1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,000 Speaker 1: Joining us is Jennifer Rogers, Executive director of the Center 2 00:00:03,040 --> 00:00:08,119 Speaker 1: for the Advancement of Public Integrity. Jennifer, perjury requires a 3 00:00:08,200 --> 00:00:12,080 Speaker 1: statement under oath that is false, material, or significant, and 4 00:00:12,119 --> 00:00:16,479 Speaker 1: that the speaker knows is false. Does sessions testimony fit 5 00:00:16,560 --> 00:00:20,959 Speaker 1: the legal criteria for perjury? I don't think so. I 6 00:00:21,000 --> 00:00:23,680 Speaker 1: think the question and answer are just a little too 7 00:00:23,720 --> 00:00:27,160 Speaker 1: ambiguous to make a perjury count out. It's just a 8 00:00:27,280 --> 00:00:30,520 Speaker 1: very very hard statue to prove, and in this case, 9 00:00:30,560 --> 00:00:33,400 Speaker 1: it's just not a clean enough question and answer to 10 00:00:33,479 --> 00:00:35,919 Speaker 1: be able to say that for sure he knew that 11 00:00:35,960 --> 00:00:40,640 Speaker 1: he was being untruthful when he answered, Well, Jennifer, is 12 00:00:40,640 --> 00:00:42,559 Speaker 1: is that the only question here though, whether or not 13 00:00:42,600 --> 00:00:45,839 Speaker 1: he committed perjury or because a lot of people in 14 00:00:45,960 --> 00:00:50,680 Speaker 1: Congress at least seem to be upset with um the veracity, 15 00:00:50,720 --> 00:00:53,640 Speaker 1: whether or not it's a crime. Well, there are a 16 00:00:53,720 --> 00:00:56,560 Speaker 1: whole host of issues about whether the Attorney General was 17 00:00:56,680 --> 00:01:00,440 Speaker 1: misleading Congress and if so, whether he should resigning. And 18 00:01:00,600 --> 00:01:03,280 Speaker 1: you know, there's a false statement statute also that could 19 00:01:03,280 --> 00:01:07,000 Speaker 1: be applied here. There's even a misdemeanor statute for misleading 20 00:01:07,040 --> 00:01:10,960 Speaker 1: Congress that was used back in the Watergate times. UM 21 00:01:11,040 --> 00:01:13,840 Speaker 1: So I'm really just talking about perjury because it is 22 00:01:13,840 --> 00:01:15,959 Speaker 1: such a hard statute to prove. But there are a 23 00:01:16,040 --> 00:01:18,520 Speaker 1: whole host of other issues that you know, become a 24 00:01:18,600 --> 00:01:22,200 Speaker 1: little bit more of a political issue than a legal issue. 25 00:01:22,880 --> 00:01:25,880 Speaker 1: And so what what you know, let's say that you 26 00:01:25,920 --> 00:01:30,119 Speaker 1: can't prove perjury here, what what could Congress look at 27 00:01:30,280 --> 00:01:32,840 Speaker 1: if they wanted to investigate what is going on here 28 00:01:32,840 --> 00:01:36,480 Speaker 1: and what has happened here? Well, on the legal side, 29 00:01:36,840 --> 00:01:39,920 Speaker 1: you know, there's really just perjury and false statements, neither 30 00:01:39,959 --> 00:01:42,039 Speaker 1: of which I think is going to be actionable here 31 00:01:42,120 --> 00:01:45,840 Speaker 1: unless additional information came out. Um. And then there's the 32 00:01:45,920 --> 00:01:49,960 Speaker 1: misdemeanor about misleading Congress. That one is a possibility. Uh. 33 00:01:50,400 --> 00:01:53,160 Speaker 1: And then of course there're a whole, a whole realm 34 00:01:53,200 --> 00:01:57,600 Speaker 1: of non legal actions, right. They could continue to investigate 35 00:01:57,680 --> 00:02:00,680 Speaker 1: him and you know, seek his resignation and and other 36 00:02:00,840 --> 00:02:04,600 Speaker 1: other means of removal other than criminal convictions under the 37 00:02:04,680 --> 00:02:07,520 Speaker 1: legal system, But as far as the law is concerned, 38 00:02:07,560 --> 00:02:09,960 Speaker 1: the options are pretty limited, at least on the evidence 39 00:02:10,000 --> 00:02:13,120 Speaker 1: we know now, unless something else comes out. So what 40 00:02:13,200 --> 00:02:18,760 Speaker 1: about contempt of Congress proceedings? UM? I think could certainly 41 00:02:19,000 --> 00:02:22,600 Speaker 1: UM initiate something like that um. You know, the problem 42 00:02:22,680 --> 00:02:26,880 Speaker 1: is we're dealing with a Republican Congress that doesn't seem 43 00:02:26,960 --> 00:02:30,240 Speaker 1: so far to be bowing to pressure to go too 44 00:02:30,240 --> 00:02:34,600 Speaker 1: far into this. Um. So, you know, all the possibilities 45 00:02:34,639 --> 00:02:37,160 Speaker 1: kind of on the political side are a little bit 46 00:02:37,200 --> 00:02:41,640 Speaker 1: sketchy given the Republican leadership in Congress, but that is 47 00:02:41,639 --> 00:02:44,359 Speaker 1: a possibility if they were willing to take that up. 48 00:02:44,680 --> 00:02:49,520 Speaker 1: Jennifer just pushing to pass having Democrats pushed to pass 49 00:02:49,560 --> 00:02:53,919 Speaker 1: a contempt of Congress resolution could force him to resign. 50 00:02:54,000 --> 00:02:57,760 Speaker 1: It's certainly there's been pressure to other attorney generals in 51 00:02:57,800 --> 00:03:01,240 Speaker 1: the past that have pushed them to resign. And isn't 52 00:03:01,240 --> 00:03:04,880 Speaker 1: there also a factor of the Attorney General being the 53 00:03:04,919 --> 00:03:09,680 Speaker 1: top law enforcement officer in the nation and being held 54 00:03:09,840 --> 00:03:14,680 Speaker 1: to a strict standard. Well, certainly the Attorney General should 55 00:03:14,680 --> 00:03:17,040 Speaker 1: be held to the highest of ethical standards, you know. 56 00:03:17,120 --> 00:03:19,720 Speaker 1: But what he's saying is, you know, I wasn't lying. 57 00:03:19,919 --> 00:03:22,360 Speaker 1: It just was the question was asked, and I wasn't 58 00:03:22,400 --> 00:03:24,800 Speaker 1: thinking about this other contact that I had had in 59 00:03:24,840 --> 00:03:28,720 Speaker 1: a different context. So at least as far as what 60 00:03:29,080 --> 00:03:32,760 Speaker 1: Attorney General Sessions is claiming now, he is you know, 61 00:03:33,120 --> 00:03:36,160 Speaker 1: being uh, he is acting in the in the highest standards. 62 00:03:36,160 --> 00:03:39,200 Speaker 1: So you know, I'm not sure that he would disagree 63 00:03:39,280 --> 00:03:41,160 Speaker 1: with the fact that he should be held at that standard. 64 00:03:41,160 --> 00:03:43,840 Speaker 1: But he says that he is um, and you know, 65 00:03:43,880 --> 00:03:46,360 Speaker 1: it's it's it's kind of hard to disprove it unless again, 66 00:03:46,400 --> 00:03:48,920 Speaker 1: there's evidence to come out. I mean, surely if there 67 00:03:48,920 --> 00:03:50,920 Speaker 1: were a recording of the meeting where it was clear 68 00:03:50,960 --> 00:03:55,280 Speaker 1: they were talking about the campaign and Russian influence in 69 00:03:55,320 --> 00:03:57,920 Speaker 1: the election, then I think it would be more clear 70 00:03:57,960 --> 00:04:01,040 Speaker 1: that he knew he wasn't telling the roots um when 71 00:04:01,040 --> 00:04:04,600 Speaker 1: he said he didn't know about any communications of that nature. UM. 72 00:04:04,640 --> 00:04:07,320 Speaker 1: But short of that, you know, I think he just says, look, 73 00:04:07,320 --> 00:04:09,600 Speaker 1: it was a little bit of a disconnect. I was 74 00:04:09,600 --> 00:04:12,480 Speaker 1: thinking about one thing and and you know, other people 75 00:04:12,520 --> 00:04:15,480 Speaker 1: are thinking about other things, and that's where we are. Well, 76 00:04:15,640 --> 00:04:19,719 Speaker 1: so he's now accused himself from the investigation, saying that 77 00:04:20,560 --> 00:04:23,279 Speaker 1: he that you know, he's not going to take any 78 00:04:23,320 --> 00:04:25,680 Speaker 1: part in them at this point. Now that we found 79 00:04:25,680 --> 00:04:28,760 Speaker 1: out about these things, you know, it raises it's raised 80 00:04:28,800 --> 00:04:30,760 Speaker 1: a number of questions for people about why he didn't 81 00:04:30,760 --> 00:04:35,680 Speaker 1: recuse earlier, and is recusal sufficient? But I wonder if 82 00:04:35,720 --> 00:04:37,240 Speaker 1: he really didn't do if he says he didn't do 83 00:04:37,240 --> 00:04:41,080 Speaker 1: anything wrong here. Does he really need to be recused? Well, 84 00:04:41,120 --> 00:04:43,760 Speaker 1: I think he does, Um, And the reason is that, 85 00:04:43,839 --> 00:04:46,240 Speaker 1: first of all, recusal, you should have a very low 86 00:04:46,279 --> 00:04:49,120 Speaker 1: bar for recusal. If there's really any suggestion at all 87 00:04:49,720 --> 00:04:52,839 Speaker 1: that you have a personal conflict or that you personally 88 00:04:52,920 --> 00:04:55,840 Speaker 1: will be brought into the scope of an investigation, then 89 00:04:55,839 --> 00:05:00,039 Speaker 1: you really should recuse um. And so I think it 90 00:05:00,040 --> 00:05:02,040 Speaker 1: it was the right decision. I think it didn't happen 91 00:05:02,080 --> 00:05:04,520 Speaker 1: earlier because he was just trying to fend off the 92 00:05:05,000 --> 00:05:07,839 Speaker 1: growing storm about it, and you know, finally when it 93 00:05:07,880 --> 00:05:11,440 Speaker 1: became a bit of a roar, then he did say 94 00:05:11,480 --> 00:05:15,040 Speaker 1: he would recuse. So the Deputy Attorney General will will 95 00:05:15,080 --> 00:05:18,560 Speaker 1: handle the investigation, and you know, we'll wait to see 96 00:05:18,560 --> 00:05:20,840 Speaker 1: where that goes, of course, but ultimately I think it 97 00:05:20,880 --> 00:05:23,400 Speaker 1: was right to step away. You know, high level federal 98 00:05:23,400 --> 00:05:26,440 Speaker 1: officials need to not only avoid actual conflicts, but the 99 00:05:26,480 --> 00:05:29,520 Speaker 1: appearance of conflicts, and so you know, ultimately that was 100 00:05:29,880 --> 00:05:32,280 Speaker 1: he did the right thing. Jennifer. He said he's going 101 00:05:32,360 --> 00:05:37,400 Speaker 1: to correct the record, but some senators are criticizing him 102 00:05:37,560 --> 00:05:41,880 Speaker 1: for his failure to clarify his response in written testimony 103 00:05:41,920 --> 00:05:46,080 Speaker 1: to the committee. Afterwards, and he had a lot of 104 00:05:46,120 --> 00:05:50,880 Speaker 1: opportunity to clarify his response once he realized what was 105 00:05:50,920 --> 00:05:55,080 Speaker 1: happening with Michael Flynn and all the different the investigations 106 00:05:55,120 --> 00:06:02,640 Speaker 1: into the alleged Russia connection. So is at incriminating, you know, 107 00:06:02,720 --> 00:06:05,640 Speaker 1: it's hard to say. I mean, again, he's maintaining that 108 00:06:06,000 --> 00:06:09,200 Speaker 1: the context that he had were in a totally different context. 109 00:06:09,279 --> 00:06:12,600 Speaker 1: They were context he had because he was a senator 110 00:06:12,680 --> 00:06:14,640 Speaker 1: or not because he was kind of part of the 111 00:06:14,640 --> 00:06:17,679 Speaker 1: Trump world. So you know, he could just say, listen, 112 00:06:17,680 --> 00:06:19,599 Speaker 1: I had a separation there. You know, I didn't have 113 00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:22,960 Speaker 1: any contact in connection with the Trump things that I 114 00:06:23,040 --> 00:06:25,800 Speaker 1: was doing, and so I didn't feel any need to 115 00:06:25,839 --> 00:06:29,000 Speaker 1: correct the record in that respect. Um, you know, he's 116 00:06:29,040 --> 00:06:32,279 Speaker 1: he's got that division. He's maintaining that division. If something 117 00:06:32,320 --> 00:06:35,599 Speaker 1: comes out that shows that that's not an actual division, 118 00:06:35,680 --> 00:06:38,720 Speaker 1: then we'll have more to talk about. But I think 119 00:06:38,720 --> 00:06:41,359 Speaker 1: he just kind of came up with this, you know, 120 00:06:41,440 --> 00:06:43,839 Speaker 1: dividing line in his mind, and he's he's sticking to 121 00:06:43,960 --> 00:06:47,080 Speaker 1: it in always. Let me just tell you some of 122 00:06:47,120 --> 00:06:49,920 Speaker 1: the events. Let's just go through a chronology and then 123 00:06:50,600 --> 00:06:53,520 Speaker 1: we can put into context what what where he was 124 00:06:53,600 --> 00:06:58,479 Speaker 1: at perhaps on March seventeenth, he discussed Trump's foreign policy positions, 125 00:06:58,680 --> 00:07:00,960 Speaker 1: including there being no re He's in for the US 126 00:07:01,000 --> 00:07:03,599 Speaker 1: and Russia to be at loggerheads at a meeting on 127 00:07:03,720 --> 00:07:08,279 Speaker 1: July eighteen, the Russian ambassador approached him after a Heritage 128 00:07:08,320 --> 00:07:13,080 Speaker 1: Foundation panel that focused on Russia's incursions into Ukraine and Georgia. 129 00:07:13,520 --> 00:07:16,360 Speaker 1: On July thirty one, in an appearance on CNN, he 130 00:07:16,440 --> 00:07:19,720 Speaker 1: defended Trump's position on reaching out to Russia. And then 131 00:07:19,760 --> 00:07:23,960 Speaker 1: September eight you have him meeting with that Russian ambassador 132 00:07:24,160 --> 00:07:27,960 Speaker 1: that had approached him in his Senate office. In light 133 00:07:28,040 --> 00:07:32,760 Speaker 1: of that, and as we see some of his aids 134 00:07:32,800 --> 00:07:36,440 Speaker 1: perhaps being called before the committee, doesn't it seem as 135 00:07:36,480 --> 00:07:39,920 Speaker 1: if there is and he does have an involvement with 136 00:07:39,960 --> 00:07:45,080 Speaker 1: the Russia issue. Well, look, I mean he certainly could. 137 00:07:45,120 --> 00:07:47,680 Speaker 1: I think the problem is we just don't have any 138 00:07:47,760 --> 00:07:51,120 Speaker 1: evidence other than what he is saying about what happened 139 00:07:51,200 --> 00:07:54,880 Speaker 1: during that meeting, um so, and you need that kind 140 00:07:54,880 --> 00:07:58,520 Speaker 1: of evidence to bring charges. So whatever it looks like 141 00:07:58,760 --> 00:08:01,680 Speaker 1: politically and the pressure that's on him to resign or 142 00:08:01,720 --> 00:08:04,480 Speaker 1: what have you, that's kind of one side of things. 143 00:08:04,520 --> 00:08:07,840 Speaker 1: But you know, what I've been thinking about really is 144 00:08:07,840 --> 00:08:09,640 Speaker 1: more on the legal side of things. What evidence you 145 00:08:09,680 --> 00:08:12,400 Speaker 1: have to have to bring an actual criminal charge, and 146 00:08:12,760 --> 00:08:16,720 Speaker 1: you know, innuendo and suggestive chronologies really just aren't enough. 147 00:08:16,800 --> 00:08:20,040 Speaker 1: So without evidence that what happened in that meeting really 148 00:08:20,160 --> 00:08:22,960 Speaker 1: was related to the campaign or the election and not 149 00:08:23,160 --> 00:08:27,480 Speaker 1: to just general Senate stuff, UM, you know, I don't 150 00:08:27,480 --> 00:08:30,240 Speaker 1: think you have it. And you know, I'm even mindful 151 00:08:30,320 --> 00:08:33,360 Speaker 1: of the commentary I've seen recently that says that Senators 152 00:08:33,400 --> 00:08:38,160 Speaker 1: don't typically meet with ambassadors, UM, just to talk about 153 00:08:38,400 --> 00:08:40,280 Speaker 1: general Senate stuff. It's not the sort of thing you 154 00:08:40,280 --> 00:08:43,120 Speaker 1: would do to meet with a foreign adversary. UM. So 155 00:08:43,200 --> 00:08:45,760 Speaker 1: I'm not sure what they did talk about or how 156 00:08:45,800 --> 00:08:48,520 Speaker 1: it can be justified. But without evidence that that's not 157 00:08:48,559 --> 00:08:51,600 Speaker 1: true and what they actually we're doing was talking about 158 00:08:51,920 --> 00:08:55,280 Speaker 1: election or campaign related things, it's not solid enough to 159 00:08:55,280 --> 00:08:58,040 Speaker 1: bring a criminal case. Well, you know, you're going to 160 00:08:58,120 --> 00:09:04,400 Speaker 1: have Justice Department lawyers and presumably the FBI now investigating this. UM. 161 00:09:04,960 --> 00:09:08,040 Speaker 1: The Attorney General recused. You know, the White House has 162 00:09:08,040 --> 00:09:11,640 Speaker 1: been very outspoken about UM, all of these issues and 163 00:09:11,960 --> 00:09:14,960 Speaker 1: their position on them, and some have called for a 164 00:09:15,600 --> 00:09:18,200 Speaker 1: you know, a special prosecutor or investigator to take a 165 00:09:18,200 --> 00:09:22,320 Speaker 1: look at these allegations and that hasn't happened. Do you think, Jennifer, 166 00:09:22,400 --> 00:09:25,280 Speaker 1: that you know, people can have some faith in the 167 00:09:25,320 --> 00:09:28,400 Speaker 1: Justice Department to actually do this investigation given the Attorney 168 00:09:28,440 --> 00:09:31,000 Speaker 1: General's involvement in what's coming from the White House, or 169 00:09:31,040 --> 00:09:34,680 Speaker 1: how ethically should people be thinking about what the Justice 170 00:09:34,679 --> 00:09:37,680 Speaker 1: Department is about to do? You know, I think we 171 00:09:37,760 --> 00:09:42,320 Speaker 1: can have confidence in what's going to happen. UM. I 172 00:09:42,360 --> 00:09:44,839 Speaker 1: was lucky enough to work with Jim Comey when he 173 00:09:44,920 --> 00:09:47,000 Speaker 1: was the U. S Attorney in Manhattan, and I have 174 00:09:47,120 --> 00:09:50,199 Speaker 1: the highest faith in his abilities to be independent and 175 00:09:50,200 --> 00:09:53,960 Speaker 1: impartial and to take the investigation where the evidence leads. 176 00:09:54,320 --> 00:09:57,320 Speaker 1: And I've heard heard also very good things about Rod Rosenstein, 177 00:09:57,440 --> 00:10:00,319 Speaker 1: who's due to come in after confirmation and as the 178 00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:02,959 Speaker 1: Deputy Attorney General. I don't know him personally, but I've 179 00:10:02,960 --> 00:10:07,240 Speaker 1: heard good things about his um, his ethics, So you know, 180 00:10:07,400 --> 00:10:09,840 Speaker 1: I do think that these are people who are charged 181 00:10:09,880 --> 00:10:13,720 Speaker 1: with upholding the law and for investigating and and following 182 00:10:13,720 --> 00:10:16,480 Speaker 1: where the evidence leads. So I do think that we 183 00:10:16,520 --> 00:10:19,840 Speaker 1: can have confidence that, uh, if there is evidence to 184 00:10:20,200 --> 00:10:24,200 Speaker 1: suggest that there was a lie or even misleading evidence 185 00:10:24,280 --> 00:10:27,360 Speaker 1: put before the Congress, that UM that that they will 186 00:10:27,400 --> 00:10:30,000 Speaker 1: go with that and and ultimately do whatever is appropriate 187 00:10:30,040 --> 00:10:30,920 Speaker 1: with that information.