The chair is authorized to declare recesses of the committee at any time. To theome everyone hearings and oversight in the department of justice. I begin by recognizing myself. Today we welcome attorney jeff sessions, the annual Department Oversight hearing. General, you have a long and distinguished career in public service. Even when your decisions are not always well received. Leaving theear department of justice has not been without difficulty, which is expected at the outset of a new administration. While much has been done to theect the proper under Obama Administration, more work must be done to ensure the department is operating to impartially administered justice. Our last doj oversight hearing was beyond disappointing. Loretta lynchal gave the least. And at least transparent testimony i can recall in my time in congress. It was lame a disservice to the American People. Ms. Lynch failed to respond substantively to every question posed by this committee. Former miss lynch and former holder was let go for his own stonewalling for fast and furious. I expect, mr. Attorney general, that you will be more willing to candidly answer questions from members on both sides of the i o. You will hear question after question today concerning our knowledge of and involvement with russia. Efforts tolies interfere in the 2016 president ial election. Whether it concerns a work on behalf of now President Trump during the campaign or your service in the senate, i suspect this theme will be a constant refrain from my friends on the other side of the aisle. While i understand your decision to recuse yourself was an effort to do the right thing, i believe you, as a person of integrity, will be impartial and fair and follow the facts wherever they lead. I have chosen as chairman of robertmmittee to elect mueller to do his job, free from undue political influence. At the same time, this committee will do its duty and conduct oversight at the department of justice. To that end, we sent two letters to you calling on you to name a second as special counsel to restore the publics confidence in our Justice System. Numerous matters connected to the 2016 election remained unresolved. Appointedment has not a second counsel. Consequently, this committee had no choice but to open our own joint investigation with the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to review doj of the handling investigation into former secretary Hillary Clinton and her mishandling of classified information. As we said earlier this year, it is incumbent on this committee in oversight opacity to ensure the agencies we oversee are above reproach, and that the particularartment in remains immune to accusations of politicizing should. Politicizing. Fromave recused yourself matters stemming from the 2016 election, but there are significant concerns that the partisanship of the fbi and the department has weakened the ability of each to act objectively. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this and what steps you are taken to remove politics from Law Enforcement. However, these investigations are but a few of the many important issues we need to discuss today. For instance, we just overwhelmingly reported the usa at liberty act out of Committee Last week. This Bipartisan Legislation would reauthorize section 702 of the four intelligence act. The administration has chosen to oppose any reform of the law. I understand the desire for a clean reauthorization of this vital program. Believe this stands as a miscalculation and risks further eroding trust in our intelligence apparatus. We hope we can work with you now that the usa at liberty act, which we authorizes a law that is vital to our nations battle against terrorism while protecting Civil Liberties is reported out of committee. This is especially important given the ongoing threat of terrorist attacks in the United States. As we all know, not two weeks ago eight people were killed and almost a dozen injured when a isis inspired jihadist drove a pickup truck into a bicycle path near the World Trade Center in new york. Terrorist threat is real and ongoing hearing we cannot afford to play politics with National Security. I also look forward to continuing to work with you on our criminal Justice System. There is bipartisan support to do this in congress, and with your help, we can make changes that crack down on violent offenders while also doing more to rehabilitate federal prisons and curb abuses in the system as well as punishments. To your credit, since you assumed leadership of the permit of justice, there has been a significant increase in the prosecution of firearms offenses in the United States. Criticized itave lacks enforcement of the gun laws already on the books. Enforcing these laws is the most effective way to combat Violent Crime in our cities and neighborhoods. Under your leadership, the number of defendants charged with Unlawful Possession of a firearm has increased by nearly 25 . The number of defendants charged with armed Drug Trafficking has increased to 10 . I commend you for your focus on these prosecutions because they will help make our streets safer. There are many matters on which we share common ground, especially when it comes to rectifying the failures of the Obama Administration. Passedmple, the house legislation to ban settlement payments to nonvictim third parties following your policy directive to shut down the use of such mandatory donations. These reform initiatives followed a concerted effort by the Obama Administration to use settlements to benefit its political allies. We commend your efforts to combat illegal immigration, protect our citizens from criminal aliens, and to fight back against socalled sanctuary cities. More than two years have passed since a woman was killed by an illegal alien who had then deported five times. We have addressed this issue head on by moving legislation to combat sanctuary cities and to find and remove criminal gang members. Mr. Attorney general, our country is at a crossroads. Our constituents are greatly concerned that our Justice System does not work for them. Ther your leadership am of Justice Department has taken strides to mitigate the harms done in the prior administration. I am for you to work with us to continue that trend, and i thank you sincerely for your appearance here today. I now recognize the Ranking Member of the committee, the general friend from michigan, mr. Conyers, for his Opening Statements. Conyers, for his statement. Mr. Conyers thank you. Top of the morning. In the ordinary course of business, anyone of a dozen topics related to the department of justice would be worthy of its own hearing. And to be clear, i would rather spend our time today discussing the upkeep of the criminal Justice System, the enforcement of civil rights, and the work we must all do to ensure access to the ballot box. We must spend our time debating the troubles of a wayward administration. Mr. Conyers although this is the attorney generals first appearance before the house, he has already made three visits to our colleagues in the senate. At his confirmation hearing, he did not havet he communications with the russians. That anth, he testified continuing exchange of information between trumps surrogates and intermediaries for the russian government did not happen, at least to my knowledge, and not with me. We now know, of course, that neither of these statements is true. Shortly after the attorney general made the first comment, the Washington Post reported that he met with the russian and twicet are at least during the campaign. In the past month, we have learned the attorney general must have been very much aware of a continuing exchange of information between the Trump Campaign and the russian government. In charging documents unsealed last month, George Papadopoulos, a foreignpolicy advisor to the admits Extensive Communications with russian contacts. At a march 31, 2016 meeting of the campaigns National Security attendede committee, Advisory Committee, chaired by senator sessions, mr. Sumdopoulos stated, in and substance, that he had connections that can help arrange a meeting between then candidate trump and president putin. It does not matter, and has been that the attorney general remembers this meeting after the fact. Remembers it so vividly, in fact, that two unarmed sources, the senator shot george down. Under oath, knowing in advance that he could be asked about this subject, the attorney general give answers that are at best incomplete. The attorney general can provide some clarification on this problem in his remarks today. Uslso hope that he can sure assure us that the departments weathering near daily attacks on its independence by President Trump. And that no office of the toartment is being used pressure the president s political enemies. In recent months, President Trump has attacked the beleaguered attorney general and criticized his very weak position on Hillary Clintons crimes. The president has talked openly about firing the leadership of the department, including the attorney general, the Deputy Attorney general, the former acting director of the fbi, and special counsel robert mueller. He did fire former fbi director. Omey in his own words, because of that russia thing with trump and russia. As well as acting attorney and all 46ly yates sitting United States attorneys. Last year, he denigrated a federal judge because of his mexican heritage. Was born inriel indiana, by the way. Month, in a radio interview, President Trump said he was very unhappy with the. Ustice Department Hours later, he proclaimed the military Justice System a complete and total disgrace. The one that six with me is the president s july interview with the New York Times. , begins byerview once again attacking the attorney generals credibility. Never should have recused himself, the president complains. Then, the conversation takes a sinister turn. Along, out ofe courtesy, the fbi started reporting to the department of justice, but the fbi person really reports directly to the president of the United States. He goes on. I could have ended the Flynn Investigation just by saying they say it cannot be obstruction because you can say it has ended, it is over. Case, then the president requires some correction. The fbi reports directly to the attorney general. The founding of the bureau, it can be obstruction of justice if the president orders an investigation closed with a corrupt motive. What strikes me about these comments is the president s view that the criminal Justice System serves him and not the public. Believet trump seems to that on a whim, he can bring pressure to bear on his enemies, dismissed charges against his himself andinsulate his family from any consequence. I cannot overemphasize the poses of this perspective to our republic. I have served on this committee long enough to remember another president who shared this view. Myself up on Richard Nixons enemy list. We worked to hold that administration accountable, our work is not complete. Remember our common responsibility to prevent that kind of abuse from happening again. Look to the attorney generals partnership in this effort, but i have begun to worry about his resolve. Last night, in a letter sent from the department to chairman as aatte, without so much copy to the Ranking Member, by theway, they insisted attorney general seems to hold the door open to appointing a new special counsel to cater to the president s political needs. The fact that this letter was to the majority without the customary and appropriate notice to me indicates that the charge given to the Department Officials to evaluate the issues has political motivation. Now, in his own words, the attorney generals recused from any questions involving investigations that involve secretary clinton. Cannot refer an investigation to a second counsel if we lack the evidence to predicate a criminal investigation in the first place. Virtually, every clinton related that President Trump complains about has been well litigated. Andfully examined completely debunked. Still, to quote former attorney ,eneral Michael Mukasey putting political opponents in jail for offenses committed in a political setting is something that we do not do here. The thread alone resembles a Banana Republic threat alone resembles a banana. Republic in the the now republic. Attorney general is generally come to see us within two or three months of taking office. No attorney general in recent memory has taken more than six months before making an appearance here. Attorney general sessions has broken that norm. He has had more than 10 months to settle in, making our communications with the department between hearings that much more important. I date, my colleagues and sent more than 40 letters to the Trump Administration asking for information necessary to carry out our oversight responsibilities. We have sent more than a dozen of these letters directly to the attorney general. To date, we have not received a single substantive response. We can disagree on matters of ,olicy, mr. Attorney general but you cannot keep us in the dark forever. Reasonablee a request, we expect you to reply in a prompt and responsive manner, and i hope you can explain why your department has chosen to ignore these letters. More importantly, i hope that you will be more forthcoming with your answers, both in your testimony today, and in the weeks to come, and i look forward to your testimony and mr. Chairman, i think you and your back the balance of my time. All other members Opening Statements will be made part of the record. We welcome our distinguished witness. If you will please rise, i will begin by swearing you in. Hand. Raise your right do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god . Thank you. The witness answered in the affirmative. Mr. Jeff sessions was sworn in as the 84th attorney general of the United States on february 9, 2017, from 1996 to his confirmation to lead the department of justice. Mr. Sessions served as the united eight senator for alabama. Served mr. Zens sessions served as the United States attorney for the Southern District of alabama. Alabama attorney general and captain in the United States army reserve. Attorney general sessions is a graduate of Huntington College and the university of alabama law school. Sessions, yourl entire written statements will be entered into the record. We asked you summarize your testimony in five minutes. The Ranking Member took a few more minutes than that. Feel free to do that as well. Veryessions thank you much. Mr. Chairman, it is an honor to be before this thing wished committee, having served 20 years as your counterpart in the Senate Judiciary committee. I must note with regret that your announcement of retirement that our relationship has been good in the past, and i hope it will continue to be good. You have done a fabulous job in leading this committee. On my first day as attorney general, i spoke about the Critical Role we as a department play in maintaining and strengthening the rule of law, which forms the foundation of our liberty, our safety, and our prosperity. In this rule of law, we are blessed beyond all nations. I truly believe that. At this department, we must you always can to ensure that it is. Reserved and advanced such ideals transcend politics. From that day to did a, we at have worked to be faithful to that mission. Let me share things we have done initially. The president set up an order to reduce crime, not to allow crime to continue to increase. Nd we embrace that mission the Violent Crime rate has risen, and the homicide rate has risen by more than 20 in just two years. Years of Violent Crime. After a careful review, we have established a reinvigorated initiative. It has been proven to get results in the first years of implementation and reduce Violent Crime by 4. 1 . Case studies showing reductions in certain areas where it was intensely applied of up to 42 . We are also focusing on criminals with guns. Mr. Chairman, we have seen a 20 increase in gun prosecutions. I am honored to lead the superb men and women of the fbi, the drug, atf, and the united eight marshals service, who Work Together every day with our state and local partners in this crimefighting mission that is a responsibility in the department. Increasestaggering 61 and the number in the number of Law Enforcement officers killed in the line of duty. 150 officers were assaulted every single day. These numbers are on. Fortunately, the president understands this, and has directed us to back our men and women in blue. We are making it clear that we stand with our Law Enforcement partners 100 . They are the solution to crime. We also protected the rule of department. Wn we prohibited socalled thirdparty settlements, being used to bankroll professional interest groups. We have settled civil cases regarding the Affordable Care act, Birth Control mandate that settled the cases of many groups of taxexempt on groups. The status was wrongfully delayed by the Internal Revenue service. We also provided Legal Counsel to this administration in favor of ending several other unlawful policies. This includes President Trumps order ending billions in funding for Insurance Companies that were not appropriated by congress under the Affordable Care act. Lawsuition was filing a against one of the most dramatic erosions of the congressional appropriations power in our history. House members, you are correct to challenge that. You won in the district court. We believed you were correct. We reversed the policy and had that matter withdrawn. We put an end to actions by the Previous Administration to circumvent congresss duly passed immigration laws on the daca. It gave individuals that were here illegally certificates of lawful status, work permits, and the right to participate in social security. Now, the issue is in the hands of congress where it belongs. E have filed briefs lawful redistricting plans, religious liberty, and free speech on college campuses. Mission tot is our restore the American Peoples confidence in the department of justice by defending the rule of law and enforcing the laws as you have passed them. And it is a mission we are honored to undertake in response to letters from this committee and others. I have directed senior federal prosecutors to make recommendations as to whether any matters not currently under investigation should be open, whether any matters currently under investigation require further resources or whether any matters under consideration may merit the appointment of a special counsel. And as you all are aware, the departments general has enacted a review of fbi policies and procedures, which were not followed in a number of matters you addressed. Mr. Chairman, the letter was addressed to you because it was andsponse to your letter, that is how it was sent. We will make such decisions hear me, without regard of politics, ideology, or bias. As many of you know, the department has a longstanding policy not to confirm or deny the existence of investigation. This policy can be frustrating, i understand, especially when there is great Public Interest about a matter, but it enhances we act under the law with professionalism and discipline. This policy necessarily precludes any discussion on cases i may be recused from because to do so would confirm the existence of underlying investigations. To the extent a matter comes to thatttention of my office, may warrant consideration of recusal. I review the issue and solve it with the appropriate ethics officials and make my decision as i promised the Senate Committee when i was confirmed. Lastly, i would like to address the false charges made about my previous testimony. My answers have not changed. I have always told the truth, and i have answered every question as i understood them to the best of my recollection as i will continue to do today. To address recent reports regarding meetings during the campaign attended by papadopoulos and carter page among others. Frankly, i had no recollection of this meeting until i saw these news reports. I do not recall that the march 2016 meeting at the trump hotel that mr. Papadopoulos attended, but i have no clear recollection of the details of what he said at that meeting. After reading his account, and to the best of my recollection, i believe i wanted to make clear to him that he was not authorized to represent the campaign with the russian government or any other Foreign Government for that matter. But i did not recall this event which occurred 18 months before my testimony of a few weeks ago, and i would gladly have reported it had i remembered it, because i pushed back against his mayestion that i thought have been improper. As for mr. Page, while i do not challenge his recollection, i have no memory of his presence at a dinner at the Capitol Hill Club or any passing conversation he may have had with me as he left the dinner. Campaigns,e been in let me just suggest, is that most of you have not participated in a president ial campaign, and none of you in the Trump Campaign, and it was a brilliant campaign, i think, in many ways, but it was a form of chaos every day from day one. We traveled sometimes to several places in one day. Sleep was in short supply. I was a fulltime senator with a very full schedule. I spent close to 20 hours testifying before congress before today. I have been asked to remember details from a year ago, such as who i saw on what day, in what meeting, and who said what, when. And all of my testimony, i can only do my best to answer your questions as i understand them, and to the best of my memory. But i will not accept and reject accusations that i have ever lied. That is a lie. Let me be clear. I have at all times conducted myself honorably and in a manner consistent with the high standards and responsibilities of the office of attorney general, which i revere. I spent 15 years in that department. I have loved that department. I honor that department and will do my best level level best to be worthy of your attorney general. Story hasbefore, my never changed. I have always told the truth. I answered every question to the best of my recollection and will continue to do so today. With that, mr. Chairman, i am honored to take your question. Thank you, general sessions. We will continue with questions. I recognize myself. Under your leadership, the prosecution of firearms offenses have increased over the same period of the previous year. Furthermore, the number of defendants charged with using a ofearm is Violent Crimes Drug Trafficking rose 10 over the previous year. We have a slide which shows the increase as compared to the obama era numbers. What do these increased prosecutions of firearms offenses indicate about the department of justices commitment to fighting Violent Crime, particularly with the use of firearms, in this country. . Chairman, as ar. Formal federal prosecutor who emphasized gun prosecutions, i there is aelieved Significant Impact in reducing Violent Crime. Professors earlier this year explained that they share this view based on scientific analysis. It will be a high priority of hours. You are correct. If prosecutions fell, one incident that was raised during the texas shooting at the church texas,h sutherland in was the ability of an individual to get a firearm and whether or not they filed correctly their form before you get one. A question about criminal convictions and courtmartials. Prosecutions, i noticed, have jumped by over 50 in the last three or four years. I think those were the worthy prosecutions. When a criminal is carrying a gun during a criminal act of some other kind, that is a clear presentent and danger to the public, and those are important and impact reduction of crime. As you are anywhere, i and a majority of the members of this committee have requested a special counsel to investigate her secretary ha Hillary Clinton smith classifying of information with respectynch to former fbi director comeys decision not to prosecute former secretary clinton. I am in receipt of the trentons letter from yesterday stating that senior federal prosecutors will review our letters and make recommendations as to whether any matter is not currently under investigation should be opened, require further resources, or marriage a special counsel. Do i have your assurance these matters will proceed fairly and expeditiously . Mr. Sessions yes, you can, mr. Chairman. You can be sure that they will be done without political influence, they will be done correctly, and properly. Rep. Goodlatte you also reference an ongoing Inspector General investigation into many of the matters we have raised. Will you ensure that the ig briefs this committee if necessary . Mr. Sessions i will do my best to comply with that. The Inspector General is able to announce investigations in a way that we do not on a normal side of the department of justice. I assume you would be able to do that. Rep. Goodlatte over the past year, we have seen numerous apparent disclosures of unmasked names in intelligence reports during which crimes are violated when these unmasked names are disclosed, for example, to the press . How does the department of justice investigate such unauthorized disclosures . Mr. Sessions mr. Chairman, i could implicate a number of legal prohibitions, and it could clearly be a release of classified information contrary to law. It is a very grave offense and certainly goes against a core policy. Government to protect those matters from disclosure. The second part of your question was rep. Goodlatte how the Department Investigates such unauthorized decisions . Mr. Sessions we have members of the committee, about nine open investigations of classified leaks in the last three years. We had 27 investigations opened today. We intend to get to the bottom of these leaks. It has reached epidemic proportions. It cannot be allowed to continue, and we will do our best effort to ensure that it does not continue. Rep. Goodlatte and on april 11, you assured a memorandum issued a memorandum saying they would make prosecution a higher priority. To your knowledge, the number of federal prosecutions increased asionwide for offenses such harboring aliens, improper entry, and illegal reentry . Mr. Sessions i do not have the statistics on that, but i believe there has been some increases in those cases. One thing we have seen is a reduction of attempts to enter the country illegally. That is good news and should result in some decline in some prosecutions. Rep. Goodlatte this committee did a great deal of work to enact legislation last congress. Will you continue to work in good faith for me and the members of the committee on both sides of the aisle to craft responsible reforms . Mr. Sessions i certainly will, mr. Chairman. Rep. Goodlatte thank you, general sessions. I recognize the Ranking Member of the committee, mr. Conyers, for five minutes. Mr. Conyers thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome again mr. Attorney general. I would like to put a few statements by the president on the screen. 2017. Rst from july 24, so why arent the committees and investigators, and of course, our beleaguered attorney general, looking into crooked hillary crimes in russia relations . From november 3, everybody is asking why the Justice Department and the fbi isnt looking at all of the dishonesty going on with crooked hillary and the dems. The third. Also from november 3. Pocahontas just stated that the the legendary by rigged Hillary Clinton, the primaries. Lets go to the fbi and Justice Department. I believe he is referring to senator Elizabeth Warren and that last one. When Richard Nixon spoke about us that way, at least he had the courtesy to do it behind closed doors. Mr. Attorney general, a few questions for you. Yes or no. Democracy in a functioning democracy, is it normal for the leader of a country to order the criminal Justice System to retaliate against his political opponents . Mr. Sessions is that a question . Mr. Conyers yes, that is a question. Mr. Sessions is it proper, is that what youre asking . Mr. Conyers you answer to me whether it is yes or no. Your response . Mr. Sessions i did not quite catch the beginning of the question. Mr. Conyers in a functioning democracy, is it common for the leader of the country to order the criminal Justice System to retaliate against his political opponents . Mr. Sessions mr. Conyers, i would say that the department of totice can never be used retaliate politically against opponents, and that would be wrong. Mr. Conyers i interpret that as no. Mr. Sessions the answer stands for itself. That would make it a little easier if you just responded yes or no, if you can. Here is another. Should the president of the United States make Public Comments that might influence a pending criminal investigation . Takeonyers he should great care and know the issues. Mr. Sessions could you respond yes or no . Mr. Conyers i dont know exactly the facts of what youre raising and what amounts of the concern you have. I would say it is improper to , aluence it would be president cannot improperly influence an investigation. Mr. Conyers ok. Mr. Sessions and i have not been improperly influenced and would not be improperly influenced. The president speaks his mind. He is bold and direct about what he says. Daywe do our duty every based in the laws and facts. Mr. Conyers reclaiming my time, i am not impugning these comments as to what you would do in advance. Last night, sir, the assistant attorney general sent the chairman a letter suggesting that the attorney general is directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate certain like the sale of uranium in 2010. At your confirmation hearing, you said i believe the proper thing for me to do would be to recuse myself from any questions involving those kinds of investigations that involve and that wereton raised during the campaign or to be otherwise connected to it. Now, from a yes or no question. Are you recused from investigations that involve secretary clinton . Mr. Sessions mr. Chairman, i ,annot answer that yes or no because under the policies of the department of justice, to announce recusal in any investigation, would repeal the in the existence of that investigation, and the top ethics officials have advised me i should not do so. The time of the gentleman has expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin for five minutes. Thank you very much, mr. Attorney general. We are debating whether section 702 should be reauthorized. I would like to talk about that issue. Poster that my a Campaign Committee put up by the university of whitewater campus in the 2014 election very a debate by the u. S. Liberty act. It says the government did what government knows what you did last night. The nsa has grabbed your phone calls, facebook polls, and emailed. Sensenbrenner think that is an outrageous violation of your policies. I asked the students to vote for me. It worked. My presented on that campus went up 20 points from the previous election. Now, we are talking about many of the same issues in terms of section 702, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was designed to collect foreign intelligence, not domestic intelligence. In reality, we know that a vast number of Americans Communications are also collected. The committee took a great cap in trying to balance security and privacy last week when we the usa liberty act, which made significant changes to the program. Notably, this legislation specifies two ways a government can query the information under either foreign intelligence or evidence of a crime. The usa liberty act injures the government does not abuse 702 by requiring a warrant to be necessary to access content after querying information for evidence of a crime. Now, attorney general sessions, you have stated that several occasions that you believe that a warrant requirement would hinder the governments ability to stop terrorists, yet this bill already provides the government the move forward foreigna warrant on intelligence in emergency situations. Why cant the usa liberty act be the compromise . Cant we allow the Intelligence Community to stop terrorists while protecting the Constitutional Rights of americans . Mr. Sessions we can. The Constitutional Rights of americans should be protected. Actworked on the patriot when it came up with senator hatch, leahy, and others. You are a champion of Civil Liberties. I would just say that we can do that. The act, as written, as in law today, has been approved by the been found to not be in violation of the law. Is first and foremost. I know the committee has decided to put some additional restrictions on the way the act is conducted. We did not think that was lawfully required. Congress can make its own decisions, and we will continue to be able to share our thoughts about how the legislation should be crafted. Rep. Sensenbrenner mr. Attorney general, the day before the committee marked up this bill, the Justice Department was actively lobbying members of the committee to oppose the measure, stating it would dismantle section seven of two 702. It expires at the end of the year. We have a very short timeline. I want to ask you, whether yes or no, following my friend from us again, do you want to risk the real possibility this program will expire by insisting upon a clean reauthorization without a sunset . Mr. Sessions no, we dont want to commit that risk. Rep. Sensenbrenner will you commit to working with congress and not against us to ensure to rise,ion 702 israel either the way you wanted or the way we want it . I almost said mr. Chairman. I know you held that office. Dispose, tos to give our opinion. I believe the act, as past, that has been reauthorized with an even larger vote last time, is constitutional. , and i amit works worried about additional burdens, particularly a warrant requirement, which could be exceedingly damaging to the effectiveness of the act. Youre willing to talk to about some of the concerns that exist out there. Hopefully, we can work our way and accept the concerns and fix the concerns you have without going too far. Rep. Sensenbrenner with all the respect, there is an emergency exemption in the usa liberty act, which is reported from the committee. That should take care of the problem, and yet, people in your department are saying that this was no good. Offer at face value, if i will let you know hear members of your department actively lobbying to defeat the bill rather than to work something out. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Sessions i know you will let us know, mr. Sensenbrenner. Rep. Goodlatte the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. Thank you. Following up on the questions from mr. Conyers, you said i believe the proper thing for me to do would be to accuse myself. Many questions that involve secretary clinton were to be otherwise connected. You stand by that statement, yes or no . Mr. Sessions yes. Thank you. I want to show you of an image of a committee you chaired with than then candidate donald trump. The charging papers filed by special counsel bob mueller described the meeting. Mr. Papadopoulos told the group he had connections and could help arrange a meeting between donald trump and vladimir putin. Papadopoulos continued to communicate with the government on behalf of the campaign and told officials about it. Here is the problem. On october 18th of this year, you said under oath in front of the Senate Judiciary committee, a continuing exchange between intermediaries did not happen, at least not to my knowledge. You responded i am not aware of anyone else that did. One, they hadhat P Communications with the russians. Two, who seem to have been aware. Theor no, did you chair march 31, 2016 meeting of the National SecurityAdvisory Committee . Mr. Sessions i did chair that meeting. Rep. Nadler is on a, did mr. Papadopoulos mention his outreach to the russian government during that meeting . Mr. Sessions he made some comments to that effect as i remember after having read it in the newspaper. Rep. Nadler i asked you yes or no. I dont have time. There are reports you shut george down on the meeting with putin. Is this correct, yes or no . Mr. Sessions yes, i pushed back. I will say it that way rep. Nadler your answer is yes. So you were obviously concerned by mr. Papadopouloss connections and his possibly arrange a meeting with putin. Yes or no, did anyone else at that meeting including then candidate trump, react in any way to what mr. Papadopoulos had presented . Mr. Sessions i dont recall. Rep. Nadler ok, so your testimony is that neither donald trump nor anyone else at the meeting expressed any interest in meeting the russian president were any concerns about communications between the campaign and the russians . Mr. Sessions i dont recall. Rep. Nadler we know from multiple sources, including the papadopoulos guilty plea, part of the interview with the intelligence committee, and Donald Trumps emails, among others, that contrary to your earlier testimony, there were efforts to communicate with the russians on behalf of trumps campaign. We have established the new about some of these efforts, and they cause do such concern that down. Ut george i want to know what you did with this information. Yes or no, after the meeting, did you take any steps to prevent officials, advisors, or employees from further outreach to the russians . Nadler,sions mr. Let me say it this way. I pushed back. I pushed back. I have to be able to answer. I cannot be able to rep. Nadler i made i only have five minutes. Mr. Sessions i am not going to be able to answer it if i cannot answer completely. Rep. Nadler you said he pushed back. We accept that. After the meeting, did you take any further steps to prevent Trump Campaign officials come advisers, or employees from further outreach to the russians after he pushed back at that meeting . Mr. Sessions you alleged there was some further contacts later. I dont believe i had any knowledge of further contacts, and i was not in radial or contact with mr. Papadopoulos. Rep. Nadler your answer is no . Mr. Sessions i am not aware of it. To askdler i was going you a question of did you raise the issue with various people . But your answer is no. Mr. Sessions to the best of my recollection. Rep. Nadler your testimony is you communicated with no one in the campaign after the meeting because nothing happened. Isr testimony therefore it you committed with nobody in the campaign about this matter after the march 31 meeting. Mr. Sessions i dont recall. Rep. Nadler at some point, you became aware that the fbi was investigating potential links between the Trump Campaign manager russian government. Of theou became aware investigation, did you ever discuss mr. Papadopoulos effort with anybody at the fbi . Mr. Sessions did i discussed the matter with the fbi . Ask them questions about what they may have found . I have not had any discussions with mr. Mueller or his team or the fbi concerning any factors with regards rep. Nadler nobody else at the fbi either . Mr. Sessions no. Rep. Nadler at the department of justice . Mr. Sessions no. Rep. Nadler . At the white house know. Mr. Sessions rep. Nadler any member of congress . Mr. Sessions i dont know if the some stations may have come up at some not to obtain the information. With regard to your blog question, i do not recall at this moment, sitting here, any such discussion. It is important for me to rep. Goodlatte the time with the gentleman has expired. We have a lot of people waiting to ask questions. Mr. Shabbat, five minutes. Thank you. Does your recusal from investigations related to the interference by russian 2016 president ial campaign apply to any investigations regarding efforts by the Democratic National committee and the Clinton Campaign to secretly fund a scoreless and what scu rrilous dossier on President Trump . Anything that arises in this nature that may be or may not be connected to my recusal on the question of the campaign and russia would be discussed between me, the senior ethics advisor, at the department of justice, and that is how i make my decision. That is what i promised to do when i was confirmed before the Senate Judiciary committee, and that is what i will do. I am unable to provide information to you as to what decision would has been made in this matter. Rep. Shabbat mr. Chabot thank you very much. Im not and never was a prosecutor but did criminal defense work back in the day when i practiced law for almost 20 years. It seems to me that a president ial campaign using a law firm as a conduit to pay for activities with which the campaign itself doesnt want to be directly associated is more than just dirty politics, its also quite possibly illegal. To me it seems that this is at least a violation of Campaign Finance laws for failure to accurately disclose the actual recipients of campaign disbursements. However, this type of arrangement is not illegal if its not illegal under current law, i fear were risking opening pandoras box with all sorts of underhanded activities by campaigns being laundered through law firms and shielded under attorneyclient privilege. As the chief Law Enforcement official in this country, do you share a similar concern . In your opinion, is it legal under current law for a president ial campaign to hide its funding of the compilation and dissemination of political dirt on its opponent by using a law firm to directly pay for the work . Mr. Sessions i would think that those matters are worthy of consideration. You but as to the details of them and me express a comment today im unable to do so. Mr. Chabot thank you. Let me shift to something different. Federal law currently still cites marijuana as a dangerous drug, still illegal under federal law, yet a number of states have for both medical purposes, now even for recreational purposes, have basically made it legal. What is your departments policy on that relative to enforcing the law . Mr. Sessions our policy is that the same, really, fundamentally, as the holder policy. Which is that the federal law remains in effect and a state can legalize marijuana for its Law Enforcement purposes, but it still remains illegal with regard to federal purposes. Mr. Chabot it seems to me theres always been a tremendous amount of gray area in that whole field which i think as a nation we need to look much more closely at, both from the states point of view and the federal Government Point of view. Thats just my feeling on that. Running out of time. I have four other things. Let me go to one final thing here. I have been very involved in the area of victims rights. I was the following henry hydes leadership on this introduced the victims rights constitutional amendment years back. Various pieces of legislation on victims rights. And i have also worked closely with the parents of murdered children. And when you talk about something that affects ones family, there is nothing that affects a family more adversely than Something Like that happening. We still have Capital Punishment on the books, both at the federal level and many of our states. Yet these families are dragged left and right up, up and down, back and forth into hearing after hearing. Cases can drag on for more than 20 years before the imposition of Capital Punishment actually occurs. In many instances it never does. While these people are behind bars, oftentimes they attack, sometimes kill guards, attack, sometimes kill other inmates. I would be interested to see what is your intentions relative to Capital Punishment if in country . Mr. Sessions let me state Capital Punishment, federal government has Capital Punishment for a number of offenses. We have within the department a recommendation process through appointed committee to seek or not to seek a Death Penalty when a case is charged. Sometimes its a complex thing. But i believe the Death Penalty, the federal Death Penalty, is a part of our law. I think its a legitimate penalty. Its constitutional. And we will do our duty even if those circumstances that require the imposition of the Death Penalty. Mr. Chabot thank you very much. My time expired. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, mrs. Lofgren, for five minutes. Ms. Lofgren thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Attorney general, for being who are today. Former National Security advisor Michael Flynn is under investigation because of his work and ties to Foreign Governments. According to various reports, much of his work with these Foreign Governments went unreported when mr. Flynn was required to make certain disclosures by law. As chairman of the Trump Campaign, National SecurityAdvisor Committee and lead advisor on the trump Transition Team, i think you worked closely with mr. Flynn. Id like you to answer a few yes or no questions about mr. Flynn. Knowing that mr. Flynn is under investigation, im going to stick to subject matter that predates both the special counsel investigation and your appointment as attorney general. The Foreign Policy platform at the Republican National convention undertook dramatic changes. Did you discuss changes to the republican Foreign Policy platform with mr. Flynn at any point during the campaign . Mr. Sessions i dont recall it. I was not at the convention when the Platform Committee met. Ms. Lofgren you were the lead of the campaign, but you dont recall discussing it with him . Mr. Sessions that may be a bit of a stretch. I was asked to lead, inform, and find some people who would join and meet with mr. Trump to give him advice and support regarding Foreign Policy. And i did so. Although we were not a very effective group, really. Ms. Lofgren you met with ambassador kislyak in november of 2016. Did you discuss your meetings kislyak with mr. Flynn . Mr. Sessions did i discuss mr. Flynn with him . Ms. Lofgren did you discuss your meeting with the ambassador with mr. Flynn . Mr. Sessions i met, i think, some 25 ambassadors that year. I did meet once in my office with mr. Kislyak, and do i not recall and dont believe i communicated any of that information to mr. Flynn. Ms. Lofgren are you aware of any meetings between the ambassador and mr. Flynn that might have occurred around the time of your meeting with the ambassador . Mr. Session i do not. Ms. Lofgren former acting attorney general sally yates testified one week into the Trump Administration she notified the administration that mr. Flynn had lied to Vice President pence about discussing sanctions with the ambassador. As part of the Transition Team and the president s pick for attorney general, in january, were you notified when the administration was notified of mr. Flynns lie and his susceptibility to russian blackmail . Mr. Sessions i dont believe so. Ms. Lofgren we now know that you were aware of the efforts of carter page and George Papadopoulos to meet and establish communications with the russian government. Did you at any mr. Session not necessarily so at least from what mr. Carter page says. I dont recall that. Ms. Lofgren all right. Did you at any point discuss with Michael Flynn the possibility of then candidate trump or his surrogates meeting with the russian government . Mr. Sessions i do not recall such a conversation. Ms. Lofgren did you know that flynn was working for the turkish government while acting as a surrogate for the Trump Campaign . Mr. Sessions i dont believe i had the information to that effect. Ms. Lofgren did you know he was working for the turkish government at any point after the election . Mr. Session i dont believe so. Ms. Lofgren were you or anyone on the Trump Campaign aware of mr. Flynns efforts to extradite turkish cleric gulan . Mr. Sessions i read that in the paper recently. But i dont recall ever being made aware of that before this recent release. Ms. Lofgren you read about it in the newspaper afterwards. After the inauguration, you did not know that the fbi was requested to conduct a new review of turkish 2016 extradition requests for mr. Gulan . Did you know about that . Mr. Sessions im aware that the turkish government continued to press the federal government with regard to seeking the return of mr. Gulan to turkey. Ms. Lofgren did you know mr. Sessions my department had a role to play in that although i am not at liberty to discuss the details. Ms. Lofgren did you know the turkish government allegedly offered 15 million for mr. Flynn to kidnap mr. Gulan . Mr. Sessions absolutely not. You mean it no. Ms. Lofgren on the time of the gentlewoman has expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa, mr. King, for five minutes. Mr. King thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, general sessions, for your testimony today and service to the country over the years you have been front and center. A number of things i wanted to discuss. One of them is the daca situation. And it seems as i recall made a Public Statement some time back about the constitutionality of the policy that was implemented by president obama. Would you care to reiterate that position today . Mr. Sessions well, the president , president obama, indicated multiple times that he felt that daca, he didnt have the power to do daca in the way it was done. And eventually they must have changed their mind and executed this policy to make persons in take persons who were in the country unlawfully and give them lawful status, work permits, and even participation in social security. I felt for some time that was not proper. A Federal District court in texas so held. And the fifth Circuit Court of appeals also so held that it was unlawful. So, what happened was we worked on the research but the department of Homeland Security withdrew the policy because it was not defensible, in my view. Mr. King and established a date to close it down of march 5 of next year . Mr. Sessions thats right. The Homeland Security asked for time to wind this program down. And i thought that was appropriate. Mr. King theres a lot of public dialogue about what kind of legislation might be passed in conjunction with the daca policy. Thats up in the air right now. Im noticing the democrats are saying were going to have everything we want on daca or well shut the government down. It causes me to think about what should happen if Congress Reaches an impasse and there is no passage of any legislation to extend the daca policy. If the president should decide to honor on or before that march 5 date that he wants to extend the policy, what would your position be . Mr. Sessions thats hypothetical, i dont think i should speculate on that. I do think congress will have to give it thought. We have a law now. Its in place. Congress passed. And congress would have to change it. Mr. King i would just remark that im watching a lot of people be rewarded for violation of the rule of law. I appreciate your emphasis on the rule of law in your testimony today. Multiple times coming back to that point. We are acting judges. Hasuld say on the backlog gone up dramatically. Its now over 600,000. The last two or three months were almost not at into the backlog. I am told by the additional work we are doomed by january we will not be adding to the backlog but hopefully reducing it. That would be a real change in the trends we were hitting on. Reflect the potential of a special counsel to broaden this look that i think is forced upon us in a reluctant way but i certainly support the special counsel. Look back at some time to that i believe should be incorporated into this and that is i look back at october 16 2015 when barack obama was speaking on Hillary Clinton and whether she might have violated any security clauses in the statute. When he said he had no impression that mrs. Clinton had to excuse anyried information made the point of intent behind that in april a similar statement she would never put america in any kind of jeopardy. Those words is intent caught my intention when i heard james comey used that word in july 5. It seems he lashed onto the statements made by president obama and more or less implied and interpretation of the statute as if it were a for any prosecution of violation of 793. Chair recognized the gentleman from texas. Most jackson lee for five minutes. Do you believe in this book the constitution of the United States. And will book the constitution of the United States. Abide by it with all of your intentions. I took the liberty of reviewing federal crimes against children. Kaufman, Beverly Young nelson have accused this individual judge more who is running for a federal office the of childates Senate Sexual activity. I have no reason to doubt these young women. If you believe these young women do you believe judge moore should be seated in the senate and would you introduce investigations by the doj regarding his actions. We will evaluate every case. As to whether or not it should be investigated this kind of case would normally be a state case. Say the ethics people at the department of justice advised me that the attorney general should not be involved. N this campaign thank you. I have friends in the campaign. I want to make sure that if he comes to the United States senate that there would be the of referring his case for a least a federal review by the department of justice. Let me also refer you back to the meeting on march 31, 2016 with mr. Papadopoulos. You know that he even addition to his comments in the meeting regarding the meeting between trump and mr. Putin had a series , imeetings dealing with cannot imagine your memory would fail you so much. Whoalso had Stephen Miller was noted in the stipulated statement of offense to receive conversations from mr. Papadopoulos about his constant interaction with the russians to intrude in the 2016 election. You continued in the october 18 to not answer the question. Now in light of the facts that are part of the record to you wish to change your testimony before the Senate Intelligence committee on june 13th where you said i have never met with or had a conversation with any russians or any foreign officials. Knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected to the Trump Campaign. Oathu want to admit under that you did not tell the truth or misrepresented or do you want to correct your testimony right now . Youre referring to my testimony before the Senate Intelligence committee. I dont think i am able to respond because i dont understand. Wrecks you had no knowledge or involvement of the trump individuals regarding the campaign. Supported mr. Trumps press conference where he said russia, i hope you will be able to find the 30,000 emails. Change yourto testimony where you said i have no knowledge of any such conversations regarding russians involved in the campaign. On june a testimonial 13. I am not able to understand. Let me move to a document. Timement i should be given ea and i do not have extra time. Does he want to change his testimony in the intelligence committee. I stand by this testimony of the intelligence committee. I have never met with or had any conversation with any russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with the campaign for election in the United States and i have no knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected to the Trump Campaign. Thank you very much for that. Explained that when i was asked in october just a few did iago about the matter have any knowledge of anyone who with the russians i had indicated that i had not recalled that meeting. When that occurred. With the russians i i would have been pleased to have responded and explained it if i had recalled it. I have tried to be honest about that and give you my best response. And did throughout all the testimony given. You stand by it is money. Are you familiar with the names eric garner, walter scott, tamir rice . Is as i hold of the poster, black identity extremists. Yous interesting to me that are opposing individuals who are proposing lethal force similar to the attack on reverend dr. Martin luther king on tell pro but there seems to be nothing with the ticket torch parade in charlottesville. Why is there an attack on black activists versus any reports dealing with the all right and white nationalists . Can you answer that question quickly . Is anyone investigating that . When was that report completed . I in august 2017. Not studied that report. It is an attack on individuals who are trying to petition the government in the redress of grievances. We have found mandatory minimums and over incarceration has been the history of criminal justice. Going to make America Great for waste taxpayer dollars. Do you have any interest in recognizing that mandatory minimums correct the opportunities for over incarceration rather than telling prosecutors to prosecute on every single crime . Is there any opportunity to work with your office to find progressive ways of dealing with criminal Justice Reform at this time . Yes or no . Senator durbin and i worked together to reduce the crack cocaine penalties some years ago. Gentleman f the gentlewoman has expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from california for five minutes. Its good to see you again. Russian and i dont meet with russians and i dont really want to ask about those questions today but i do have very important questions. I bet you have met with some russians in your lifetime. Is there any opportunity to work withtaking those words at face e someone might accuse you of not being honest. Thats what theyve done to me. Recks you are absolutely right that is the challenge. I meet with lots of ambassadors and i dont want to try to remember everything that was discussed and what i thought was a meeting. There are a couple areas left over from Previous Administrations i would like to talk about. We sent Loretta Lynch a letter and theto sober homes predicament is fairly straightforward. To be honest was not satisfactory and we have given your staff copy of it. Homesially sober living are required to provide no care whatsoever to the alcoholic or recovering drug abuser because that has to be done somewhere else so they dont qualify as sober homes and yet currently there is in the ninth Circuit Decision that have caused cities to be unable to regulate them in a way that would prevent people in asimply buying houses very prestigious neighborhood and turning them into these Sober Living Homes which are boarding houses with 15 or more people. Will you agree to work with us to try to find an appropriate way to align your enforcement of the americans with disability act and the Fair Housing Act for cities tosity be able to essentially regulate how many people live in a home . Yes. I would be pleased to do that. These are important issues because a lot of money is being spent and some of it not wisely in these areas. A lot of it is federal dollars being squandered to the benefit of people that are speculating. In a Trial Court Ruling in the nursery versus army corps of engineers case are you familiar with this case . I am not. During your administration and assistant u. S. Attorney on your behalf argued that the waters of the u. S. Which is not a valid regulations delivered to congress and eligible under cra to be considered or reject to continue to argue that that was long. Would you agree that your attorneys on your behalf should not argue regulations which have not been delivered to congress and as a result are not eligible for cra review . Cracks i now recall the case. That matter was intensely reviewed by the new assistant acting for thel environment and natural after greatvision consideration we felt it was a device to me and i approved Going Forward with that position in court so i will take responsibility for it but i got to tell you we did look at it very hard. In general you agree that if a regulation is created or some other word to the executive branch they dont have the weight of law unless they are delivered to congress so we have an opportunity to review them under the congressional review act. That would sound correct. My last question is less of a softball. In a Previous Congress the ways and Means Committee of the United States house voted for and referred criminal charges against lois lerner. I also was involved in investigating her wrongful activity. Criminal charges and they did so under a statute that says and i will paraphrase as well as iit, that the u. S. Ar the district of columbias shout present to the grand jury the following and they laid out from a charges. The previous attorney general ordered the u. S. Attorney made a decision not to enforce that. The statute as we understand it is not a statute that says you will look at this and decide independently. It says it shall be presented to the grand jury. Will you commit to review that and if you agree with us as to what the statute says, and we think it is plain english, order a u. S. Attorney to present to a grand jury, and if they know bill it, fine, but present it consistent with statutory law . I will review that more personally, but the department of justices view is that it takes a full vote of the house to accomplish that act. Im not sure where that leaves us, but i will give it a personal review. If you can stop the clock for one second, mr. Chairman. If the entire house voted the time of the gentle and has expired. The chair recognizes the gentle man from tennessee. I noted you went to the 50th anniversary of the selma, alabama march. Your sponsor for the gold medal for the folks that marched. I would like to ask you, what have you done as attorney general to see to it that africanamericans and others who have been discriminated for years in voting have more access to the ballot box . We will resolutely defend the right of all americans to vote, including our africanamerican brothers and sisters. You cannot ever be suggested that people are blocked from voting and we have done a number of things in the department of justice let me ask you this. There have been studies that show that the voter id is more discriminatory in its effect on africanamericans and latinos than anything else. Will you stop defending voter id law cases . No. The Supreme Court has approved the voter id. Other courts have. It can be done in a discriminatory way, which is not proper and should not be approved. I believe it is settled law that a properly handled and written voter id law is lawful. With all due respect, we come from a similar region. I think we have a greater responsibility than anybody else in this country to see to it that africanamericans get a chance at the ballot when they were discriminated against, they were slaves for 200 plus years, they were not allowed to vote and they are still being discriminated against and i would ask you to look at voter id laws, access to ballot, election day voting number of indices. Other on marijuana you said you are basically doing the same as older and lynch. I believe general holder and general lynch abided by congressional appropriations that limited the Justice Department in enforcing marijuana laws where states passed laws on medical marijuana and others. Will you abide by congressional appropriations limitations on marijuana when it conflicts with state laws . I believe we are bound by that. That is great. What you did on crack cocaine was good. Your proposal was a 20 to one ratio. You decided on 18 to one. Mr. Durbin took what he could get. It should have been one to one. You admitted in that hearing it could discriminate against the disparity against africanamericans and minorities. I would say the effect of that legislation was to reduce the penalty one is subjected to for dealing with crack cocaine. Analysis the 18 to one of whatever it is. Generally considered a more dangerous drug. Marijuana is not as dangerous as heroin. I think that is correct. I would hope that in your enforcement that you would look at the limitations youve got to read theres always an opportunity cost. Your enforcement on crack, opioids and heroin. Marijuana is the least bother some of all. 29 states in the district of columbia have legalized it for medical purposes. Eight states and the district of columbia for recreational purposes. States brandeis said the are the laboratories of democracy. I would hope you would look at the states as laboratories of democracy and see how they have helped. In states where theyve got medical marijuana, they have 25 less opioid use. It gives people a way to relieve pain without using opioids which inevitably leads to death and crime. So i would hope you take a look at that. We will be looking at some rigorous analysis of the marijuana usage and how it plays out. Im not as optimistic as you. You said one time that good people dont smoke marijuana. Which of these people would you say are not good people . Let me explain how that occurred. George pataki, rick santorum, ted cruz, george bush, arnold schwarzenegger, judge clarence thomas, which of those are not good people . Let me tell you how that came about. What do you dos, about drug use. The epidemic we are seeing in the country and how you reverse it. Part of that is a cultural thing. I explained how when i became 1981, states attorney in and drugs were being used widely over a period of years it became unfashionable, unpopular, and people were it was seen as such that good people do not use marijuana. That was the context of that statement. One last question. Alabama or auburn . Time has expired. [laughter] mr. Attorney general, did the fbi pay Christopher Steel . Dossier. R of the those are matters you have to direct to maybe the special counsel. Im not able to reveal investigatory matters under the investigation of anybody. This happened in the summer of 2016. The democrat National Committee paid through a law firm to produce the dossier. We know the offer was Christopher Steel. He was on the payroll of the fbi. I want to know if in fact that was the case. Im not able to provide an answer to you. Did the fbi provide the dossier to the fisa court . Im not able to answer that. Dido you know if the fbi the established process protocol in evaluating claims in the dossier . Im not able to answer that. 6, james comey briefed president elect trump in new york about the dossier. Shortly thereafter, the fact that that meeting took place and the subject of the meeting was cnn. Ossier was leaked to do you know who leaked that information . Are you investigating soulik that information . Who leaked that information . A number of investigations going on regarding leaks. Is that likely one of those you are investigating . Im not able to reveal the existence of investigations are not. I appreciate your service in the senate, your service as the Justice Department. Frankly, i appreciate yesterdays letter saying you were considering appointing a special counsel. My concern is, we sent you a letter 3. 5 months ago asking for a Second Special counsel and if you are now just considering it what is it going to take . Former fbi director james comey misled the American People in the summer of 2016 when he called the clinton investigation a matter. Fbi director comey was drafting and exoneration letter before the best edition was complete. , five days before secretary clinton was scheduled to be interviewed by the fbi, that with bill clinton in phoenix. We know after that meeting, when she was corresponding with Public Relations people at the Justice Department, she was using the name elizabeth carlyle. It seems to me if we were just talking golf and grandkids you could probably use your real name. Publicized theey investigation and we know he made the final decision on whether to prosecute or not. Fired, hehen he gets leaks a government document through a friend to the New York Times and what was his goal . To create momentum for special counsel. Its got to be bob mueller come his best friend, his mentor. The same bob mueller involved in this whole investigation with the informant regarding russian businesses wanting to do business in the iranian business in the United States regarding. He iranian one deal my question is what is it going to take, if all of that, not to mention dossier information, what is it going to take to get a special counsel . A factual basis that meets a standard of is that analysis going on now . It is in the manual of the department of justice for whats required. Weve only had two. Senatoras danforth took over that investigation as special counsel. And mr. Mueller. Each of those are special factual situations. We will use the proper standards and thats the only thing i can tell you mr. Jordan. You can have your idea but sometimes we have to study what the facts are and evaluate whether it meets the standard. We know the Clinton Campaign, the democrat National Committee, paid for through the law firm, the dossier. It looks like the fbi was paying the author of that document. It sure looks like a Major Political party was working with the federal government to turn an Opposition Research document into an intelligence document, take that defies a court so they could get a warrant to spy on Americans Associated with President Trumps campaign. A secondhat warrant special counsel . 20 members of this committee wrote you come asking you to do. Mr. Comey is no longer the director of the fbi. We have an excellent man of integrity and ability in chris wray and i think he will do an outstanding job. He is not here today. I would say looks like is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel. Chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. Johnson. Remarkable and a notable career over the last 42 years as an attorney and private practice as the attorney general of alabama, the u. S. Attorney in alabama, later, the u. S. Senator of alabama, and now the attorney general of the United States of america. You have made a professional judgment call when you recused yourself from the investigation of the russian interference in the 2016 elections. You caught a lot of flack for that decision. Why did you recused yourself . Thank you very much. I told the Senate Judiciary committee when i was confirmed that i would evaluate those matters. I would seek the counsel of the senior ethics advisor. My question is, why did you recused yourself why did you recuse yourself . They showed me something i was not familiar with. Code of federal regulations. Its as if you participate in a substantial role in a campaign, a department of justice employee should not participate in investigating that campaign. I felt that was correct. It was not because i had any concern about anything i had done previously. To me, if i were not bound by that i dont see how other people in the department of justice could be expected to follow the rules of the department either. Thank you, sir. After youve recused yourself you did participate in the firing of the fbi director who was leading the investigation into the russian interference with the 2016 elections. Prior to jim comeys termination, were you contacted by the donald Trump Administration, anyone in that administration, donald trump himself or any of his political aboutpaign officials, their quest to fire jim comey . Reveal conversations with the president of the United States or his top advisers. At tth regards to the proposed acquisition of time warner, which owns cnn, it verticalo be a merger, much like the comcast, nbc, universal merger doj approved. Unlike its treatment of comcast nbc universal, doj has suggested strongly that it will not time warnerat t merger unless time warner sells , turners Parent Company broadcasting. It is wellknown that your boss, President Trump, has disdain for. Nn, which he calls, fake news has the white house or any individual in or on behalf of the Trump Administration, or the trump Political Team or campaign , excluding staff from fcc or you,has anybody contacted your office or your assigns regarding that at t time Warner Acquisition . First i would say that i dont accept and cannot accept the accuracy of that news report. We have toldur department has not time warner that they must shed turner broadcasting . Is that a false report or a true report . I would tell you i dont think im able to accept as accurate a news report on october 18 when testifying before the Senate Judiciary asked you ifnator the department had taken adequate action to prevent election meddling in the future. You stated there was no review underway of the Cyber Security vulnerabilities. Have you requested a review of what laws need to be updated in order to protect elections from foreign influence . We have discussed of those matters. No completion has been done. Are you conducting a review at this time . Our team is looking at that. The fbi has real skills in that area. I think we are not anywhere near where i would like us to be yet. What individual with your department is leading that inquiry . With ourl be working Voting Rights section, criminal section, National Security section, probably is the most knowledgeable in hacking areas as well as the expertise in the fbi. The general ands time has expired. The gentlemans time has expired. Mr. Attorney general, i want to thank you for your efforts to restore the rule of law. Nothing could be more important to our Justice System and nothing could be more important to protecting the lives of americans. Keeping all americans safe. Many of us appreciate your efforts to crack down on sanctuary cities that ignore federal immigration laws to combat criminal gangs that prey on our communities, to return to robust prosecutions of drug cases, to protect children from dangerous child predators and safeguard religious liberties enshrined in our constitution. Id like to go back to sanctuary cities. Ive been waiting 20 years for a president and administration that would enforce current immigration laws. I introduced a bill in 1996 with senator alsons and how simpson that outlawed sanctuary cities. Being to thank you for willing to enforce that law which will protect americans from harm. I would like to ask you if you feel there are any immigration which ones, so, that need to be better enforced. Theyre absolutely are. Maybe even some improved. I know you have worked on that and the chairman has worked on that with excellent legislation. I believe in professional. Egislation we have to deal with numbers. When you create a mechanism by people ine had 5000 2005 who claimed a credible fear. Last year, it was 95,000. This is creating hearings and backlogs that were never intended to be part of the system. There thatngs out burden our Law Enforcement officers, make it more difficult, more expensive, more lengthy to complete these things. Weve just got to make up our mind. , doot to make up our mind we want a lawful system of immigration that serves the national interest, or do we want open borders and we are not going to enforce it. Thank you for your leadership, mr. Smith. I know you will be leaving this body also, and i have enjoyed the honor of working with you. Thank you mr. Attorney general. Im not going to ask any questions and i and with that. I yield back. We will take a break, attorney general sessions. The committee will stand in recess for 10 minutes. Thank you