Did Jeff Sessions Lie To Congress?

Hmmm, U.S. Senator Al Franken, interrogating Attorney General Jeff Sessions in the above video, bears a resemblance to OIB contributor John Marshall Lee. Did Sessions lie about his Russian contacts? Time will tell.

From The New York Times:

In this footage from his confirmation hearing, Attorney General Jeff Sessions says he “did not have communications with the Russians.” A Justice Department official more recently said Mr. Sessions had two conversations with Ambassador Sergey I. Kislyak.

More here.

Lee with shovel
What say you John Marshall Lee, is Jeff Sessions shoveling it?


  1. You know an Attorney is lying when you see his mouth moving. Attorney General Jeff Sessions indeed lied to Congress. He also lied when he said he had been called a surrogate. I never called him that. I called him a ‘Sergey get.’ It’s a term I came up with to describe anyone who gets in bed with the Russian Ambassador.

  2. Remember when it was the Republican Party that stood tall and spoke out against Democrats calling them liberals who love Russia (USSR) and they hated America? Remember how President Ronald Reagan disliked Russia so much, he increased defense spending because of Russia? Now we have the Trump administration which is in love with Russia and it’s the Democrats who are standing up to fight against Russia. Again, just follow the money, this is an onion being peel back slowly, layer by layer, just like Nixon and Watergate.

    1. That’s funny. I clearly remember Obama (not my President) on a hot mic tell Medvedev he’d have “more flexibility” after the election and to please relay that to Putin. How about Hillary and her stupid reset button prop? Anybody?

  3. There is one way to make this go away or prevent this scandal from going much further. Do a Hillary Clinton. All the people involved in communication with the Russians must find a way to slip and fall in a way that causes memory loss. Both Flynn and Sessions have already lost memory as to what they talked about with the Russian Ambassador, but they forgot to slip and fall first.

  4. The video recording provided by the New York Times was edited to just the final portion of Senator Franken’s question. I heard the entire question posed to Attorney General Sessions by Senator Franken on an unbiased news source. When you hear Franken’s question in its entirety, you understand why Sessions answered as he did.
    Lennie, can you access the full video the New York Times edited?

    1. Jeff Sessions lied and commuted perjury. He also did not directly answer the question posed to him by Senator Franken. Franken asked Sessions what he would do if he had to investigate any connection between the Trump campaign and the Russian Government. In other words, since Sessions played an integral role in the Trump campaign, would there not be a conflict of interest present where it would be necessary to recuse himself from that investigation so there would be no doubt of the impartiality of the question. Sessions did not answer that and he went off and made his own statement about not knowing about any Trump Campaign/Russian Government connection but then Sessions verified his own connection to the Trump campaign (surrogate) and that he also had no connection with the Russian Government. He said, “NO.” Sessions also answered a written inquiry from Senator Leahy about any connections between the Trump campaign (and Sessions was part of the Trump campaign) and Sessions’ one-word response was “No.” We need to remember the issue of Russian involvement in the presidential election and Trump and his campaigns’ involvement with the Russian Government had already become major issues and, therefore, it seems to be incredulous that Sessions would not be highly sensitive to how he answered any question. Many times we talk about the letter and/or spirit of the law. Today, Sessions is parsing every single word and trying to get out of this mess by explanations that are to the tightest letter of the law (thereby getting him off the hook of a crime, perjury). In my opinion, he violated the “spirit” of the law and, in that sense, he violated the law and, yes, he did lie. At the minimum, he should recuse himself from any/all Trump campaign/Russian Government investigation and he should do that today. There would need to a decision made to go forward or not with the issue of whether or not he committed perjury while testifying to the Senate.

      1. Again you are relying on liberal press that likes to make stuff up as they go along. I heard Sessions answer the question and he stated he would recuse himself. Frank, you Democrats got your asses kicked, get over it.

        1. Andy, it’s called inductive reasoning. Take a small piece of information such as the edited Franken question, and make it a headline with the complete cooperation of the news media.
          Sessions has agreed to recuse himself to try to appease the Democrats but they will continue to make it a headline with the media. This is just an example of what the Democrats and the biased media is doing to disrupt the new administration.

      2. Again you are spreading half-truths. Sessions answered Franken and said he would recuse himself. What more do you and your liberal friends want? You all have to get over the fact that Bill Clinton lost the election. BTW last year Obama met 24 times with the same Russian Sessions did. Now what?

  5. Ron, remember when the Republicans fought the Southern Democrats in the Civil War to end slavery in America? Remember when the Democrats enacted Jim Crow laws and segregation? Remember when Rosa Parks of Alabama refused to sit in the back of the bus that started the Civil Right Movement, led by Dr. King? Remember how the Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Acts? Now you have the Democrats championing on behalf of blacks and the Republicans trying to keep blacks down. Peel that onion and let me know what you find at the center.

    Let me tell you what I found. Democrats run almost every urban black community. Chicago is a war zone in the black communities. Hundred of black lives lost yearly, thousands shot and 100s of thousands living in poverty. Why hasn’t crime gotten under control in Chicago under the Democrat leadership? Take New York, it had crime like Chicago under Democrats in the ’70s, ’80s, and early ’90s.

    Then a Republican Mayor implemented some controversial remedies and went from the worst major crime city to the safest major city, saving 10s of thousands of black lives. What’s the first thing a Democrat mayor in New York does when they get into office, end stop and frisk because it seems to be profiling blacks. Well it was, and it stops blacks for shooting and killing other blacks. I thought black lives matter. What layer of the onion I didn’t get to are black Democrats not speaking out against their party’s failure in the black community is it because they are beholding to the party (in other words are black Democrat beholden to their master (Democrat Party) I heard some of the “crackers” were black in the days of Willie Lynch.

    PS don’t forget the George Bush love and hate relationship with Putin.
    www .youtube.com/watch?v=cx49KA_IW-Y

    1. Well said, Robert. The Democrats have been selling the minority communities a bill of goods built on BS. Generations of people beholden to government to live, all in the name votes. After every election, they’re forgotten. The neighborhood gets worse and worse.

      1. I won’t go that far to say the Democrats are selling blacks a bill of goods or Democrats have forgotten them after an election, for they were never thought of. Of course progress would be slow under the Democrats for blacks. Republicans think globally, (Military) blacks were well aware of who enacted Jim Crow laws, segregation, and who they were marching against. If you want to destroy something sometimes it has to be from within. My point to Ron was holding his party accountable because if he’s just going to blame the Republicans or whites, progress for blacks is going to be slow. If Ron wants elected officials to advance progress for blacks he can’t blame the ones he didn’t elect but the ones he elected to make those advancements regardless of party or race. It starts with education, and then a job with means.

    2. Robert Teixeira, you have a much greater grasp of history than most people and I compliment you on that. However, as you peeled your onion, you used some layers that fit your narrative but you discarded other layers that undermined your narrative.

      1. It was not my onion, it was Ron’s. I would like to know what layer I discarded. My narrative (layer) was based on two crime-ridden major cities under Democrat rule. New York was five times the population of Chicago, and it took a Republican to clean it up. Now it is governed by a Democrat, crime is up, and the police are revolting. I grasp the complexity of trying to maintain order especially in large populations. I also know that blue line can get very blurry and so thin I could floss my teeth with it even within the force. Trump said it well; we must have safety and law&order. Or we will have chaos. I just read a report about two cops arrested for kidnapping and assault that street stuff. If the institution that is set up to ensure safety, law&order, and to help those in need become what they were set up to fight then evil has won, but that’s another onion that will be peeled at a later date.

  6. *** The question was did Sessions have any contact with Russians about the 2016 campaign, not any contact with the Russians about anything under the sun. He could have met with the Russian ambassador and talked about the weather, no? That’s not talking about the election, is it? I need a little more info. Before I can get on board with what seems so far like a “fake” to-do about nothing news! ***

    1. We need to remember the issue of involvement between Trump and his campaign and the Russian government was already a front-burner highly visible issue so any question posed to anyone connected to Trump would have to answer to the highest tightest standard. At that point, everything was already under a microscope. Even if Sessions and the Russian Ambassador had bumped into each other on a casual basis would have required an admission with an explanation. If Sessions had answered the question by saying, “yes, I met the Russian Ambassador twice” and described the meeting, Sessions would not be dealing with this today. But he said “No” twice. This parsing of words is actually making things worse for Sessions.

    2. The question is does Trump have any business or financial dealings with Russia. That is the onion Ron has alluded too. How far this onion is peeled and what it reveals. Is it going to be used for impeachment, or is it the Democrats’ Trump’s Benghazi like the Republican’s Hillary Benghazi that was a current cycle of news and hearing as fodder of hope to appease the other side. TWT.

  7. Trump and the Republicans (and a couple of people right here on OIB) will not directly answer the question. Trump and company’s answer is always to deflect to Obama and Trump and company still stubbornly hold on to Hillary Clinton to deflect and obfuscate.

    1. Frank, I would assume you might be talking to me as one of those on OIB. If I’m wrong, sorry, I will answer your question. I’m neither a Republican nor a Democrat, because sometimes both parties don’t see the baby. However, I do lean more right than left. Like Ron alluded to, this has nothing to do with Session or Flynn. It’s about Trump. The ultimate question is and I will state it again, Does Trump have any business or financial dealings with Russia?

      1. Robert Teixeira, actually I was not thinking about you when I made this comment, but you were talking more directly about a comment from Ron Mackey, but you say this is all about Trump. Of course it is. You ask about whether or not Trump had any business or financial dealings with Russia. So how do we find that out? Maybe if Trump releases years of tax returns we can find out.

  8. Attorney General Jeff Sessions HAS RECUSED himself from any Trump/Russia investigation. Had he not, Sessions, Trump and the Republicans would have had ongoing lingering controversy with increasing calls for Sessions’ resignation. Today’s action is a strategy called, cutting your losses.

        1. Considering the years we’ve both watched Bridgeport city council violate conflict of interest and refuse to behave ethically, it becomes difficult to recognize anywhere doesn’t it? Sessions is going high on this one, and only this one. Thus far, I for one don’t feel the need to go low.

  9. Ron, there’s a stark difference between Nixon’s Watergate impeachment/resignation and Trump’s current situation. Nixon was already elected as president and was planning his reelection when Watergate happened. Trump was running to be elected for the presidency, and his dealing with Russia had to be known and well documented if any impeachment and resignation is to occur.

    These onion layers are being manufactured. Let’s face it, Trump as a politician and Commander and Chief who’s run America without help is frightening, to say the least.

    Have you seen some of his executive orders signing on TV? He forgot how many he had to sign and was told by someone he had one more to sign, and then he asked for his notes that went with the order. He read the note word for word. By the way, there were only two executive orders to be signed that day.

    He’s no Maria who grasps information.

    Off the cuff he’s all gibberish like his rallies and at formal things, like his address, he’s has to read the speech word for word. If any impeachment is to occur I see an “IS” moment but either way it was manufactured prior to his “win.”
    www .youtube.com/watch?v=Yp3TQf2xDc8
    Bam I’m out. 🙂

  10. Robert Teixeira, I’ve addressed your question before on OIB about blacks and both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party but you just don’t want to accept the truth. When Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1862 to free the slaves the Southern States became Democrats. Most blacks did not have the right to vote but those blacks who could vote became Republicans.

    It was the black vote who were Republicans who put JFK into the White House because Daddy King, Martin Luther King’s father said the Sunday night before the election, “You know, I never voted for a Catholic. I never thought I could, but, you know, if I had a sack full of votes, I’d take them up to Washington and put them at the feet of Senator John F. Kennedy, because Robert F. Kennedy secured the release of Martin Luther King, Jr. from prison. Well, that story got out and blacks came out to vote for a Democrat. Blacks then started to become Democrats right away. Robert, you don’t have believe me, just look it up.

    1. Ron,
      You know history and it is a jump from Lincoln to Kennedy. Please provide a few in-between moments in US history, not generally taught when I was in school, but that seem critically important today.
      1863–Emancipation Proclamation
      1865–Juneteenth–“freedom comes to Texas”
      Reconstruction and voting rights provides opportunity in public square with Federal troops enforcing the law.
      1876–Presidential election; electoral college problems in three states; “deal” places Ohio Republican Rutherford Hayes in the White House with agreement to remove Federal troops from the South
      1877 into 20th Century–Jim Crow rules, first in transportation, then wherever, creates US segregation in South that does not provide equality before the law.

      There is more, but a basic outline should help all understand the situation from fairness and justice perspective. We are a productive people when we become focused. What can we focus upon today? Time will tell.

      1. The Dred Scott case:
        On March 6, 1857, the United States Supreme Court issues a decision in the Dred Scott case, affirming the right of slave owners to take their slaves into the Western territories, thereby negating the doctrine of popular sovereignty and severely undermining the platform of the newly created Republican Party.

        Dred Scott was a slave whose owner, an army doctor, had spent time in Illinois, a free state, and Wisconsin, a free territory at the time of Scott’s residence. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote the majority decision, which was issued on March 6, 1857. The court held that Scott was not free based on his residence in either Illinois or Wisconsin because he was not considered a person under the U.S. Constitution–in the opinion of the justices, black people were not considered citizens when the Constitution was drafted in 1787. According to Taney, Dred Scott was the property of his owner, and property could not be taken from a person without due process of law. Taney wrote, believed that blacks “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.

        Plessy vs. Ferguson:
        During the era of Reconstruction, black Americans’ political rights were affirmed by three constitutional amendments and numerous laws passed by Congress. Racial discrimination was attacked on a particularly broad front by the Civil Rights Act of 1875. This legislation made it a crime for an individual to deny “the full and equal enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color.”
        In 1883, the Supreme Court struck down the 1875 act, ruling that the 14th Amendment did not give Congress authority to prevent discrimination by private individuals. Victims of racial discrimination were told to seek relief not from the Federal Government, but from the states. Unfortunately, state governments were passing legislation that codified inequality between the races. Laws requiring the establishment of separate schools for children of each race were most common; however, segregation was soon extended to encompass most public and semi-public facilities.

        The ruling in this Supreme Court case upheld a Louisiana state law that allowed for “equal but separate accommodations for the white and colored races.”

          1. Not from what I read here. If you mean blacks were then Americans I agree 100%. But black history???

  11. Are you saying a few days before the elections Martin’s father said he’d vote for JFK because of Robert Kennedy bonded out his son, Martin and word of this got out throughout the South? Did he have a Twitter account? If it was the last Sunday night how did the word get out without churches on Sunday mass?

    Ron, it has nothing to do with believing YOU. You asked to remember I asked you to remember.

    If Martin were marching for the right for blacks to vote how significant was the black vote in the South? JFK won because he placed LBJ as his vice-president, a white Southerner. That was in 1960. When was the Civil Rights Act signed and by whom? It kinda goes with what Phantom was saying about blacks being forgotten after the election.

    Ron for proud “ponder” blackman.
    www .youtube.com/watch?v=-OnWnwwxNPA

    1. What’s frightening is not so much he believes this but he is actively working to bring it to fruition. And he’s not alone. There is a movement of believers called dominionists whose goal is to foment nuclear war to bring about the Apocalypse so they may enjoy the Rapture and leave the rest of us to the flames of hell.

  12. Attached is a list of our exalted elected Dems who have spent time with the Russian ambassador.
    Old photos of Russian Amb. Sergey Kislyak w/senators, including Reed (D), Blunt (R), Landrieu (D), Wicker (R), McCaskill (D).
    Btw, when did we go to war with Russia?

    1. Andy, thanks; but how does any of President Trump’s team and son-in-law meet with the Russian ambassador and not say to him what in hell are you doing messing with our election? Before they even had a handshake the first thing should have been about our election but no and in fact Trump is not concerned about Russia’s involvement in our election.

        1. Andy, now is the time for President Trump to call for an independent special prosecutor to see if President Obama had Trump’s headquarters wiretapped and if he did then have legal action taken against Obama. Andy, where is the evidence that Obama had Trump’s Headquarters wiretapped? Now 16 security US Government agencies have evidence Russia was involved in America’s 2016 election for President but President Trump has no concern about America’s election process being hacked by Russia, so let’s have this investigation.

  13. Russian’s involvement in the USA election is two weeks ago fake news. We are onto this week’s fake news, Attorney General Jeff Sessions lied. What will next week bring? If the Democrats put this much effort into the betterment of the citizens of the USA we all would be in great better place.

  14. *** Smokescreen on Trump’s part to get the news heat about Sessions and the rest of the rumors concerning Russia off his back, and on to Obama! I can’t remember a President who has had so much negative drama in their first 100 days in office. It’s sad what has been going on all over America during the campaign and after since Trump ran and won! Who knows what else is in store for America and the White House? ***

  15. Trump supporters and the GOP have peeled the onion back so much there’s nothing left but political stink they can no longer smell. Political finger-pointing about rumors and fake news seem to have taken front center stage over getting any meaningful government work done. *** God help us! ***

Leave a Reply