STING OPERATION: Sessions Perjured Himself!!!

[berni_mccoy]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/01/politics/sessions-russian-ambassador-letter/index.html?adkey=bn

First on CNN: Senators asked Comey to investigate AG Jeff Sessions for possible perjury

"Earlier this year, Attorney General Sessions provided false testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in response to our questions regarding his contacts with Russian officials," Franken and Leahy said in a joint statement Thursday. "The attorney general never fully explained or even acknowledged the misrepresentations in his testimony, and we remained concerned that he had still not been forthcoming about the extent of his contacts with Russian officials."

Leahy and Franken said that, if Sessions did perjure himself, he should resign.

[BumRushDaShow]

1. Leahy's tweet & joint press release

Link to tweet

https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-and-franken-release-their-earlier-letters-to-the-fbi-requesting-an-inquiry-into-attorney-general-sessions-contacts-with-russian-officials

[vlyons]

2. He should resign even if he didn't commit perfury

He's a racist bigot. That's reason enough

[C_U_L8R]

3. That will leave a permanent mark.

Yeah.. Sessions should resign. He shames the office he pretends to hold.

[arthritisR_US]

40. Resignation is not enough, he should be charged.

Perjury is a federal crime here and the acting AG should charge him accordingly.

[kacekwl]

43. Of course he should.

Dose anyone think he will admit it on his own ? Jiao

[arthritisR_US]

45. I wasn't stating that as a disparaging remark to you, sorry. nt

[tavalon]

49. absolutely

[still_one]

4. The problem is the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause will be argued as

shielding lawmakers from prosecution for lying during proceedings in the House or Senate, and since Sessions was a sitting Senator when this took place, most likely nothing will happen. There is no way I can see him resigning

[berni_mccoy]

6. Perjury is a Felony and there is no protection for that

In that clause.

[40RatRod]

8. Donald would pardon any of "his people"

that are convicted.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

15. Not if he resigns or is 25thed or impeached first. . . . nt

[airmid]

25. If he pardoned him, wouldn't this be an acknowledgement of a crime?

[tavalon]

50. Yes, but that didn't stop Ford.

[tazkcmo]

29. He'd still be removed as AG. n/t

[Alice11111]

35. That's what I think. It would at least get rid of him as AG

Thanks Franken for going after the lyin little elf. He really never answered any questions seriously. He just sparkled his eyes and smiled, trying to be a cute little bigot, and weasel around the answers. Were he truthful and taking the questions seriouly, his demeanor would have been much different. In my profession, I have dealt w many liars. I can tell.

Most of the Repub clan is not saying , we didn't do it. They are saying, you can't prove it. Liars say that
Hubris.

[L. Coyote]

9. Indeed. If we remain a nation of laws equal for all, he must be prosecuted.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[LOL Lib]

30. Wouldn't it also be obstruction?

Sessions knew Comey was investing him so he recommends firing Comey. Sounds like obstruction to me.

[Alice11111]

36. Yes. Still, they are mostly investigating themselves...

in other words, it's a big CYA. Mueller is our best hope. I think DT will impulsively fire him, as he gets closer.
Franken, keep bearing down. Get a body guard.

[still_one]

12. This tends to disagree with your opinon on that

"Members of Congress are given an absolute privilege to lie with impunity in the House or Senate, if they so desire, by the Speech or Debate Clause in Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution. It states that, with regard to senators and representatives, "for Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place." The Framers of the Constitution wanted to encourage debate in Congress, and they did not want that debate chilled by the threat of lawsuits. Even if White could prove that Ashcroft's statement was false, the Constitution forbids him from bringing suit.

Statements that senators and representatives make outside of the House or Senate are not privileged, however. If a member of Congress defames you in a press release or on a talk show, you can sue him or her for libel. Of course, that doesn't mean you'll win."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2001/01/who_can_lie_to_congress.html

[berni_mccoy]

19. You didn't read your own article then.

"Is it illegal to lie to Congress? Yes, most of the time. Witnesses in congressional hearings who make false statements under oath can be prosecuted for perjury, a criminal offense."

The Speech And Debate Clause does not cover witness testimony under oath, nor does it protect from perjury even if you are a sitting senator.

No one accused Ashcroft of perjury and that fact is called out in the article you linked. That is distinctly different from what Sessions did when asked a direct question. He left no wiggle room for this and is caught red-handed perjuring himself.

It also appears the answer is not cut-and-dry: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/03/can-jeff-sessions-be-prosecuted-perjury

So this would be untested ground.

[LOL Lib]

32. Also, wasn't President Clinton impeached for perjury

Why would a senator be immune to perjury if the POTUS is not?

[unblock]

7. good point.

even though he wasn't acting in his capacity as senator at that moment, he was nevertheless a senator in uttering speech in the senate.

most they could do is refer him to the ethics committee where they would probably just covfefe him.

[still_one]

13. I understand that rubs people the wrong way, but that is how that is interpreted

"Members of Congress are given an absolute privilege to lie with impunity in the House or Senate, if they so desire, by the Speech or Debate Clause in Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution. It states that, with regard to senators and representatives, "for Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place." The Framers of the Constitution wanted to encourage debate in Congress, and they did not want that debate chilled by the threat of lawsuits. Even if White could prove that Ashcroft's statement was false, the Constitution forbids him from bringing suit.

Statements that senators and representatives make outside of the House or Senate are not privileged, however. If a member of Congress defames you in a press release or on a talk show, you can sue him or her for libel. Of course, that doesn't mean you'll win."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2001/01/who_can_lie_to_congress.html

[tazkcmo]

31. "for Speech or Debate "

He was doing neither. He lied to Congress while under oath.

[madokie]

39. The key words

are he lied under oath

Felony
No two ways about it

[politicaljunkie41910]

42. Agreed he was doing neither. If it's okay for a Senator to lie under oath,

why bother with the administering of and taking of an oath during a confirmation hearing? When they came to that part, shouldn't they have said, "Oh you are a sitting Senator, you are not required to take the oath because you don't have to swear to tell the truth."

[shraby]

18. He wasn't on the Senate floor speechifying. He was testifying under oath to

a committee in order to be confirmed to the position he was nominated for. No matter how you try to knot it, he lied under oath.

[unblock]

20. I don't disagree and would love for this case to get to the point where the Supremes have to decide

[shraby]

17. He can't lie to congress under oath and that's what he did.

[Sanity Claws]

28. He was not speaking as a Senator

He was speaking as a witness, being questioned about his suitability for a position.

If he was sworn in, he is subject to perjury rules.

[Achilleaze]

5. republican Sessions did perjure himself

he should do the honorable thing and resign. But he's a republican and does not do honor. So he must be fired.

[L. Coyote]

10. Being part of the #TrumpRussia conspiracy makes him immune to Trump firing him.

The conspiracy just gets ever more complex and intertwined as more reports surface, adding evidence and co-conspirators as well as conspirator motives.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Trump's New Impeachable Offenses: Obstruction of Justice, Conspiracy, Abuse of Power

[brer cat]

11. Who is the "honorable" person who could fire him? nt

[WinkyDink]

26. The $64,000 question.

[Mr. Evil]

14. He certainly won't be fired so he needs to be arrested.

I don't care if he's pardoned by Confefe45 or not. At least he won't be AG anymore.

[Alice11111]

38. The acting FBI Director should arrest him quickly, before

DT appoints a nrw creep.

[Stuart G]

16. Sounds like something I have heard before.."I am not a crook"...

but Mr. Sessions,,,,you are!!!!!!!

[BadgerMom]

21. Who would his replacement be?

Trump's (Putin's) choices are so perverse, the thought of this curls my toes.

[berksdem]

22. Total POS...

and deserves to to be charged with perjury. Do I have any faith that will actually happen? Absolutely not...

[Honeycombe8]

23. He shouldn't resign. He should BE REMOVED. nt

[Nitram]

24. Couldn't happen to a nicer Southern bigot.

[WinkyDink]

27. RUN, Jeffy! RUN!

[MontanaMama]

33. Soooooooo

what's the hold up? Lock Him Up!

[shenmue]

34. Jail

[Fritz Walter]

37. Lock. Him. Up.

Or indeed, since there are so many ripples in the swamp right now...

Lock. 'Em. Up.

[jmg257]

41. Good luck with that...

Franken: "CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week that included information that quote, ‘Russian operatives claimed to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.’ These documents also allegedly say quote, ‘There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump's surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.’

"Now, again, I'm telling you this as it's coming out, so you know. But if it's true, it's obviously extremely serious and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?"

Sessions: "Senator Franken, I'm not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."


"Sessions and spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores have said his statement was truthful because he met with the Russian ambassador in his capacity as a senator, not as a Trump campaign surrogate."



SEN. PATRICK J. LEAHY: Several of the President-elect's nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?" the Vermont Democrat asked in a questionnaire.
SESSIONS: No.
DATE: January 10




It'll be further explained away as non-specific. Dumb-ass didn't even have to answer the Franken's question about himself and the Russians...he gave that himself.

[dalton99a]

44. Kick.

[Warren DeMontague]

46. This is the guy who absolutely insists federal law must be enforced against pot smoking

but perjury? meh

[malaise]

52. Amazing indeed

Lock him up!

[Warren DeMontague]

53. They never should have let him out of the tree to begin with.

[malaise]

54. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

I needed that laugh

[Grins]

47. Leahy and Franken: "(Sessions) should resign." Oh, yeah...?

"Leahy and Franken said that, if Sessions did perjure himself, he should resign."

Yeah? And replaced by whom? Someone equally foul who has not recused himself so he CAN fuck with the investigation into the Rat-fucking by Trump and Vlad...?

Unless that person's name is Sally Yates....

[justiceischeap]

48. Keep this in mind: if Comey was asked to investigate Sessions for perjury

and Sessions was instrumental in his firing, which he was according to the letter his name is on, then does that not also amount to obstruction of justice?

Also, for lawyers, can someone not file a complaint with the Bar and recommend disbarment?

[madville]

51. I don't think he is guilty of perjury, here's why

I think he was just too damn dumb to correctly answer the question. Answering a question wrong is not perjury, because it all boils down to intent. I don't think he intended to lie, he was incapable of processing what was being asked of him.

Incompetence? Absolutely.

Criminal? No, unless some kind of hard evidence of his intent to decieve emerges, like a tape recording or email.

[DefenseLawyer]

55. He also lied on his sf86, which is a sworn document.

It's also a felony to lie in that document.