Heres a portion of his confirmation hearing from january. The attorney general of the United States is of course, the nations chief Law Enforcement officer. He or she is not the president s theer, no rr is he president s wingmen, as the attorney general described himself. Rather, he or she has an independent obligation to the constitution and to the American People. I know you care deeply about this foundational principle. So, i am going to ask you a question. I have heard you ask other nominees for attorney general. Occasionally he will be called upon to offer an opinion to the president who appointed you. You will have to tell him, yes or no. And sometimes, president s dont like to be told no. So, i would like to know, will you be able to stand up and say no to the president of the United States if in your judgment, the law and your duty demands it . I ask that because i know you work very hard for the president elect. Mr. Chairman, i understand the importance of your question. I understand the responsibility of the attorney general and i will do so. We simply have to help the president do things that he might desire in a lawful way and have to be able to say no, both for the country, the legal system, and the president to avoid situations that are not acceptable. I understand that duty. I have observed it through my years here and i will fulfill that responsibility. So my colleagues dont think i am taking advantage of the time, somebody should start the clock. Ok. Working. Isnt i can read it now. Working. You told him so and he intends to pursue that course of action anyway. What are your options at that point . Mr. Chairman, i think the attorney general should first work with the president , i would hope that attorney general would have the confidence of the president and avoid situations that would be unacceptable. I do believe that if the attorney general is asked to do something that is plainly unlawful, you he or she cannot participate in that and that person would have to resign before agreeing to execute a policy that the attorney general believes would be unlawful or unconstitutional. Chairman, there are areas i think are clear and right. There are areas that might be gray. There are areas that are on acceptable and a good attorney general needs to know where those lines are to help the president where possible and to resist in proper, unacceptable actions. Mr. Chairman you served in this department for 14 or 15 years. You served as your states attorney general and you served on this committee for a long time. We have oversight over the department that you might have. You have done that all for 20 years. I have had my share of disagreements with the departments leadership over the last few years. Some of those were purely policy disagreements, but some issues were especially troubling to me the department failed to perform fundamental functions to enforce the law. As attorney general, day in and day out, you will be faced with difficult and sometimes thorny legal problems. What will your approach be to ensuring the department enforces the law and more broadly, what is your vision for the department . Jeff sessions mr. Chairman, the ultimate responsibility of the attorney general and the department of justice is to by thisthe laws passed congress and to follow the constitution in that process and carry its principles out. So, you can be sure i understand that. We may have disagreements about whether a law should be passed, but once passed, i will do my dead level best to ensure it is properly and fairly enforced. I do believe we have a crime problem. I wont perhaps go into that unless you want me to. I will describe what we could do to address that. There are other challenges this country faces. I would be pleased to recognize the influence of the legislative branch and to welcome the insides you might have the insights you might have. Mr. Chairman that is a very important issue with me and every collie care. Let me emphasize by saying, is it fair to say then, with regards to what your position might have been as a legislator, your approach will be intto and forth a lot regardless of policy differences . Jeff sessions absolutely, mr. Chairman. I dont think i have any hesitation to separate the roles that i have had. Executive, from the legislative branch to the executive branch is a transfer of not only position, but the way you approach issues. I would be an executive function, an enforcement function of the laws this great legislative body might pass. Mr. Chairman as you know, the department of justice has at its heart, the career prosecutor and the attorney core. The conservative bloggers are already circulating names of career attorneys and the department, who they say should be demoted or reassigned because of positions they argued under attorney general holder and attorney general lynch. One commentator for the Heritage Foundation has made the comparison to self within the department of justice and said you need to run rivers through the department and wash out the agency from top to bottom, and you yourself have criticized Department Attorneys for being secular. Now that was as recently as november. Now in rhode island, we have a long tradition back to Roger Williams of separating church and state, and as an attorney general and u. S. Attorney, we also have a tradition of allowing career attorneys to follow the policy dictates of other administrations and not holding the career people responsible for that. I am wondering how you will react to this. Do you have a problem with career attorneys . If their private religious beliefs are secular ones . And will you support the career attorneys against the pressure from these rightwing organizations seeking to wash them out like filth, to paraphrase the Heritage Foundation. Jeff sessions the department of justice is composed primarily of career professionals, as you know senator whitehouse, you served there ably, and i give them the highest respect. Most of those attorneys reach high standards and they are willing to follow lawful orders and directions from their superiors, even if they might have a different philosophy. I do think it it is often that they are put into noncareer spots. You can go back to career spots, but i dont know how exactly networks. So, you would normally expect, and i am sure the Obama Administration made changes in the leadership of the department. They put career people in positions they thought would be most advantageous for them to advance the causes they believed in, and that is sort of within the rules of the game, but to target people and demean them if they are fine public servants, and they were following the law, and carrying out the legitimate policy of their supervisors would be wrong, and we should respect them. Does a secular attorney have anything to fear from attorney general sessions in the department of justice . Jeff sessions well, no. And i use that word at the 90,000 foot level. A little concern i have that we as a nation are reaching a level in which truth is not sufficiently respected, that the very ideal, the idea of truth is not believed to be real, and that all of life is just a matter of your perspective and my perspective, which i think is contrary to the american heritage. Lets just say, we are not a theocracy. Nobody should be required to believe anything. I share Thomas Jeffersons words on the memorial over here. I swear hostility over any domination of the mind of man and i think we should respect peoples views and not demand any kind of religious test for holding office. And a secular person has dust a good a claim to understanding the truth as a person who is not religious . Jeff sessions well, i am not sure. In what method . An attorney would bring to bear Jeff Sessions let me just say, we are going to treat anybody with different fairly and objectively, and the ideal of truth and trying to achieve the right solution to me is an important goal of the american jurisprudential system, actually our legislative system. What is the right thing . What is the truth . And lets act on it and do the right thing. A little over a month after winning the president ial election, donald trump chose Rex Tillerson for secretary of state. He was confirmed by the senate 5643 on february 1. Mr. Tillerson spent his entire professional career at exxon mobil, starting at the company in 1975 as a Production Engineer and rising through the ranks to eventually become chairman and ceo. Here is a portion of his confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign relations committee. I have found the russians to be very strategic in their thinking, very tactical, and they generally have a very clear plan that they have laid before them. In terms of when i make the statement they are not unpredictable if one is able to step back and understand what their longterm motivation is, and you see they are going to chart a course, then it is an understanding of how are they likely to carry that plan out, and where are all the elements of that plan that are on the table . In my view, the leadership of russia has a plan. It is a geographic plan that is in front of them, and they are taking actions to implement that plan. They are judging responses and then making the next step in the plan based on the response in that regard. They are not unpredictable. If russia does not receive an adequate response to an action, they will execute the next step of the plan. Give me more specifics. Summarize that plan you see they have. Well, russia, more than anything wants to reestablish its role in the global world order. They have a view that following the breakup of the soviet union they were mistreated in some respects in the transition period. They believe they deserve a rightful role in the global world order because they are a nuclear power. And they are searching as how to establish that, and for most of the past 20 plus years since the demise of the soviet union, they were not in a position to assert that. They have spent all of these years developing the capability to do that, and i think that is now what we are witnessing, an assertion on their part in order to force a conversation about what is russias role in the global world order, and some of the steps being taking are simply to make that point. That russia is here, russian matters, and we are a force to be dealt with, and that is a fairly predictable course of action they are taking. I think the important conversation we have to have with them is, does russia want to now and forever be an adversary of the United States . Do you want this to get worse, or does russia desire a different relationship . We are not likely to ever be friends. I think as others have noted, our values systems are starkly different and we do not hold the same values, but i also know the russian people because of having spent so many years in russia. There is scope to define a different relationship that can bring down the temperature around the conflicts we have today. I think as secretary gates as the secretary alluded to, both in their opening remarks, dialogue is critical so these things do not spin out of control. We need to move russia from being an adversary always to a partner at times, and on other issues, we will be adversaries. It is not unlike my comments on china. At times china is friendly, and at times an adversary, but with russia, engagement is necessary in order to define what is that relationship going to be, and then we will know how to chart our own plan of action to respond to that. In my mind, if i take a look at the spectrum of americas relationship to different nations, you have friends and allies, friendly rivals, unfriendly adversaries, enemies, and right now you are basically putting russia in the unfriendly adversary category . Rex tillerson well, unfriendly to enemies. I think at this point, they are clearly in the unfriendly adversary category. I hope they do not move to enemy, because that would imply even more direct conflict with one another. You do not hold out much help much hope that we can move them into the friendly rival category . Maybe partners where we have mutual interests . Rex tillerson senator, i tend to think in three categories. They are our friends, our partners, and adversaries. At times, certainly our friends are partners from time to time on specific actions. Our adversaries from time to time can be partners, but on other issues, we are not going to agree, so we remain adversaries. An adversary at the ideological level is one thing. An adversary at the direct conflict level, that is very different. I want to switch subjects are little bit. I agree with former senator nunn when he said your experience, your private sector accent and your relationship with putin is an asset coming into this position. I come from the private sector. I think that perspective is sorely needed. I dont think we have enough people from the private sector. I think economic strength is inextricably linked to national strength. Your background traveling the world, i know i asked you when we met, i dont know if you did calculations. How many Different Countries have you traveled to . Rex tillerson i have never actually counted them up. I would say somewhere between 40 and 50. I have never counted them. How many countries have you done deals with . Where did you dealt with top leadership . Rex tillerson i have never counted in those, but it is certainly probably between 10 and 20, where i was directly engaged in a significant way. Let me ask you as someone from the private sector, being asked to serve your nation, i understand you will be going through a process like this, understanding all the disclosure, leaving the life behind that im sure you value. What was your greatest reservations saying yes . Rex tillerson senator, when i went through all the analysis, all the reasons i had for saying no, which is your question, for all selfish reasons. So, i had no reason to say no. You obviously had a responsibility as a ceo of exxon mobil, a fiduciary responsibility. Your role is going to change. Do you have any reservation come describe whatu your mindset is from making that transition . Rex tillerson senator, i have no reservations about my clean break with my private sector life. It was a wonderful 41 andahalf year career. I am extraordinarily proud of it. I learned an awful lot, but now i am moving to a completely different responsibility. My love of country and my patriotism is going to dictate that i serve no ones interests but that of the American People in advancing our own National Security. As you have traveled the world with the business mindset, working at developing projects around the world, obviously you are hearing from people around the world. Former president carter in june of 2015 was commenting on president obamas foreign policy. And here are some excerpts from his quotes. He said he cant think of many nations in the world where we have a better relationship than when he took over, president obama. The United States influence and prestige is probably lower than it was six or seven years ago. Is that your sense as you travel around the world in the last eight years during this administration, that our power, influence, prestige, respect is lower, that we have not developed better relationships around the world . Rex tillerson senator, i dont know if i shared it with you in the meeting we had. I know i shared it with others in meetings. In many respects, i spent the last 10 years on an unintended listening tour as i traveled about the world conducting affairs and engaging with top leadership, heads of state in many of these countries, and i have had the opportunity to listen to them express their frustrations, their fears, the concerns as to the withdrawal and the stepping back of americas leadership, the lack of the engagement. And they are yearning and want American Leadership reasserted, and when i met with the president elect and we were meeting about his ultimately asking me to do this, i indicated to him, i said, mr. President , we have a tough hand of cards that you have been dealt. But i said, there is no use in whining about it, complaining, appointing fingers. We are just going to play that handout. America still holds all the aces. We just need to draw them out of that deck. And that leaders around the world want our engagement. I said, you will be pushing on an open door because people want america to come back. Since you have worked in one sector in one company throughout your entire career, getting a sense of your worldview is incredibly important since you will be the chief advocate and advisor to the president elect on those issues. Would like to go through a series of questions. I think many of them can be answered by a simple yes or no. Others will probably take greater, more extensive answers, and you alluded to some of this in your Opening Statement. Let me go through several of them. Do you believe it is in the National Interest of the United States to continue to support International Laws and norms that were established after world war ii . Rex tillerson yes, sir. Do you believe the International Order includes respecting the territorial integrity of sovereign countries and the inliability of their borders . Rex tillerson yes, sir. Did russia violate this order when it annexed crimea and invaded ukraine . Rex tillerson yes, it did. Did russias occupation of countries violate International Laws and norms . Rex tillerson i am not sure which countries you are referring to. The annexation of crimea, eastern ukraine, georgia just to mention a few. Rex tillerson yes, sir. Syriasrussia and targeted Bombing Campaign in aleppo, on hospitals, violate this International Order . Rex tillerson yes, this is not acceptable behavior. Do you believe these actions constitute war crimes . Rex tillerson again, senator, i dont have sufficient information to make that serious conclusion. Coming to that conclusion will require me to have additional information. Do you understand what the standard is for a war . Rex tillerson i do. And knowing that standard and within thet is realm of public information, you cannot say whether those actions constitute a war crime or not . Rex til