03:20.560 --> 0:03:23.760
<v Speaker 1>for false statements and false testimony, and those are two

0:03:23.800 --> 0:03:27.600
<v Speaker 1>different um criminal violations. I think it's clear that he's

0:03:27.600 --> 0:03:31.560
<v Speaker 1>given false testimony already. So this third question, I think

0:03:31.960 --> 0:03:34.920
<v Speaker 1>the come not puts him in even greater legal jeopardy.

0:03:35.000 --> 0:03:38.200
<v Speaker 1>He's already made a false statement, hasn't and failed to

0:03:38.840 --> 0:03:42.160
<v Speaker 1>change it in time. This third meeting, Uh, it really

0:03:42.200 --> 0:03:45.360
<v Speaker 1>puts him in intense scrutiny for a much clear case

0:03:45.400 --> 0:03:50.200
<v Speaker 1>of perjury and false testimony. And Andrew, some of the

0:03:50.280 --> 0:03:54.520
<v Speaker 1>senators are really focused on what he had to do

0:03:54.680 --> 0:03:59.120
<v Speaker 1>with Comey's firing, since he had recused himself from the

0:03:59.200 --> 0:04:04.560
<v Speaker 1>Russia invest instigation, and why he didn't step in between

0:04:04.640 --> 0:04:08.280
<v Speaker 1>Comy and the president. All the questions of his lingering

0:04:08.320 --> 0:04:11.040
<v Speaker 1>when the President asked him to leave. What kind of

0:04:11.120 --> 0:04:14.120
<v Speaker 1>questions do you see coming from that? I mean, I

0:04:14.320 --> 0:04:16.480
<v Speaker 1>think he has a lot to answer for their Frankly

0:04:16.600 --> 0:04:19.560
<v Speaker 1>he um. You know, his recusal was very broad any

0:04:19.600 --> 0:04:23.880
<v Speaker 1>campaign related matters, Um. And you know, on the first

0:04:23.960 --> 0:04:25.840
<v Speaker 1>day of Comy's firing, and when it looked like the

0:04:25.880 --> 0:04:28.400
<v Speaker 1>White House claim was going to be that it simply

0:04:28.440 --> 0:04:31.719
<v Speaker 1>had to do with um with Comy's you know, activities

0:04:31.720 --> 0:04:33.719
<v Speaker 1>back in two thousand six. You know, maybe it was

0:04:33.760 --> 0:04:37.159
<v Speaker 1>appropriate processions to have been involved in that. But once

0:04:37.240 --> 0:04:40.000
<v Speaker 1>the President stated repeatedly that he had fired him because

0:04:40.000 --> 0:04:43.000
<v Speaker 1>of the Russia investigation. I think it was very clear

0:04:43.040 --> 0:04:46.680
<v Speaker 1>that Session should have had nothing to do with advising

0:04:46.720 --> 0:04:49.880
<v Speaker 1>on or ratifying that decision. So I think he's going

0:04:49.920 --> 0:04:52.359
<v Speaker 1>to get some very very tough questions about what, you know,

0:04:52.400 --> 0:04:55.279
<v Speaker 1>how he was possibly thinking that that was consistent with

0:04:55.400 --> 0:04:59.039
<v Speaker 1>his recusal on the on the second mount that you raised, June,

0:04:59.240 --> 0:05:02.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, the his spokesperson has pushed back a little

0:05:02.240 --> 0:05:06.080
<v Speaker 1>bit on Comy's claim, saying that, um, saying that you know,

0:05:06.120 --> 0:05:10.200
<v Speaker 1>Sessions did uh, you know, tell callmy that he agreed that,

0:05:10.560 --> 0:05:12.920
<v Speaker 1>you know, there should not be direct contact of that

0:05:13.000 --> 0:05:16.560
<v Speaker 1>kind between the between the president and the FBI director,

0:05:17.120 --> 0:05:19.600
<v Speaker 1>and you know, suggesting that he was You're going to

0:05:19.760 --> 0:05:22.040
<v Speaker 1>try to try to be helpful going forward and making

0:05:22.080 --> 0:05:25.440
<v Speaker 1>sure those contexts didn't happen, uh, you know, sort of

0:05:25.440 --> 0:05:30.120
<v Speaker 1>a less dark version than Comy's testimony, which was essentially that, uh,

0:05:30.160 --> 0:05:33.320
<v Speaker 1>you know that Sessions did nothing. So we'll see. Um,

0:05:33.440 --> 0:05:35.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, I think it's on the first one, I

0:05:35.279 --> 0:05:37.560
<v Speaker 1>think it's pretty indefensible. On the second one, he may

0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:41.280
<v Speaker 1>well have some uh you know, some qualifying or explaining

0:05:41.320 --> 0:05:43.560
<v Speaker 1>that that he could do that might put you know,

0:05:43.600 --> 0:05:45.760
<v Speaker 1>his conduct in a better light. But I guess we'll

0:05:45.760 --> 0:05:52.760
<v Speaker 1>see tomorrow. And UM, jed, how how significant is this testimony?

0:05:52.880 --> 0:05:57.640
<v Speaker 1>Is his job on the line? I think, I think

0:05:58.080 --> 0:06:00.680
<v Speaker 1>who job is on the line? And number of ways.

0:06:00.680 --> 0:06:01.919
<v Speaker 1>I mean the fact that this is going to be

0:06:01.960 --> 0:06:04.800
<v Speaker 1>an open and open testimony, UH, is going to be

0:06:05.120 --> 0:06:08.800
<v Speaker 1>UM scrutiny that increases from the Coomi hearings last week.

0:06:08.920 --> 0:06:11.279
<v Speaker 1>It was something like thirty million people watched that live

0:06:11.360 --> 0:06:13.560
<v Speaker 1>or something like that. So we know that Trump cares

0:06:13.560 --> 0:06:15.800
<v Speaker 1>a lot about ratings and this is this will get

0:06:16.120 --> 0:06:21.360
<v Speaker 1>under open televised hearings. This will get tremendous scrutiny. UH

0:06:21.400 --> 0:06:24.479
<v Speaker 1>and UM, I think there are going to be lots

0:06:24.520 --> 0:06:28.280
<v Speaker 1>of questions beyond the questions that we've teed up here.

0:06:28.320 --> 0:06:31.119
<v Speaker 1>I think this is really an opportunity for both sides.

0:06:31.600 --> 0:06:34.960
<v Speaker 1>All Right, I'll have to stop you there. We'll pick

0:06:35.080 --> 0:06:36.000
<v Speaker 1>up with more of this