[gavel pounding] [indiscernible] attorney general sessions, welcome. For all the people in the audience, we welcome you as well. Think general set thank general sessions were being here that attorney general sessions were being here for the oversight hearing. His is an opportunity for congress to investigate and question the policies and actions of any executive branch. It is an opportunity for the executive branch to take any of thosey for policies and actions, and an toortunity for congress defend its constitutional powers and check any abuses by an overreaching executive branch, and it has been that way for 230 years. That wee complained have not had an oversight hearing with this attorney general earlier. Was that for deferring the attorney general should have his team in place before appearing before us. Certainly, attorney general holder and attorney general did have their respective teams well in place by the time they appeared here as you are now here. The other side has been blocking executive nomination for the past 10 months, significantly delaying the department of ability to get management in place and things in order. But we are here now, and ready to do our oversight. The department of justice is an incredibly important branch, part of the executive branch, enforcing laws and ensuring Public Safety against foreign and domestic threats among a lot of other responsibilities. Our citizens look to the department of justice to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime. We rely on the department to seek just punishment for those , andy of unlawful behavior to ensure fair and impartial. Dministration of justice the department currently faces many difficult issues. Our country is challenged with the over growing threat of foreign or homegrown terrorism. We have seen terrorist incidents involving evolving around the world, especially impacting europe. In the u. K. Alone, there have been at least half a dozen major terrorist incidents in the past nine months, and i have a couple paragraphs here of other things going on, both in europe and the United States that, to save time, i am going to skip over. But there has been a lot of People Killed and terrorist western world are something we ought to be very concerned about. Mustare real, and we protect our country by lawful means. Congress has tried to do so by providing lawful authorities 72 of the fisa amendments act. Congress passed the legislation, and president bush signed it into law, 2008. After more debate and president obamas support, congress reauthorize the law in 2012, unchanged. The law is again up for reauthorization. Section 702 is scheduled to expire at the end of this year. It is up to congress to reauthorize this Important National security tool while preserving privacy and Civil Liberties, and increasing transparency for the american public. General sessions, i am interested in hearing your thoughts on that important legislation. In september, the fbi released its annual crime data. For the second euro, Violent Crime increased across the United States. Six 8. 6 ght and increases, and other cities have seen massive increases in homicide. Baltimore is on pace to top the number of homicides in new york city, even though the population is almost 8 million less, and this country continues to be mired in a National Epidemic of Overdose Deaths and abuse of opioid drugs. Over 47,000 people died in 2014. 50,000 died, 2015. Last year, 64,000 people. We have a new administration, i want to know what the department of justice is doing to reduce Violent Crime, to help ensure that the citizens around the country are safe. I also want to find out what the department is doing to combat Opioid Crisis, and we all care deeply about this issue. The abuse of prescription painkillers, heroin, synthetic opioids, fentanyl, as an example, artist ryan lives in communities across iowa and the nation as a whole. I know that it is a national issue. The copperheads of addiction and recovery act, known as cara. It passed through this committee, signed into law last year. Addresses the Opioid Crisis in a comprehensive way while also raising over 900 million over five years for recovery. Reports suggest that Congress Gave a pastor made gave a past two Big Drug Companies by enacting the ensuring Patient Access and attractive effective Drug Enforcement act. , just last year, signed off on this bill. Now former dea employees are railing against the law, pointing fingers at lawmakers. If dea had problems with this bill, they were the ones that expertise tothe warn congress, and they did not. The Obama Administration provided light which were the bill and signed it into law. I am planning on having an oversight hearing that will your sessions, toeneral see what, if anything, needs changing. Country, this suffered through the deadliest mass shooting, and i do not need to go through the history of that, but it will be in my printed statement. Has recently breached brief the judiciary staff on the addition two guns called bump stocks. We will be looking more at that issue. In september, the president announced a wind down of the deferred action against childhood arrivals program, daca, for short. A sixmonth extension. My office received preliminary 2021showing individuals that had daca status terminated for criminal and gang activity. We want to know who these criminals are, what kinds of crimes they are committing, and any it if they are with gangs. Secondly, general sessions, you announced earlier this year dojs recommitment to criminal investigation enforcement. 50 more Immigration Judges were supposed to be added to the bench this year, 75 more next year. Dojeed to know what steps has taken and what still needs to be done to reduce this Immigration Court backlog. There is another issue i want to address that came up in the news just yesterday. In june 2015, at the beginning of last week, i wrote to the aboutepartments the acquisition of the radio , in the last administration. A holding of in 20 of americas uranium mining capacity. It turns out that during the transaction, the Justice Department had ongoing criminal investigation for bribery, extortion, Money Laundering into officials for the Company Making the purchase. Involved in the conspiracy, and reported as coursing with high power government officials, some connected to Vladimir Putin. While this was going on, the Clinton Foundation was receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is one of the agencies that comes up to the takeover. Somehow, despite all this, the Previous Administration approved the transaction. In my letter, i asked the agencies involved in approving the transaction if they were aware of the criminal probe, and the intelligence operation examining the activity. This committee has an obligation to get to the bottom of this issue. The committee is also waiting to 11 oversight letters sent to the Justice Department on matters on which the occur need general is not accused. There are more letters that have not been answered. The letters date back to january 2016. I expect these letters will be answered, including, most from thely, ones Previous Administration. I also want to ask you about the firing of former fbi director james comey. It was an important moment for the department of justice and for this country. The American People have a right to know why he was fired, especially in the middle of so many highprofile issues going on, including the investigation into interview russian interference in the 2016 election. Thank you, general sessions, for being here, and for your Continuous Service to the country. Senator feinstein . Senator feinstein i do, mr. Chairman. Attorneying, mr. General. This is the first time you have appeared before this committee, and i want to say welcome. As a former member, you know well the Oversight Authority that we hold. As i mentioned that your confirmation hearing, i have a deep belief in the independence of the attorney general. Although we have had attorney general to view their job as serving the president and as an extension of the white house, i do not believe that is the job of the attorney general. , hishe attorney general master is the people and the law. Importantly, his job is to enforce federal law fairly and equally for all americans. I was surprised that in april, you declared that the Justice Department is in a new area. His is the trump era. I want for a moment to explore with a few issues what you mean by that. Begin with Voting Rights. During your confirmation hearing, you testified, and i quote the aggressive enforcement of laws to ensure access to the ballot for every eligible voter, without hindrance or discrimination. That would be a special priority. I was pleased future that. But this year, the Justice Department discarded its longstanding position on a texas voter id law. For nearly six years, the department of justice had argued that the texas law was unconstitutional. It intended to discriminate against minority voters. The voter idence, laws have a disproportionate effect on minorities. Despite this, just two weeks after you were confirmed, the department dropped its opposition to the texas law. The Department Also changed its position on another key Voting Rights case. This one involved ohios purge of voters. Procedure,s voters who had not cast a ballot in six years and failed to return a postcard were removed from state voting rolls. Resultedess reportedly in the removal of 40,000 voters in one county alone, cuyahoga county, which covers cleveland and its surrounding suburbs. Organizations challenged the process, arguing that the National Voter registration act forbids the state from removing individuals for failing to vote. 2016, the Justice Department told the court it opposed ohios purge, and in september 2016, the sixth circuit agreed that ohios process for removing voters from its roles was unconstitutional. This ruling cleared the way for thousands of ohioans to cast president iale 2016 election. However, that decision is being appealed to the Supreme Court, and now the department of justice is taking the side of removing voters from the rolls, even though the last election clearly demonstrated how this policy harms eligible voters. I would now like to turn to lgbt rights. Throughout my career, i have worked to ensure lgbt americans have equal rights and protections under the law. It is important to me that we preserve these protections. This committee should not tolerate efforts to undermine the progress that has been made. At your confirmation hearing, and i quote we must continue to move forward and never back. I will ensure the statutes protecting the lgbt communities civil rights and their safety are fully enforced. So i was very pleased to learn that the department is sending a top hate crimes lawyer to iowa to assist with prosecution of the case of a transgender teenager murdered last year. Times, this the decision was personally initiated by you. However, i was also surprised and concerned to learn that this Department Justice switched its position on title vii, and is now arguing that the law does not protect lgbt workers. Just two weeks ago, you issued a memorandum to all u. S. Attorneys and agency heads, instructing them that their Department Must now take the position that title vii does not protect transgender employees in all cases. In other words, it appears that your department is urging the courts to allow employers to discriminate against all lgbt workers across the country. I hope you will clear that up in your testimony. There are other controversial policies being implemented at justice. President s travel ban, for example. Multiple federal courts found the muslim ban unconstitutional, including another court in hawaii just yesterday. These travel ban efforts are an affront to our nations commitment destinations commitment to religious liberty, yet the Justice Department staunchly defends the ban. On daca, you recommended in september that the program be terminated. Believe these young people have placed their trust in the government, they have come out of the shadows, they have provided all of their information to authorities. They seek the opportunity to get right with the law, and i think most of us believe these dreamers embody the american spirit and have made positive contributions to the country, so we should stand by them. Finally, we will also wants to hear about the firing of fbi director james comey. President trump initially said he fired director call me based on your recommendation and that of Deputy Attorney general Rod Rosenstein. Within days, however, the president admitted to lester holt on nbc news that he actually fired comey because of the russia thing. It has also been reported that the day before he fired director comey, President Trump summoned his top advisers and told them that he had prepared a termination letter. It is important, i believe, to you had inwhat role this process, including conversations with the president and others in the white house. Last week, the democratic members of this committee sent a letter, making it clear we would be asking about director comeys firing at this hearing. We expected answers, or the assertion of a valid claim of executive privilege by the president. In conclusion, attorney general, your department as you know is incredibly important, and you are as well. Our country depends on a department that is independent, committed to protecting the rights and freedoms of all americans, not just some. So we look forward to hearing from you on these and other important issues. I thank you, mr. Chairman. General sessions, i would like to swear you at this point. Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so hope you got . A. G. Sessions i do. Chairman grassley before you speak, we have a long session ahead of us, probably with you. There will be a lot of questions. Ofce we did not get a copy your opening remarks, i was wondering if it would be possible for you to submit your longer remarks and maybe summarize so we can get to questions sooner . I will defer to you, but that is my request, but whatever time you need, take it. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to be with all of you. Anding member on distinguished members of the committee, former colleagues and , this is the honor of a lifetime. As attorneyrve general of the United States of america. You can understand and know that with my 15 years in that department and my 20 years in this committee with oversight of that department, i understand all of the responsibilities i have and the duties that i have the time to have to undertake , and i will do my best every day to be worthy of the trust you have placed in me. Everything will day, the men and women in the department of justice worked to protect our National Security against terrorist threats, civil rights, reduce Violent Crime, stop deadly drug dealers, and strengthen the rule of law. Today, i would like to share some thoughts about what we are doing, and give you insight into the exciting activities that are ongoing. The department of justice is resolutely focused on dealing with the terrorism threats that we face. They are real, the military tells us they can expect not a reduction after isis is defeated, but maybe even an increase in attacks. The president s executive order is an important step to ensuring that we know who is coming into our country. It is a lawful necessary order that we are proud to defend, and indeed, most may not know, the Supreme Court has already vacated one courts injunction against that order, and we are with the as the time goes by in the Supreme Court. We know, colleagues, that Violent Crime is rising after almost 30 years of decline, for two years in a row we have seen the fastest overall increase in Violent Crime in 25 years. The homicide rate increased 20 in two years. In 2015, the increase was the greatest in 49 years. I believe it is a trend we must confront. This,esident understands and one of his First Executive andrs he directed us to, fairly simple terms, to reduce crime in america. We have heard that challenge, we embrace it, and we are setting about it. Something after the department of justice at the moment of justice, we understand a key fact, at the department of justice, we understand a key fact. Most Police Officers in america are state and local. They are better trained and more professional than ever. It is a huge factor in the decline in crime, in my opinion, that we have seen recently, and we know crime in america will never be reduced without a partnership between federal and state officers. That federal,ubt state, local, and travel resources especially a pride applied with scientifically proven polities can significant policies can significantly impact the crime rate. If you look at our cities mr. Chairman, you noted that new york has dedicated itself over decades to highly effective, proactive, communitybased policing. They saw 334 homicides last year. Chicago, on the other hand, while only one third of the size of new york, logged more than twice as many murders. Our professionals in the department have been intensely studying how researchbased proven Crime Reduction increases can reverse in crime. They produced, in my opinion, a brilliant set of initiatives. I was very pleased with their plan. Whatever the Violent Crime might be, might have been in the next few years, it will be lower if these policies are followed. I can ensure you of that. Our aim is to not see how many young people can be incarcerated , but to focus on the most dangerous repeat offenders and actually reduce crime and violence in america. An effective Crime Reduction strategy also means starving criminal enterprises of their profits, the asset seizure and Forfeiture Program is one of the most effective tools congress has provided. I know a number of you are concerned about the operation of that program. I hear your concerns. I have established an Asset Forfeiture accountability will oversee the entirety of this Forfeiture Program, and to ensure it operates in an accountable and responsible way, and be able to report to you anytime you need information about it. It is part of this committee to protect the civil and Constitutional Rights of all americans, and to prosecuting hate crime violence. Every american, regardless of race, religion, sex, or Sexual Orientation, must be safe from violence and criminality. We will not shy away from defending First Amendment rights. Force ready to enforce federal law, to assemble and speak peacefully, and to freely exercise our religion. We are in the midst of the deadliest drug epidemic this country has ever seen. We have seen nothing like it. , lowerilability of drugs prices, increased security, alone with a doubly substance deadly substance, fentanyl, have resulted in climbing death tolls across the country. It was 52,000 last year that died of overdose. 000 in 2015, and the same in 2016. This started with opioids that began with Prescription Drug addiction and moved to heroin and fentanyl. There can be no doubt, colleagues, that we need stricter accountability in the manufacture and prescribing and distribution of addictive opioids. We do not need to delay this any longer. To deathften lead through other drugs. We know that most of the heroine, cocaine, fentanyltamine, and that is fueling the drug crisis was brought across by powerful drug cartels, bringing violence, addiction, and death. An important factor in our longterm success requires securing our borders. For decades, the American People have asked for a just, lawful six to system of immigration. They are right in their demands. We can end the legality. Illegality. Aesident trump has sent message to the world, and the flow has been reduced by almost one half. But there is still more to do. We can end the lawlessness. Egislation is essential the president has set out and a reasonable and effective plan with numerous immigration priorities for this body to consider, including a border wall, significant asylum reform, swift border returns, and enhanced interior enforcement. With the progress already achieved, our country is on its way. Whether it is an end to anctuary city policies or in verification system to ensure our lawful employment, they are supported by the vast majority of americans. There has been, im afraid, and erosion in the respect for the rule of law. Often, advancing political agendas has been substituted for following the law. This department of justice respects congress and the constitution, and we intend to enforce the laws as you have written them. The daca policy produced by the could not beration sustained. It was unlawful and contrary to the laws passed by this constitution this institution. Congress, you now have the ability to act on this issue. I would just note that the president has said that he wants to work with congress. He has a heart for young people. But we have got to have more than just an amnesty, friends. We need a good improvement in the illegality that is going on, and there is an opportunity right now, im telling you. An opportunity now to do something historic. The department is also directing taxpayer dollars to the overwhelming number of cities and states that cooperate with federal enforcement by Grant Funding, but it is not an entitlement, it is a allocation of taxpayers dollars under the apartment to enforce the laws of congress and the federal department. So we urge our jurisdictions to cooperate with federal officials, stop letting criminal aliens back on their streets, that further victimize your community. It does not make sense. Thate grateful overwhelmingly, most cities and jurisdictions cooperate fully and to those who have heard our cooperating,re now after 20 years in this body, i understand the responsiveness, mr. Chairman, something you have been vocal about ever since i have been on this committee. We are going to do so. We inherited a very significant backlog of unanswered congressional inquiries, chairman grassley, dating back to 2015. We have already reduced it by half. You can be sure we will continue to deuce that backlog reduce that backlog, and it will mean a priority of hours. Lso want to redress address the letter i received from the minority leaders of this committee, which determine that by today, whether the president will exam invoke executive privilege in which on issues i may be asked about today. This requestered very respectfully. It is an important matter. At consistent with longstanding policy and practice of the executive branch, i can neither assert executive privilege, nor can i disclose today the content of my confidential conversations with the president. Under the administration of both parties, it is wellestablished that a president is entitled to ,ave private Confidential Communications with his cabinet officials. His secretary of state, secretary of defense, the secretary of the treasury, and certainly his counsel and the attorney general of the United States, which provides counsel. Such provisions are within the core of executive privilege. Until such time as the president makes a decision with respect to this privilege, i cannot waive that privilege myself or otherwise compromised his ability to assert it. , during todays hearing and under these circumstances today, i will not be able to discuss the content of my conversations with the president. I understand you have an important oversight responsibility today, and i hope you respect this longstanding practice and respect the duty that i feel and that i face. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and i will be prepared to do my best to answer your questions. Chairman grassley i would like to make two point before i start ask questions. Remember, just because you mention the backlog of letters, the president put out an advisory that they would only answer all questions for chairman of committees. That leaves out about 35 republicans, 48 democrats. I wrote to the white house, he or rewritten that advisory, whatever it was, with the understanding he would answer ofstions for any member congress, republican, democrat, chairman or not. The longse of oversight hearing their having today, i appreciate your cooperation on the request i made last time, that if you at the end of your seven minutes and start before the last ,econd, and you ask a question go ahead and ask that question. You go ahead and answer general sessions. We do not have dialogue after the time has run off. Some of you noticed, i think, there was special consideration to senator leahy and senator hassan and Ranking Member feinstein. I think they deserve the recognition of former chairman of the committee and Ranking Member, so if they run over a bit, just a little bit, that is ok with me. Just a little bit. [laughter] the only onesley i paid much attention to his mrs. Feinstein, and she was only a couple minutes, so do not crow about that. [laughter] a. G. Sessions you and director quotes wrote a letter director coates wrote a letter to leadership about the importance of 702. You said that reauthorization of 702 is the departments top legislative priority, question. Section 70 that two were not reauthorized, can you tell us what impact that would have on the Intelligence Community and our National Security interest . A. G. Sessions mr. Chairman, having been involved since i have been in the department with many of the day today day two daytoday impact the 702, it would have a significance. It would reduce our ability to identify terrorist acts and potential acts before they happen. That was one of the goals that we had when we passed the patriot act, and i guessed senator hatch and senator leahy worked very hard on that. It was one of the most intense times i have ever seen this committee do. 702 has proven its worth, courts have upheld it, it has the most rigorous oversight procedures of any act i think in existence toay, and it enables us focus on terrorists abroad and to identify those who could be threats to us. Place,t we have that in the fbi, for example, is able to collectionsed 702 subject to procedures you in u. S. Person data to help connect the dots. If congress were to impose a warrant requirement on assessing information obtained through socalled u. S. s personal queries, how would that affect the fbis ability to do its job . Mr. Chairman, it is not legally required, in my opinion, to have a war in warrant requirement. This originates abroad by people who are not protected by the u. S. Constitution, and i do not believe that we could carry out the responsibilities that we are expected to do with a warrant requirement for any of the seven are too tight material. 702 type material. Chairman grassley there will be talks in congress of reform, i am sure. Is there anything that can be done to help provide more transparency into the amount of information that the intelligence agencies collect or the amount of searches conducted, especially with respect to u. S. Persons . Are sessions i think we certainly open to discussing that with the members of this committee. A number of you have proposed ideas, and we would be pleased to provide our suggestions, support, or concern as appropriate. Chairman grassley i want to ask you a question that looks like history, but it was in the news recently. Believe, according to government documents and recent news reports, the Justice Department has an ongoing criminal investigation for bribery, extortion, and Money Laundering into officials for the russian Company Making the uranium one. The purchase was approved during the Previous Administration and resulted in the russians owning 20 of americans uranium mining capacity. What are you doing to find out how the russian takeover of the american uranium was allowed to occur, despite criminal conduct by the Russian Company that the Obama Administration approved to make the purchase . Mr. Chairman, we will hear your concerns. The department of justice will take such actions as is appropriate for now, and i would offer that some people have gone to jail in that transaction already, but the article talks about other issues. Or denyingconfirming the existence of any particular investigation, i would say that i hear your concerns and they will be reviewed. Chairman grassley i think i know a you are probably reluctant to go into some detail on that, but i would like to remind you that Deputy Attorney rosenstein directly supervise the criminal case when he was u. S. Attorney in maryland. I do not think it would be proper for him to supervise a review of his own conduct, do you . A. G. Sessions it would be his decision. He is a man of integrity and ability. If he feels he has an inability to par steve perceive any investigation, it would be his responsibility to make that determination, and should told you i i would and i have done with the senior ethics people at the department. Reports grassley suggest that the Clinton Foundation received millions of dollars from interested parties in the transaction. Bill clinton received 500,000 for a speech in moscow, june 2010, from the russian government aligned bank, the russia began the uranium acquisition process. This pattern raises serious concerns about improper political influence, and the process by the previous, the clintons during the Obama Administration. Has the Justice Department fully investigated whether the russians compromise the Obama Administrations decisions to smooth the way for transactions, and if not, why not . A. G. Sessions we are working hard to maintain discipline in the department. It would not be appropriate for me to comment on any Ongoing Investigation. Chairman grassley then let them move onto another issue. December,ar last year. This Committee Published a majority staff report and criminal referrals regarding payments in connection with transferring human fetal tissue. The report referral outlining evidence from the organizations own financial records that they profited from the sale of fetal tissue, which is in violation of law. No one from the department or the fbi replied to my criminal referrals or saw unredacted copies of the evidence outlined in the report. Report,nths after the there is no indication that anyone from the fbi or Justice Department has actually read the referrals and the full reports. I hope you will commit to providing the committee written confirmation when the relevant Justice Department and fbi personnel have completed their reviews of both the referral and the majority staff report. That is my question, and that will be the last one. I will go to senator feinstein. A. G. Sessions thank you, chairman. I will evaluate your request personally and make sure it is properly handled. Chairman grassley senator feinstein . Sen. Fienstein thank you very much, mr. Chairman. You a question about the firing of the ii director, specifically have your letter dated may 9 to the president. Specifically, what was your designated role in the decision to fire director comey . It is a matter that i can share some information about, because the president himself has talked about it and revealed in that letter. He asked that Deputy Rosenstein and i make our recommendations in writing. We prepared those recommendations and submitted them to the president. Feinstein, i do not think it has been fully understood the significance of the error that mr. Comey made on the clinton matter. I am aware oftime and all of my experience i do not think i have heard in a situation in which a major case in which the department of justice prosecutors were in an investigation, that the Investigative Agency announces the closure of the investigation. And then a few weeks before this happened, he was testifying before the congress, mr. Comey was, and he said he thought he did the right thing and would do it again. So the Deputy Attorney general what, 27n, who has years and department of justice, forard graduate, served eight years as u. S. Attorney under president obama, and four years under president bush he said that was an usurpation of the position of the department of justice. The attorney general position. And particularly, we were concerned that he would reaffirm that he would do it again. I think that was our basis that called for a fresh start at the fbi. Mr. Comey had many talents, there is no doubt about that, and there are no hard feelings about that, but i am really excited about the new director, chris ray, who you confirmed with an overwhelming vote. I believe he will be able to do the job of fbi director with great skill and integrity. Sen. Fienstein what exactly did President Trump tell you was his reason for firing director comey . I know he has said he thought the department was a mess and rosenstein tomr. Take a look at it. My understanding was these two letters were presented, the letter from you dated may 9 and the letter from rosenstein, dated the same date, a response to that request to take a look at the department. A. G. Sessions that is what i can tell you, he did ask for our written opinion, and we submitted that to him. Any changerepresent in either one of our opinions, as Deputy Rosenstein has also indicated i now believe, and we were asked to provide it, and we did. Sen. Fienstein did the president ever mentioned to you is concerned about lifting the cloud on the russia investigation . A. G. Sessions that calls for a communication that i have had with the president , and i believe it remains confidential. Sen. Fienstein but you do not deny there was a communication . I do not confirm or deny the existence of any communication between the president that i considered to be confidential. Did younstein when first speak with the president about firing director comey . What date . A. G. Sessions i think that is also covered by my opening statement. I believe the president has the to meetd i have a duty with him on proper occasions and provide such advice, legal or otherwise, as i am called upon to do. I have done that, and i believe he has a right to protect that confidentiality until appropriate circumstances exist that he might choose to waive that privilege. Sen. Fienstein all right. Let me go to another aspect. That is a monument lawsuits emoluments lawsuits. The president has received several lawsuits that declare he is violating the emoluments clause of the lot constitution. Strangely, the Justice Department is defending the president. What did that apartment due to determine it was appropriate to represent the president . Was the office of Legal Counsel consulted . A. G. Sessions i believe so. I would say it is the responsibility of the department of justice to defend the office of the presidency in carrying on its activities against charges meritorious. Deemed sen. Fienstein and you believe that emoluments as part of that charge . Emoluments . Senatorns as feinstein, i cannot legally discuss all the case law and history of it, except to say that we believe this is defensible, and we have taken the position that our top lawyers believe is justified. Sen. Fienstein well, let me go to another subject. That is the pardon of sheriff joe arpaio. President trump pardoned the mer Maricopa County seraph sheriff, who is convicted of criminal contempt for defying a court order to stop racially profiling and detaining latino motorists, based solely on suspicion they were undocumented immigrants. The Washington Post reported that before he decided to pardon arpaio, the president asked you to drop the criminal case against our pao arpaio. The president ask you whether the case against arpaio could be dropped . A. G. Sessions senator feinstein, i cannot comment on the private conversations i may have had with the president. I will just say that attorneys in the department of justice, at the request of the judge, prosecutor that case. A federal judge found the defendant guilty of a misdemeanor, and for his actions, and the president decided to issue a pardon. Sen. Fienstein let me ask you this. What was the process, then, by which the decision was made to joeour pio rko arpaio . A. G. Sessions im not sure the details of which, i can provide you in writing. I will be pleased to do so. Has the power to issue pardons, with or without the department of just missed justice involved. That has been done in the past and some very dramatic type pardons. This pardon was well within the power of the president to do. Sen. Fienstein my understanding is that the pardon request usually goes through the office of the pardon attorney in the department of justice. Decisions are made according to certain standards set out in that offices rules governing petitions for executive clemency. It has been reported that the process was not followed here, as you so indicate. So what you are saying, in fact, that there was no process . The president simply made the decision to pardon our pio , who had beenaio convicted . A. G. Sessions im not prepared at this moment to get you an accurate answer, because i do not know if precisely. I would like to give you something in writing that would be accurate. I would prefer to do that. Sen. Fienstein i am over, i am sorry. Thank you. A. G. Sessions Senate Chairman grassley senator hatch . Sen. Hatch we appreciate the service you have given on this committee and in your current position, as well as others. Before going to my questions, i want to set the record straight on something. The Washington Post ran an article accusing congress of passing a bill last year that the authority. It suggests that i and the other sponsors put one over on congress by speaking through a bill that nobody knew anything about. Mr. Chairman and general sessions, Ranking Member feinstein, these allegations are complete baloney, and we all know it. This committee reported the bill out by voice vote. The full senate agreed to the bill by unanimous consent. Every member of this committee supported the bill twice, first in committee and then on the floor. I do not want your anybody claim i dated not they did not know anything about the bill. It was seven pages long, took all of five minutes read to read. The Senate Minority leader wants to take to the floor and decry this bill is unconscionable and runs for withdrawing the president s chosen nominee, he should remember that he himself supported the bill twice, once in committee when he was a member of this committee, and again on the floor. We all support this legislation, everyones of us everyone of us. This supported it twice. I hope they will reply to this hit piece, and i deserve an opportunity to respond. I have a few questions, and would appreciate it, mr. Attorney general, if you keep your answers brief. I would like to discuss a substance which is often offered as a substitute for opioids. Many states across the nation have adopted laws to legalize marijuana for medicinal use, based on Research Suggesting there is some medicinal benefit. A value to be found in it. Tobe clear, i remain opposed the broad legalization of marijuana. However, i introduced, along ath senator cassidy, bipartisan marijuana drug studies act in 2017, because i believe that scientists need to study the potential benefits and dangers of marijuana. Very concerned about recent reports that the doj and dea are at odds on Marijuana Research, particularly when it comes to granting applications to grow marijuana for further research. Clarify the position of the Justice Department regarding these applications . I would a. G. Sessions i would be pleased, senator hatch and thank you for your leadership. I have been honored to serve under your chairmanship. This we have a Marijuana Research system working now. There is one supplier of the marijuana for that research. People have asked that there be multiple sources of the marijuana for Medicinal Research , and have asked it be approved. I believe there are now 26 applications for approval of suppliers who would provide marijuana for Medicinal Research. Each one of those has to be dea, and iby the have raised questions about how many. Lets be sure we are doing this in the right way, because it costs a lot of money to supervise these events. I think it would be healthy to have some more competition in the supply, but i am sure we do not need 26 new suppliers. Sen. Fienstein thank you sen. Hatch thank you, and on the topic, i think we need to revisit additional intent requirements and our law, because of the lack of mens rea requirements and our laws, i believe that Many Americans may be unwittingly breaking the law will not having the slightest idea that their behavior may be illegal. To address this problem, i recently introduced the mens rea of 2017. Act a default mens rea requirement, unless the statute explicitly states that an offense is intended to be a strict liability offense. General sessions, would you agree that mens rea reform needs to be a part of our conversation on criminal Justice Reform . A. G. Sessions it should be part of our conversation. It has to be. You have made sure that it is for a number of years. You have raised it and discuss it, and i have heard you articulate your concerns. Yes, i think it should be a part of what we do, and we will be pleased to work with you to evaluate what kind of legislation might be appropriate. Sen. Hatch thank you, and i with you. Just two weeks ago, you issued a memorandum detailing 20 liberty,s of religious as well as guidance for executive departments and agencies in implementing those principles. Is, iry first principle think, the most important. The freedom of religion is a fundamental right of paramount importance. That quote is not a mere policy preference to be traded against other policy preferences. It is a fundamental right. Status ofsay this religious liberty as a fundamental and paramount right imposes the same obligation on the legislative branch as it does on the executive branch . A. G. Sessions i think it does. Your legislation that you worked , religious passed freedom rhetoric restoration act was a big part of the foundation of the principles we set out in that religious freedom died that we produce desk guide that we produced. We believe the desk there is a lack of appreciation of the rights of americans not only to have private religious thoughts, but to exercise their religious freedom. Thats what the constitution says. ,ou should have a right Congress Shall make no law to establish a religion nor prohibited the exercise thereof. It was a big part of what we did , the legislation you and Congress Passed was a big part of what we were able to do. Senator hatch i would like to make a couple of comments. First on the Supreme Court decision to grant search any microsoft ireland case. I know the department and i have different views on this case. And the topic remains controversial. Privatehy introduce the mitigations act to create a determination for when Law Enforcement may access someones lawn a male indication. Indication. Notress needs to decide, the court, should be the body that determines our data privacy laws. Im grateful department for its work that started with me and i hope you will continue working with me and others on this committee to refine the bill so it can be enacted into law. I know my time is running mr. Chairman. Senator leahy. Leahy thank you mr. Chairman welcome attorney general. A. G. Sessions thank you senator leahy. Senator leahy i look forward to coming to the Appropriations Committee talking about your budget. When you appear before the , after your january testimony i was concerned about and i asked you in writing whether you had been in contact with anyone connected to the russian government about the 2016 election. You answered emphatically no. That betweenned occasion between you and Russian Ambassador kinsley act which we got from the press. During the height of the campaign, you reportedly met ysliak on Foreign Policy and in your senate office. Chairman serving his of then candidate trump posner National Security team. Accusing you of colluding with russians, but you yourly, your answer of no, concealed your own contact with russian officials at a time when such conduct was an interest to many. We have known each other for , we have worked together on many issues. Senator Jeff Sessions was in my shoes and he asked a question, he wouldnt tolerate being misled. Do you understand why members of this committee believe your answer of no was false testimony . A. G. Sessions i appreciate the opportunity to talk about that. I believe my answer was correct. The question you asked, you ,tarted off in the preamble which said the Intelligence Community has concluded that russia intervened in the 2016 election in an effort to help elect donald trump. The report is available, russian or parents in our election is larger than any other candidate or political party. Its about protecting our democracy and i agree with that. Then you asked a series of subparts. The question im referring to is i asked you if you had any contact with the russians and you answered emphatically no. I wanted to say the entire context of all your questions dealt with interference in the campaign by the russians. I said you meet with any russians. A. G. Sessions the last question you are referring to is and it says d e several of president elects nominees were senior advisers have russian ties, have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the russian government about the 2016 election either before or after election day . Not anyhat to mean casual conversation, but did i participate with russians about the 2016 election. Was wrong. Something everyone of your previous questions talked about improper involvement and i felt the answer was no. I did not meet with them in any way about the election. March, leahy later in when you did disclose such meetings, you said you did not recall what was said at the meetings. Your answer to my question was an emphatic no, it wasnt i dont recall. Now you are a lawyer and i am a lawyer, you are in fact our nations top lawyer. Is there a difference between responding no and i do not recall . Is that legally significant . A. G. Sessions yes. Senator leahy thank you. So if you could not recall then you could not of answered my question my first question yes or no if you dont recall what was discussed. Now, the reason i asked that, u. S. Intelligence intercepts reported in july appear that you did in fact discuss Campaign Issues with Russian Ambassador including canada trumps position on russia related issues. Let me ask you this. Have the 2016 campaign, you discussed with any russian connected official in the following, emails, russian like thence, sanctions socalled adoption issue, or any policies, positions of the campaign of the Trump Presidency . This is since the campaign. A. G. Sessions i want to be accurate so i dont want to have any ambiguity about your question. That is a lot of questions. Meeting withhad a any russian officials to discuss any kind of coordinating campaign efforts. Say o first saturday lazy desk senator leahy did you have discuss with any russian connected official anything about emails. A. G. Sessions discuss with them. I dont recall having done any such thing. Senator leahy did you discuss russian interference in our elections . A. G. Sessions no. Senator leahy did you discuss anything like sanctions or the adoption issue. A. G. Sessions i dont believe ive had any discussion about that act. Senator leahy any policies or positions of the campaign or Trump Presidency . Im not sure about that. Met with the Russian Ambassador after i gave a speech at the Republican Convention and he was right in front of the podium and we had an encounter , he asked forame an appointment in my office later. I met with 26 ambassadors in the last year and he was one of them. He came into my office with two of my Senior Defense specialists and met with me for a while. I dont recall any conversation about what was this last subject . I think he wanted to repeat something. Senator leahy any policies or positions of the Trump Campaign or presidency. A. G. Sessions i dont think there was any discussion about the details of the campaign other than it could have been in that meeting in my office or at the convention at what transpositions were. Beenor leahy have you requested to interview by special counsel connection with director comeys firing, the washington investigation, or your contact with russian officials . A. G. Sessions you will have asked the special counsel. Senator leahy im asking you. A. G. Sessions revealed the question then. Senator leahy have you been interviewed or requested to be interviewed by the special counsel either in connection with director comeys firing, the russia investigation, or your own contact with russian officials . Sure issions i am not should answer without clearing with the special counsel. What do you think . Senator leahy have you been interviewed . A. G. Sessions no. Senator lady you havent been answered interviewed in any way shape or form. A. G. Sessions the answer is no. Senator leahy thank you. I appreciate the courtesy and i do have a lot more questions along this line. Senator leahy. You attorneythank general sessions for your service. For me here today, in may, you implemented a new charging policy for federal prosecutors. Requires the prosecutors must be required to pursue the most seriously readily provable offense. The policy does permit prosecutors to apply for to charge something less than the most serious offense that is readily provable. Can you tell me what factors the department will be considering in deciding whether or not to grant approval to those prosecutors in those instances who want to charge something less than the most serious readily approvable offense . Decision,ons the that memos decision establishes a long held position of the department of justice that a prosecutor should charge the most readily provable, serious, readily approvable offense. It was altered by the previous Obama Department of justice. I believe attorney general holder, in which he declared that you should not and even directly, you should not charge what congress has said as a serious offense that carries a minimum sentence. Senator lee so you are restoring what was previously excepted. A. G. Sessions i was determined to have a simple directive to our capable United States attorneys. Not have a long six page memorandum. We submit a onepage memo to them and it said if you think that is not just and you clear it with your u. S. Attorney or the designee of the u. S. Attorney, you can charge less than the most serious readily approvable offense. You dont have to call washington or get bureaucracy, we trust you and i told them i hope that would work. If we had Serious Problems we would revisit it. Senator lee a. G. Sessions it only requires that the minimum mandatory does not require the maximum sentence as some have said. It simply says that if you commit a serious crime, that Congress Says you are carrying a certain sentence, you shouldnt fail to charge that because you want to have a different set of results. Senator lee do you intend to keep track of how long how often prosecutors and which prosecutors in particular are departing from this . A. G. Sessions yes we will. I do know where the former brought death formal process. Rod rosenstein is an experienced supervisor, 12 years of assisting the u. S. Attorneys, we have discussed this and we feel like this is a sound policy for the department of justice and essentially restores us to what it used to be. But with perhaps more less ability than the previous. Senator lee in march, just as put a statement in a case called leonard versus texas. In that statement, you suggested that monarch civil assets forfeiture practices may be unconstitutional, at least casts some doubt on the constitutionality of those procedures used by the federal government and many state governments. In may of this year i wrote a letter to you asking whether the department would review its civil Asset Forfeiture policies and practices. Newuly you announced some policies that expanded the department of justices use of civil Asset Forfeiture. Can you tell me whether you have asked the office of Legal Counsel or any other components of the department of justice to of civil formal review affect Asset Forfeiture practices of the federal government, states and the state and local counties that participate in the Equitable Sharing Program with the department of justice . An intensens we had series of discussions in the Apartment Department about the subject. It is one unfamiliar with having served 12 years as u. S. Attorney and having utilize the policy. It was changed by the former attorney general and constricted the ability of Asset Forfeiture is in a number of ways. I simply restored the previous policy, the change only occurred to or three years ago. I believe it is the best policy, but i am aware of the serious concerns you have and others have. Limits on howsome we do these forfeitures and i have Just Announced the appointment of a special director of accountability to be forfeitures all the in the United States, to review them and review any complaints that arise. We want to carry out this policy effectively and fairly without abusing anybodys rights. I would note that for decades its been a firm Supreme Court. I dont believe there are folks on the Supreme Court that would declare it somehow now not legal. We want to do it right. Senator lee i understand your position, but i think there is some lack of clarity on this and i think the Statement Issued by Justice Thomas in connection with the dialogue in leonard versus texas does cast some doubt on it. Is have youestions asked the office of Legal Counsel for their opinion on this . A. G. Sessions we are simply restoring the law that has been in effect for decades and i dont know that weve asked a formal opinion of the office of Legal Counsel and we dont think its necessary to do so. Lee as you know, the reason im concerned is in our criminal Justice System in the u. S. , we have robust protections for the accused. Triale entitled to a jury , court counsel, you have a lot of due process protections as someone accused in this country. If the courts can circumvent those rights, at least with respect to the property of an accused or to the property of someone who may not himself or herself be accused of a crime, but just as to which there is some suspicion about the involvement, that presents significant concern. If the government can just see the property and then make it his make the governments property rather than that of the owner, such that it reverses the presumption of innocence, it reverses the burden of proof and it eliminates the requirement that proof of a crime be proven be a reasonable doubt, that is a concern. Especially when some states and local governments have adopted legislation restricting the use of this and its then been circumvented with the help of the federal government through the Equitable Sharing Program. I do believe this needs to be reviewed aggressively. Thank you mr. Attorney general. Thank you mr. Chairman. A number of years ago, maybe 10 senator and i reached an accord on when these issues were being raised, we raise the burden of proof so a ,eizure of assets, often cash those seizures cannot be. Ffected without probable cause its either a product of the criminal activity or a facility used to facilitate criminal activity. Then, the person who had the money can test the case, they would have to the government has to prove on a preponderance of the evidence, which is a normal civil standard in a civil lawsuit. The probable cause standard, you can arrest an individual, a grand jury returns indictment on probable cause, so it meets the same standard that it would take to put somebody in jail. So i think its a sound policy. 80 of the seizures are not even up asted when dea sets procedure for claimants to make their claim. I believe its a sound policy. We will continue to monitor it and i watch it even closer than we have before and i would be pleased to stay in communication with you and hear your concerns. Senator urban and i will return before he is done. I will be out just a minute. Attorney general soffit sessions, welcome back to the committee. Your positions on immigration, daca is well document. We have given many speeches on the floor of the senate and i think your position and opposition to the programs have been well documented over the course of your senate career. A. G. Sessions it may not be as quite as simple as you might suggest. I will leave your rationale for you to explain. I think i know how you voted consistently against comprehensive Immigration Reform. You announced the Trump Administration was terminating the daca program. That my understanding according to longstanding Justice Department policy, the office of Legal Counsel is responsible for providing legal advice to the executive branch on all constitutional questions. Onelsie issued a memo november 19, 2014 that include desk includes daca is lawful. Its a lawful exercise of executive authority and when you go back to the department of justice after your hearing today , check your website. That opinion is still on your website that daca is lawful. So could you please tell me youe career attorneys at the office of Legal Counsel before your announcement to terminate daca . A. G. Sessions we did. There were a large number of experienced lawyers in the department. What i would say to you and i thatve this is accurate, the socalled up approval for olc wasoh elsie based on the caveat on the requirement that any action that is taken, be done on an individual basis. Court individual decisions were not being made and a blanket policy was in effect being carried out under the daca program in reality. It was not an individualized basis and therefore that is why the court found it unlawful. Durbin that is a departure from whats a currently on the department of opinion ofsite, olc 2014, if you have a new olc opinion that was based on your letter or your statement, would you provide that with a copy . A. G. Sessions i would be glad to, but i think it is fair to document said a daca program might be legal if it was done on an individualized basis. The department of justice cannot just wipe out whole sections of the american law and just say we will not enforce it after congress has passed such a law. Anduld be glad to review it we will review the validity. Senator durbin each daca recipient is individually interviewed, goes through an individual criminal background check and determines whether there is individual eligibility. So having said that, i will ask you one last thing. A. G. Sessions the court found otherwise. Senator jerked death durban. Did you have any anytor durbin did you have communication with the attorney generals threatening to bring lawsuits to daca before the decision was made . A. G. Sessions i would say this. That kind of legal discussion i believe would be part of the work product of the attorney General Office and i should not reveal it. Senator durbin you are saying you are privileged that that communication is privileged . That you had a communication with the Texas Attorney general about the threatened lawsuit against daca before the ministrations announcement . A. G. Sessions even the olc communications we have are privileged. So i would say that is correct. Will review it if i feel its appropriate for me to reveal to you, i will do so. Senator durbin this is been the moment where senator sessions of alabama would have blown up when the attorney general said he cant tell us if he communicated with another attorney general in another state. May i take it to one part of your statement that i take personally because i represent chicago and im honored to represent them. A. G. Sessions i know you are. Senator durbin what happened to las vegas was tragic and horrifying. Killed, over 500 wounded by gunshots in a brief amount of time with a military type weapon. It was just awful, horrific and disgusting. Having said that, so far this year, 3000 people have been injured by gunshots in the city of chicago. Over 500 killed. This is not something that the political debate in my heart. It breaks my heart to think of what the families are going through in the city a represent. The superintendent of police that works there, you give credit to local flaunt for smit and im glad. To you what he said. The federal governments plans of terminating byrne grant funds will hamper Community Policing and undermine the work are many women have done to reduce shootings by 16 this year and this is the sentence i want to focus on. If i have said before and i will undocumented immigrants are not driving violence in chicago. That is what i want our officers focused on, Community Policing and not trying to be Immigration Police. The money we will get we hope to get from grants we are putting into a program called shots fired. It is a monitoring device in our city that can tell instantaneously when a gun has been shot. So police can respond instantaneously to try to get the shooters and save the life of the victim. You want to cut back these funds because you want the city of chicago to play the role of Immigration Police on federal civil laws. Mr. Attorney general, you are not helping us solve the murder problem in chicago i taking away these federal funds and the superintendent says that your pursuit of undocumented immigrants has little or nothing to do with gun violence in chicago. A. G. Sessions chicago is a great city. It has many good things going for it, i do think this murder rate is a cloud over the city and it looks like this year may be even higher murder rate in last year. Good communitybased policing is absolutely essential for this. Morale ofd about the the Chicago Police department, we would like to see that improve. I think that politicians cannot say that if you remove a violent criminal from america that is illegally in the country and he is arrested by Chicago Police and put into the chicago jail, but once they are released, they shouldnt be turned over to the federal ice officers to be removed from the country. They are here illegally to begin with. And then should not be how does that make the city of chicago savor when you dont remove criminals or illegally in the country . Ignore durbin you cant the superintendent of police tells you it has nothing to do with gun violence. You want to take federal funds and criticize the murder rate. You cant have it both ways. A. G. Sessions ive increase the number of atf agents to prosecute gun crimes in chicago by 12, which is quite a large number, more than any other city. The United States government cant take over Law Enforcement for the city of chicago, we are not doing it for new york. We are not doing it for a lot of others. We are a third of atf agents to chicago and we will continue to work with you. I do not want to not have grants go to chicago, but we need their support. When somebody is arrested in the jail thats due to be deported, we simply ask that they call us. So we can come by and pick them up and say they need to be removed. That is not happening and weve got to work through it some way. Kennedy welcome back and thank you for your service. Or you conspire with russia an agent of the russian government to influence the outcome of the 2016 president ial election . A. G. Sessions no. Sen. Kennedy do you want the special counsel who is investigating those matters to succeed . A. G. Sessions i want to completed investigation professionally, yes. Sen. Kennedy if he asks you for your cooperation, would you give it . A. G. Sessions yes. Sen. Kennedy if he asks to meet with you to discuss what if anything you know about all that, would you agree to meet with him . A. G. Sessions absolutely. Sen. Kennedy i want to talk to you for a second about new orleans. New orleans is extraordinarily important to my state. My first job in government was with a government and at the time he took an Economic Development trip to japan. He tells the story he was meeting with about 20 Japanese Business people and he started off by asking them, how many of you have been to louisiana . He said five Japanese Business people raise their hand. Then he said, how many of you had been to new orleans . He said 15 raise their hands. [laughter] its a big part of our culture and our economy. We have a crime problem in new orleans as you know. We had a Police Officer, officer mcneil, killed in the line of duty this weekend. The byrne grants are very important to new orleans to help us fight crime. Now your office wrote a letter to my friends, mayor landrieu, asking him questions about the and let me cutce to the chase. There allegations that new orleans is a sanctuary city. Friend,ndrieu who is my but you got to call it like you see them, wrote you back a very unprofessional letter. Im sorry for that. He called you caustic. He suggested you were a mere politician. He said you were scapegoating immigrants. Fearmonger and basically called you a liar. Not to beider that productive discourse. I apologize on behalf of louisiana. Would you agree with me that we are a nation of immigrants . A. G. Sessions well, virtually the vast majority have emigrated here at one time or another for sure. Sen. Kennedy we are also nation of laws, is that correct . A. G. Sessions thats correct. Sen. Kennedy now if i dont agree with the loft, do i have to follow it . A. G. Sessions yes. Sen. Kennedy i hate Traffic Cameras. I dont agree with them. Do i have to follow the laws of Traffic Cameras . A. G. Sessions yes. Sen. Kennedy i do like the laws about Traffic Cameras so i need to go change them, is that right . A. G. Sessions thats correct. Would you be willing, would you make yourself available if i could arrange a meeting with you and your colleagues and mayor landrieu we are about to elect a new mayor in new orleans to sit down and work with the department of justice to resolve these allegations of being a sanctuary city in a way that the Justice Department is comfortable with so we can keep that money . A. G. Sessions absolutely i would. Senatoruld just say kennedy that there were 10 cities during the last attorney notedls tenure that were as being cities likely to be in violation of federal 1373 cooperative law that requires cooperation on detainers or at least communications with federal law officers. New orleans was one of those. About a half of those now have gotten off the list. We would love to see new orleans get off the list, but we are not there yet. The mayor has talked openly about how some of these strategies where he describes what we are asking them to do is to go out and arrest people in the city that are here illegally. We are not asking that. We are asking that when the city arrest somebody that is illegally in the country for some of the crime to communicate with us, give us notice before they are going to be released back into the community, because we may find or ice officers may find that they are due to be deported. There here illegally and they commit another crime, they ought to be deported. Thats what the law says and thats what we intend to do. Its amazing to me that some of the mayors are so reluctant and so hostile to that simple request. I am think its my duty to god grants to cities that are failing in the most fundamental relationship between the federal, state jurisdictions. Sen. Kennedy i dont mean to imply that you are taking on new orleans. I think you sent a similar and i to new york city believe philadelphia if im not mistaken. And chicago. I think its clear that are mayor in new orleans does not agree with americas immigration laws. And i understand that. This is america. You can believe what you want, but my understanding is we have to follow those laws. Is thatrstanding as well as all the Department Justice is asking that the city of new orleans follow federal law. Or go change it. Is that my understanding . A. G. Sessions thats correct. Fact, we should really strengthen 1373. Its a commonsense request for partnership with our state and locals that we support in any number of ways. I would love to see our relationships continue to get even better than they have been nationwide in crimefighting. Sen. Kennedy i want the record to reflect, mr. Chairman, i stayed with my time. Chairman thank you very much. Senator whitehouse. House thank you, chairman. Just to question. Over and over we have heard the National Security officials and people who study those issues thatofessionally Campaign Election interference by the russians is not going away, that we can expect more of it in the 2018 election. We can expect more of it in the 2020 election. A nameould like to know in the department of justice whose job it is to look at that and make recommendations to the senate as to what legislative remedies we should pursue to prevent that activity from happening. Is there such a person and what is his or her name . A. G. Sessions it would fall with interNational Security division, which is led by dan a byente, appointed president obama. Ill be frank. I dont know that we are doing a specific legislative review at this point. Sen. Whitehouse do you think it would be prudent to do it . We have been warned. A. G. Sessions i think that is a and i know that with your time in the department of justice that you can contribute to that discussion. I would be glad to discuss it with you. Sen. Whitehouse similarly there is an executive order out of the white house regarding Cyber Security that is more or less a call for information from various cabinet departments. To my knowledge there has been no proposed legislation of any. Ind my conversations with mr. Bossert at the white house have not produced any liaison or any way of Going Forward on this issue. As you know, there are multiple congressional committees that touch on Cyber Security and it complicates life that theres not somebody at the Department Justice whose job it is to work with us on Cyber Security legislation. And the silence has been deafening. If you could get me a name of a person whose responsibility it is at the Department Justice to work with the senate on Cyber Security legislation, i think that would help move things forward. A. G. Sessions i will do that. There are two levels of it. Would hope youi call our legislative affairs and say i want to talk about legislation. Sen. Whitehouse well, the reason i bring this up with the right now is that we have a lot of trouble getting answers to anything out of the Department Justice. I have a list here of unanswered mail. January 30, 2017 letter unanswered. February 2017 letter unanswered. Renewed 2017 letter september 15, 2017 unanswered. Unanswered,etter renewed july 27, 2017 unanswered. 27 2017 unanswered. September 26 letter unanswered. Please dont refer me to the people were supposed to be in charge of this relationship when they wont answer my mail. Directorions my new was just confirmed recently. Byhave got the backlog half and we will continue to cut the backlog. Knowing that you are particularly knowledgeable about these complex issues, you would like to talk to an attorney actually working the cases and has dealt with the issues. Sen. Whitehouse so yeah, im up to speed on that side. The issue is that there are things we need to fix legislatively on Cyber Security. A the moment, i cant find point of entry into this administration of anybody who is working on Cyber Security legislation or is appointed to or delegated to. Ts the person that i need about legislation and not just an update on cases. Im pretty familiar with that stuff. A. G. Sessions i understand. Sen. Whitehouse so executive privilege. The reason i sent you the letter would be that you would be prepared to talk about executive of which and this would not be a gotcha moment. Let me ask you the november 4, 1982 executive order by president reagan is still the guidelines under which the department b operates . A. G. Sessions that is part of the principles we operate under, yes. Sen. Whitehouse it is a document that describes how the executive branch will respond to executive privilege, correct . A. G. Sessions that is said and case law and other objective documents that have been issued over the years. Sen. Whitehouse so let me know if any of this has changed. That rule says that executive privilege will be asserted only in the most compelling circumstances and shall not be invoked without specific president ial authorization. Thats still the rule . A. G. Sessions repeat that. Sen. Whitehouse executive privilege will be asserted only in the most compelling circumstances and shall not be invoked without specific president ial authorization. A. G. Sessions executive privilege cannot be invoked except by the president. Sen. Whitehouse congressional request for information shall be complied with as properly and fully as possible unless it is determined the compliance raises a substantial question of is if you privilege. Is that still the rule . A. G. Sessions thats a good ruling. Sen. Whitehouse the attorney general has the authority to determine on his own that executive privilege shall not be invoked. You can make the decision not to invoke executive privilege yourself. A. G. Sessions the attorney general does not have the power to invoke it. Only the president can. Sen. Whitehouse you can determine it shall not be invoked. You have the negative power to allow questions to be answered and documents to be released not violating executive privilege. You can make that determination under paragraph three, correct . A. G. Sessions im not sure about that. Sen. Whitehouse while i dont think so. Im reading aloud. The attorney general and the ent may of the presid determine that executive privilege may not be invoked in the request of the lease of information. It says it right there. A. G. Sessions i dont believe they can do it without the approval of the president. Sen. Whitehouse they cant release . Of course it have to be able to release information without the approval of the president. You do it all the time. A. G. Sessions i guess youre talking about core. Car privileges of the executive branch, such as private conversations. Sen. Whitehouse even for that, there is still this rule that the issue has to be presented to the president. What they callnt a request of the congressional body that holds this request for a bands that you are allowed to request for. , the claim ofr executive privilege must be made with a specific approval of the president. My concern is that this period of advance has turned into a nonassertion assertion of executive privilege. Have askedstions we you about going back to your Intelligence Committee or july. E in june how long do you need to get the answer from the white house as to whether these questions are protected or not . You cant have a situation which the president never has to asserted and the advance goes on indefinitely. Dont you agree with that . A. G. Sessions well, i think you make a point, but the burden is on those who want to breach a court privilege of the president , which is private conversations with his attorney general to show precisely what it is that you would like him to waive it on. Failed what your letter and sort of reverse. It said you have to tell us what you are going to talk about. And what youre not going to talk about and i think it needs to be sen. Whitehouse tends to refer to the questions in which you asserted in interim executive privilege. We will follow up on that if we have more time. We do have questions that we will pursue any Intelligence Committee. A. G. Sessions just briefly, i have to say that the executive branch is a coequal branch. And you would not want someone demanding to know who you talk to in your office, your counsel, your chief of staff. Neither what we want to be prowling willynilly through the Supreme Court and what their clerks now and what they were told by the justices leading up to some decision thats not popular. ,o i would just urge us all first and foremost, to respect the legitimacy of any president s right to seek advice and confidence. Eisenhower was once reported to have said if one of my advisors reports the advice they gave me during the day, they will be fire that night. This is not a little matter. Thats all im saying to you. Andhis is not legitimate you make the specific cases, we will review it. It should not be done casually. Ive got to say. Sen. Whitehouse my time is up. Chairman before i call on senator graham, a question to you on this very subject, has the Intelligence Committee since he told them similar to what youre telling us today contacted to compel you to either answer specific questions orclaims of privilege subpoenaed you in any way to get answers to questions . A. G. Sessions i dont believe so, mr. Chairman. Chairman senator graham. Sen. Graham for the record, that was more than a little bit. I thought it was important enough for senator whitehouse and senator sessions. Maybe it will shorten it for other people. Sen. Graham it was important, but it wasnt a little bit. I ought to be able to define a little bit. Sen. Graham im joking. Chairman joking, ok. [laughter] give him back his time. Sen. Graham s is speaking back so speaking of letters not august 30, senator grassley and i sent a letter to the department of justice wanting information related to drafting of memos exonerated secretary clinton before the july statement of director comey. We have got nothing back. Do you think we will ever get an answer to that letter . A. G. Sessions do you need an answer or explaining why cant be answered . Sen. Graham either way. A. G. Sessions i will take that make sure it happens. Sen. Graham apparently on the fbis website, they have got contentith no suggesting that comey in may was talking and the title of this thing what is the title of this thing . Julys of director comeys 2016 statement regarding email server investigation. Thats what the title of this thing is. When you look at it, theres nothing there. Apparently in may, comey was talking to senior staff about draft memorandums clearing clinton before he ever talk to her. Are you aware of this . A. G. Sessions well, i have not been engaged in that. I told the committee at confirmation sen. Graham who do i talk to . Who do i talk to about getting my letter answered . A. G. Sessions i think you should direct your letter to the Deputy Attorney general or to the legislative affairs. Sen. Graham the reason we wrote there iser is because a hatch act investigation of a former fbi director that the Committee Office of special counsel under the hatch act gave transcripts of committee where to senior people talk about drafting this memo. So we just want to know, did comey instruct his people to draft memos rendering a conclusion about the email investigation into former july,ary clinton before before he interviewed her . If you could have somebody answer that question, we would appreciate it. Thank you. A. G. Sessions we shall respond to your inquiry. Sentencing reform there are many members of this body and committee looking at trying to reform sentences for nonviolent offenders. Would you be willing to work with us in that endeavor . A. G. Sessions i certainly would. Sen. Graham i know you want to secure the border and how the presence border plan. Count me in for securing the border. When you talk about the wall, is at the. 200 my wall . Is it a 2200 mile wall . A. G. Sessions its clear that the present is not expected to be. Sen. Graham so it will not be 2200 miles . A. G. Sessions no, it will not. Homeland security is involved in the issue. Sen. Graham do you support a pathway to citizenship for dream act kids if we get good Border Security and return . A. G. Sessions i do not support exquisitely anything about citizenship did not support explicitly anything about citizenship, but i said something can be worked out on this, but it cant be onesided. Sen. Graham i agree with that. The first thing i want to talk about is russia. Anybody inr hear of the Clinton Campaign talking about having collaborated with the russians . A. G. Sessions you mean on the media . Sen. Graham did anybody in a campaign did you ever overhear a conversation between anybody on the Campaign Meeting with the russians . A. G. Sessions you said the Clinton Campaign. Sen. Graham im sorry, the Trump Campaign. A. G. Sessions i have not seen anything that would indicate a collusion with the russians to impact the campaign. Sen. Graham were you aware of a meeting between donald jr. , ort, Jared Kushner, and russians in trump tower . A. G. Sessions no. Sen. Graham that they tell you the content of that meeting . A. G. Sessions i never discussed the content of that meeting. Sen. Graham no one said the russians are on our side and they want to help us . A. G. Sessions no, all i know about is what has been in the papers, which ive not follow that closely. Sen. Graham as into the clinton email investigation, do you know if theres a phone call between attorney general miss lynch and the white house on whether she should take a meeting with former president clinton on the tarmac . A. G. Sessions no. Sen. Graham is there anyway we can find that out . Would there be records available . The inquiries could probably directed to the Deputy Attorney general sen. Graham. Sen. Graham ok, i will do that. Do you know if the socalled trump dossier ever see toward . Ever seek a warrant . A. G. Sessions no. Sen. Graham could you find out . A. G. Sessions it would need to be directed to someone else in the department, but you can make that inquiry and you deserve a yes or no response. Sen. Graham secretary comey gave three reasons at various times i cant find my sheep here about why he took this case in july. If that is the main reason for why the president wanted to fire him for jumping into the email investigation and taking it over in unprecedented ways, why did it take so long . A. G. Sessions the investigation . Sen. Graham no, the firing . A. G. Sessions you mean, why did the president sen. Graham the president knew when he was inaugurated that comey jumped into the middle of the clinton email investigation and took the job of attorney general over. Thats the main reason he was fired. Why did he wait so long to fire comey . A. G. Sessions im not sure he ever grasped the full import of that. He asked the Deputy Attorney general rosenstein and me for recommendation. Thats the recognition we gave him. That something everybody familiar with the department of justice had been buzzing about for months. Sen. Graham now this is very important. Ive got nine seconds. I know that comey has told of the committees that the main reason he got involved in july to take over the investigation was not because of the tarmac meeting. Its because he was worried there was an email in the hands of the russians between the dnc and the department of justice. I know that testimony exists. Some claim that you know was fake. The email was fake. You know anything about this and is there anyway to find out what actually happened . A. G. Sessions suggesting one way or another that i know anything about it, i would just say that would be improper for me to share at this time if i knew. Sen. Graham thank you. Chairman senator klobuchar. Klobuchar i will start with a few questions following up my colleagues. The president has described this investigation as a witch hunt. Do you share that view of the councils work and you still have confidence in the special counsel as you have stated before the Intelligence Committee in june . A. G. Sessions people are quite free in this country to express views about the matter. Im just an old prosecutor who just says the process has to work its will. Sen. Klobuchar but back in june, you said you had confidence in special counsel muellers work. Do you still have that confidence . A. G. Sessions ive known special counsel mueller for many years before he became even fbi director. I think he will produce the work in a way he thinks is correct and history will judge. Sen. Klobuchar are you still that your testimony changed about special counsel mueller . A. G. Sessions my mind has not changed. Sen. Klobuchar when he appeared before the Intelligence Committee, you declined to answer questions about whether you discussed pardons for any of the people involved in the russian investigation. Without getting into that or your reasoning, broadly speaking, do you believe it would be problematic for an Ongoing Investigation if the president were to preemptively issue a pardon for someone we have reason to believe is of interest to that investigation before the special counsel had a chance to finish his work . Well, the pardon power is quite broad. Im not studied it. I do not know if that would be appropriate or not. Sen. Klobuchar so we dont know. Maybe we can follow up and you can look at that . A. G. Sessions i would. I would respond to a written request. Sen. Klobuchar so as you know, im very pleased with the choice of christopher wray. I was there at his ceremony and i also had a good working relationship with director comey. Do believe there are inherent risks in any private communication between the president and the fbi director . This comes out of the fact that director comey testified he had nine read the conversations with President Trump in four months. He also testified in three years that he only spoke twice with president obama. Comeysg director firing and his testimony that the president and properly raise the subject of an Ongoing Investigation during that private meeting, have you taken any steps to ensure the Justice Department officials are not being inappropriately approached by the president or anybody in the white house . Do you think there are risks in this and what steps have you taken . A. G. Sessions actually we have discussed it at some length procedures. I believe the holder or lynch memorandum on that subject remains in effect. It is probably tighter than previous memorandums on that subject and the Deputy Attorney general and others in the department i dont think we have completed our new policy, but we think there should be a careful policy on that subject. Its not appropriate to say for white house officials to call lowerlevel prosecutors or civil attorneys and carry on conversations. It should be done in an appropriate fashion. Those rules remain in effect. We are reviewing whether they should be altered in any way. Sen. Klobuchar ok, we will look forward to that and im sure you will let us know if they are altered. A letter withsent senator whitehouse and ranking number feinstein switching out some election issues. Otherjoined by my democratic colleagues asking about the Justice Departments apparent coordination with the commission. This is the pence come back Election Integrity commission, which you know has been controversial. We have sent a number of letters about this to try to figure out what the relationship is between the Integrity Department and that commission because its the Justice Departments job to ensure that Voting Rights are protected. A number of us are really concerned about this commission that is requesting data from a love of the country, including all over the country, including secretaries of states , many of whom are republican, rejecting this about going to a computer allegedly housed in the white house. I just wondered if you have had communications with members of the commission about their efforts and what kind of coronation is going on. A. G. Sessions i do not believe ive never had a single conversation with any member or staff of the commission directly. Sen. Klobuchar have people that work for you been coordinating with them . A. G. Sessions i dont know of coordinating is the correct we have been asked for assistance on several issues. I think its quite appropriate for the president to have a commission to review possible irregularities in elections. You can be sure that the department of justice will fairly and objectively enforce the law. Sen. Klobuchar i believe that to be true. Im just concerned that this commission is often doing the work and we just found out this week from the Washington Post that one of the employees have been charged with possession and distribution of child pornography. I just asked that you asked the Vice President and the vice chair to answer our questions about that. If the staffer has been charged horrendous crime had access to voter data, including minors, and what is that to the commission . A. G. Sessions we would some fulfill our responsibility. I think the directions should go to the commissions and not doj. Sen. Klobuchar maybee could pass it on. Maybe you could pass it on. Along the lines of elections, senator warner and i have been working on a bill that we think is really important and this is more to bring it to your attention. I know you have recused yourself from the russian investigation. I respect that decision. I truly do. This is just beyond that because its about the acts that were brought during the 2016 campaign. Adler bought on facebook with rubles and billions of dollars were spent on political ads in 2016. Orike ads broadcast on tv printed in the newspaper, there is no requirement on online point theyhat at any register those ads or have a way of indicating if they are paid for and how much money is spent on them. Issue National Security because of what we have seen now with russia. Also completely absurd that we have some kind of ads that you can register and check out on public file and then these others are completely dark and hidden from view. Given what is going on, do you think that the election laws should be updated as overseeing the department that has first action jurisdiction over the peoples Voting Rights to better protect our democracy . Well, in this new fastpaced world of technology, perhaps there are needs to updated it and i would be pleased to work with you. Sen. Klobuchar i appreciate that, attorney general. Thank you very much. Chairman senator cruz. Uz thank you, mr. Chairman. General sessions, welcome back. We miss you on the side of the dais and we spent a lot of time in this hearing room together and thank you for your good and Honorable Service as attorney general and the many positive things that happened at the Department Justice in the last nine months. I want to talk with you about issue that is near and dear to your heart, which is immigration. I want to cover a couple of areas. Lets start with daca. I want to commend you and the president for doing the right thing, terminating is a obamas illegal executive Amnesty Program. It was contrary to federal law. It was contrary to the president s responsibility under article two of the constitution to take cares that the laws be faithfully executed. And it directed federal Law Enforcement officers to disregard abiding federal law. So i commend you for announcing the suspension of that program. As you know, the president has indicated that it is now for program to legislate a addressed to those Daca Recipients. And there are right now considerable ongoing debates and discussions within congress about if and whether to do so and if so how. My first question is, does the department of justice have position on whether congress should legislate a new Amnesty Program for Daca Recipients . A. G. Sessions the department has not taken a position formally on that. The president has certainly left the door wide open and indicated that he would favor Something Like that. It certainly would be a lawful and proper thing for congress to do. Sen. Cruz so my understanding is that as of september 2017, there are 689,800 individuals currently with dr. Registration. Ac dr. Registrationa. There are nearly 2 million potential Daca Recipients and the country. Thoser judgment, should nearly 2 Million People here illegally in this country be eligible for United States citizenship . A. G. Sessions my best judgment that i have expressed over the years is that someone who enters the country unlawfully, if they are given some sort of legal status,and normal legal should not get everything that would flow to people who properly weight their time and enter lawfully. Im not taking a position on it that would support citizenship for those who have entered illegally. Sen. Cruz certainly as a senator on the side of the dais, i think you have multiple times spoken with great passion on the issue. As attorney general, do you have any view on whether those here illegally should be eligible for u. S. Citizenship . A. G. Sessions well, ive not changed my view at this point. Sen. Cruz let me ask you, as attorney general, if those some 2 Million People here illegally that are potential Daca Recipients for granted green cards and ultimately u. S. Citizenship, do you have concerns about the next step of chain migration of those individuals that bring in potentially 3, 4, 5 million relatives as the second step of an Amnesty Program . A. G. Sessions yes. They need to be evaluated. When you use the figure 2 million, it just raises the question that we should think carefully about, like who would qualify for a daca program if one were to be carried out . Clear,sident has made and he cares about this. He cares about young people who came here at a young age, but he also believes that the nation should have an immigration policy that serves the National Interest and that it should not be it should be a more meritbased policy like canada. That is something ive believed in for a number of years. Sen. Cruz let me ask a different question. In your personal judgment, should those here illegally be made eligible for Public Welfare and for billions in both federal , state, and local funds to provide for their various needs . A. G. Sessions if people are here unlawfully, which it strikes me that the last thing you would want to do to subsidize that unlawfulness, you would not and should not be normally eligible for benefits. Maybe some things we will do, no doubt about it. , a personamentally should not be attracted to enter the country unlawfully and then demand lawful benefits. Sen. Cruz let me shift to a different topic under immigration, which is Border Security. I want to commend the administration. Early on we saw dramatic decreases in illegal crossings and the neighborhood of a decrease of two thirds of the opening months of the of ministration. I commend you for that. I will say that im concerned by reports im hearing from the border. m concerned according to the public numbers of august this year, customs and border for texans saw a 20 increase in apprehensions of inadmissible person at ports of entry. I had a conversation with the rangers in south texas that earlier in the year the number of illegal crossings had dropped significantly, but throughout the summer, he saw the number spiking up again. He was concerned that it was returning to levels we saw earlier. Andyou concerned about that what is the department of justice and the department of Homeland Security doing to prevent this . A. G. Sessions im very concerned about it. The president s own strong leadership resulted in a decline , we believe, of almost half the attempted entries into the United States. Colleagues, if you make clear the border is closed and we back attemptseres no doubt to enter unlawfully will plummet. This is not an Impossible Task for america to secure the border. They are challenging us now. There are many, many problems with our abilities to enforce the law, some loopholes of monumental proportions, and i strongly believe that legislation from congress is going to be essential for doing what the American People want. Sen. Cruz let me ask one final question. I recently did a townhome with the number Border Patrol agent and visited a number of control agents along the rio grande. One of hearing from Border Patrol agents is that the policies of catch and release of the Obama Administration are still continuing in the current administration. That is highly troubling. When i heard those reports in january and february, i told them give the administration some time to get 13 in place. 13 in place. You cannot turn a battleship overnight. It is now october. Is the Trump Administration continuing the policy of catch and release, and if so, what is the plan to and that policy . A. G. Sessions im glad you asked that question. 2011, we had a backlog of immigration cases of 300,000. It is now over 600,000. 5000 people in 2009 who were apprehended at the border claim they should not be deported because they have a fear of being sent back home. Last year, it increased from 5000 to 94,000. Those people are basically entitled the hearings. This is a loophole that is too big. We need to create some sort of control over it. We are looking if there is anything we can do effectively short of legislation, but there is no doubt, mr. Chairman, we need legislation on the subject and several others. We are adding judges. Already and we will have another 40 by january. The backlog, instead of going up, will be going down. We will continue to work with that. Legislation is critical. Sen. Cruz my time is expired, but if i could ask for direct yes or no on whether catch a release is still the policy . A. G. Sessions essentially its not the policy, but its the reality that there are so many people claiming and being entitled to hearings that we dont have the ability to provide those hearings. They are being released into the community and theyre not coming back for their hearings. Its on acceptable. Chairman senator franken. Nken attorney general sessions, welcome back. Last time we spoke, i asked you about russian interference in the 2016 president ial election there is now absolutely no question that the russians meddled in the election in order to undermine confidence in american democracy to damage the campaign of hillary clinton, and to boost donald trump. Our intelligence agencies have confirmed this. We also know that there were many contacts and communications between russian operatives and Trump Campaign officials and associates. Now in order to make sure that this kind of attack never happens again, we need to understand what happened. And whether anyone inside the Trump Campaign assisted the russians effort. During her confirmation hearing, i asked you, and i quote, if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the trunk Campaign Trump campaign communicate with the russian government in the course of this campaign, what would you do . That was a simple, straightforward question. What will you do . The implication was will you recuse yourself . But rather than answer that question, he replied, ive been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and i did not have communications with the russians. That was on january 10. On february coming were confirmed. 8, you areary confirmed. On march first, there was a story that you met with a in july and once on september 8. It was little reported that you met with the Russian Ambassador a third time at the Mayflower Hotel in april of 2016. Confronted with these reports, you suddenly changed your story. Beforeswer under oath this committee was that you did not have communications with the russians. But on the morning that the story broke, you said, ive not met with any russians at any time to discuss any Political Campaign. On twitter, you said, i never met with any russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign. So confronted with the truth, you started to qualify your answer. Later in a letter you sent to this community to clarify committee to clarify your i dony, you wrote, not recall in discussions with the Russian Ambassador or any other representative of the russian Government Regarding the Political Campaign on these occasions or any other occasions. This summer, the Washington Post reported that american intelligence agencies intercepted communications between the Russian Ambassador and moscow in which he described two of his conversations with you. Theapril meeting at Mayflower Hotel and the july meeting at the Republican National convention, citing both former and current u. S. Officials, the intercepts reportedly indicated that you have substantive discussions on policy matters important to moscow. According to officials familiar with russian intelligence reports, the abbasid was well known for accurately relating his interactions with u. S. Officials back to the kremlin. Attorney general sessions, in response to this report, the Justice Department declined to comment on the veracity of the intelligence intercepts, but doj did assert that you did not discuss interference in the election, which is also how you describe your communications to the senate Intelligence Committee. Again, the goal post has been moved. First it was, i did not have communications with the russians. Which was not true. Then it was, i never met with any russians to discuss any Political Campaign, which may or may not be true. Now its i did not discuss interference in the campaign, which further narrows your initial blanket denial about meeting with the russians. Since you have qualified your denial to say that you did not discuss issues of the campaign with russians, what in your view constitutes issues of the campaign . A. G. Sessions well, let me just say this without hesitation that i conducted no improper discussions with russians at any time regarding the campaign or any other item facing this country. I will say that first. That has been the suggestion that you have raised and others that somehow we had conversations that were improper. Sen. Franken nasa just that a. G. Sessions no, you had a long time, senator franken. I would like to respond. Sen. Franken we will note that senator cruz 12 minutes over. Off soe going to cut me i want to ask you some questions. A. G. Sessions mr. Chairman, i dont have to sit here and listen to sen. Franken you are the one who testified. A. G. Sessions without having a chance to respond. Give me a break. Sen. Franken ok, thank you. Go ahead. A. G. Sessions its not a simple question, senator franken. Sen. Franken im sorry. A. G. Sessions it was not a support question. The lead in to your question was very, very troubling. Way thatd to you in a i felt was responsive to what you raised in your question. Let me read it to you. You said, cnn has just published a story, meaning that day, while we were in a hearing, that i had not heard about. Sen. Franken keep reading. A. G. Sessions im telling you this about this new story that has just been published. Im not expecting you to know whether or not its true. Cnn just published a story alleging that the Intelligence Community of the United States of america provided documents to the president elect last week that included information that russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and Financial Information about mr. Rump. You went on to say that these documents also allegedly say there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between trumps surrogates and intermediaries for the russian government. Now again, im telling you this as its coming out so you know, but if its true, its obviously extremely serious and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the trunk campaign communicate with the russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do . Dramaticaback by this statement that id never heard before and knew nothing about, i responded this way. Senator franken, im not aware of those activities. Surrogate acalled a time or two in this campaign and i did not have communications with the russians. Im unable to comment on it. I dont think that can fairly be interpreted as saying i never had conversations with any russians. It was referring directly to the suggestion that if there was a continuing exchange of information between trump surrogates and intermediaries for the russian government, which did not happen, at least not to my knowledge and not with me, and thats why i responded the way i did. Im disappointed. Yes, you can say what you want to about the accuracy of it, but i think it was a goodfaith response to a dramatic event at the time. I dont think its fair for you to suggest otherwise. Three minutes and then finish. Sen. Franken he took more than three minutes. A. G. Sessions how much do you want . I want to spend time bargaining with you. I do not take as much time as senator franken took. Chairman let me just deal with senator franken. Three more minutes please. ,en. Franken ok, first of all i did not have communications with the russians. This is about ongoing communications. You have three communications sylac. Insle you cannot recall whether you discussed or what you discussed with him. A. G. Sessions what i would say to you is sen. Franken please go ahead. A. G. Sessions you make a lot of allegations. Thats hard for me to respond to them in the time that ive got. Sen. Franken can i have a little bit more time . Ok. You said today in response to senator leahy that you dont recall whether you talked about the campaign. You dont recall whether you talk about issues and trumps views on issues with the russians. Those are very, very relevant to the campaign whether a surrogate from the campaign is talking with the Russian Ambassador about the candidates views on , especially at the Republican National convention, at the Mayflower Hotel the day before trump is going to give his first speech on Foreign Policy. Thats very different not being able to recall what you discussed with him. Its a very different than i have nott had communications with the russians. The ambassador from russia is russian. How your responses morphed from i did not have communications with the russians to i did not tests i didtantive not discuss the Political Campaign and then finally going to i did not discuss interference in the election. That to me is moving the goalposts every time. Itare starting off with extrawide and then by the end we are going to a 75 yard field goal. Saying i didnt discuss interfering with the election is your last statement, that is a very different bar then i can tell you i did not meet with any russians. So he gets to do about 10 minutes of improperly framing the subject and im giving a short answered response . Chairman proceed please. First andons foremost, senator franken to you and i have had a Good Relationship on this committee. I would tell most of my colleagues that ive committed myself to a high level of public service. To reach the highest standards of ethics and decency in my service, to be honest about things that i said. You have now gone through this long talk that i believe is totally unfair to me. Question. Se from this when it was charged that these documents allegedly say there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign asn trumps surrogates sf all them trump surrogates and russian navy man intermediaries, isnt that what you said . Sen. Franken i did not say all them. A. G. Sessions i felt a need to respond and i responded on the spot. Its been six hours in the hearing. End of the day and i said im not aware of those activities. And i wasnt and am not. I dont believe they occurred. I said ive been called a surrogate a time or two in that campaign and i do not have indications with the russians. Im unable to comment on it. I was talked about as a surrogate in the campaign. A continuinge exchange of information. So now Everything Else now you take that as if i ever met with the russian and ive not been candid with the committee and i reject that. Center. i was paying enough attention that i dont a dr pepper on senator cruz. That is what was distracting us on this side of the dice. I like to talk about the russians but in the longterm objectives that Vladimir Putin has to undermine the public trust. Obviously the 2016 investigation election matters a lot and ive tried to talk about something slightly different, but the longerterm goal that they have. Anybody who reads intelligence, this is not through the prism of who you voted for and 2016 election are what you think happened. All that is,as anybody who reads intelligence is know that we face a sophisticated, longterm effort by a foreign adversary to undermine our Foreign Policy and ability to lead in the world by undermining confidence in american institutions. Theres nobody reading intelligence right now that doesnt know Vladimir Putin has that objective. This should not be a republican versus democrat issue. Vladimir putin is an opportunist. Any partisan or ideological alignment he has is temporary. He wants to undermine america and every patriotic american ought to be concerned about that. Patriotic american on to be concerned about it. You listen to certain news outlets and it sounds like there is a russian behind everything. Other news outlets, it is the case of Vladimir Putin of somebody we should trust. He has everybodys best interest at heart. Which is more absurd. People reading intelligence knows russia will be back in 2018, 2020, and they have goals to undermined American Democratic republican institutions and to undermine our confidence in these institutions and exacerbate american on american hatred. We live in a time where info ops and miss information are for more are a far more costeffective way to weaken the United States of america that outspend it on a military level. As the nations chief Law Enforcement officer and as the supervisor of multiple components of our Intelligence Committee, im cures about your views on this issue. I am curious about your views on this issue. Do you think we are doing enough to prepare for future . A. G. Sessions we are not. Complex, mostso of us, we are not able to fully grasp the technical dangers out there. We have commercial penetration by some of our toughest trading partners. We have disruption and interference by russians. It requires a real review. Under your leadership, what concrete steps have the steps has the department should have to get or will take for the purposes of fighting against future for election interference . A. G. Sessions we are looking at a number of things. Reviewing, as a commercial interference and theft of trade secrets and importance data and important data. Some private companies have spent decades developing hundreds of millions of dollars and have it stolen in a moment. We have indictments dealing with some of the issues. The National Security division of the department of justice has talented people. The fbi has a good of a group of experts on sophisticated computer technology. Whether we are at the level we need to be yet i do not think so. Lets distinguish between t thingswo between two things you were asked if you had confidence in the genera 26 2016 a. G. Sessions i never i acknowledged it at my confirmation. Have no reason to deny or doubt it. Chairman you have confidence in the integrity and professionals the Intelligence Community . We have enough people coming into the National Security division. If you were arriving at doj at nd were focusing on an estate the first 100 days you were the first 100sd days were there we are investing way too little in the pipeline for offensive and defensive aspects. A. G. Sessions the Misinformation Campaign is something i am not sure we are at the bottom of yet. It needs to continue to be examined. When i was on the Armed Services committee, i had devastation i had legislation passed. Vulnerabilities in our Defense Department in our missile systems. We have the commercial penetration. Nowave cases ongoing validating the concern. Chairman that is looking chiefly at current hardware and software exposures and retrospectively you think the department of justice has a proactive role in looking at hardening our democratic process . A. G. Sessions you make a valuable point. If you have legislation or thoughts, i will be glad to hear it. I am not sure we have a specific review underway. At this point and time. Most of this has to be correlated with the intelligence theunity, nsa, cia, director of national intelligence. I appreciate your responsiveness to me i will. Me. To i will follow up. If i could run over by 30 seconds i would like to draw to your attention, the fact we have a number of crimes committed by illegal aliens in nebraska. Some of these are some of the most dangerous crimes you can imagine. This is not cherry picking that apples. We know some of the crimes we are dealing with are committed by illegal aliens in the country are dealing with threats by transnational organizations like ms13. I have a series of questions i would like to ask you about it. Because we are at time, i will pick it would you commit to or needing a briefing for my team and me on the financing and Payment Systems use by the transnational gangs . A. G. Sessions we would be glad to. Transnational organizations has been given to us by the president. In particular, ms13. We are giving great attention to it. Chairman sasse thank you. I want to ask for your accommodation. I was going to call on senator kunz and senator dallas. I was going to ask if you need a few minutes away from the table. This is what is ahead of us senator blumenthal, senator have seven we democrats want five minutes second round. Minutes foreast 40 second round. If you want to stay there, we will just a. G. Sessions i would like to have a break. Sen. Grassley ok. After senator kunz and senator we will take a 20 minute break. A half hour. Sen. Grassley a half hour break. That is what senator feinstein asked, and that is what we will do. Kunz you have publicly recused yourself from all matters relating to the ongoing russian investigation. I wanted to focus on it because i am concerned about whether or not you have honored to be guzzo fully honored the recusal fully. I wrote to the office of professional response ability and the department of justice in july. Asking exactly how employees at the department of justice are ensuring they are aware of and honoring your recusal. I have not got an answer. I took it personally until i realized, from what the chairman said earlier, there are many letters not answered by the department. If your department has not answered, could you . Answer directly how are employees participating in special counsel muellers investigation instructed about your recusal . A. G. Sessions the day i took office, after i had told this committee i would meet with the ethics officials at the department to determine whether proposal of appropriate, we had my first meeting. We had a series of meetings. Since i realized there is a possibility i would need to recuse myself at the first meeting, i received no information from the investigation. I never met with investigators. I do not know who the lawyers were officially working the case. We had a brief from the ethics officials of the nature of the case. You need to know something about the case before you can make an official recusal decision. When i recuse myself, we sent a the key peoplel in the department of justice, including the fbi director comey. Not be involved in the investigation, neither i nor my staff, the attorney generals staff, were to be involved in the investigation or receive information about it. Dr. Comey said he did not get this. We have the documents, the emails to him directly by name. I am sure he gets a lot and may have missed it. We definitely did it. I have complied with it rigorously. Sen. Coons if i could make sure a. G. Sessions for the purpose of the russian investigation, the attorney Rod Rosenstein guarantees its integrity. Sen. Coons have you spoken with present up about special counsel molar at any point special anysel muller at point . A. G. Sessions i will not comment on the conversations we have had. It violates the privilege. Do think the attorney general made the right decision to appoint a special counsel . You spoke in response to the his do youor think it is the right choice . A. G. Sessions the decision upon a special counsel on the facts and circumstances of the case of which he was fully apprised. He is a talented and experience prosecutor. You may estimate that some of the core mission of the department of justice, fighting well in crime, given our nation safe, respecting of law, promoting rule of law, it is important, as you have stated, it reaches a conclusion without interference. In your view, if the president asked for your advice about whether or not to remove or fire the special counsel, would it be an appropriate conversation to have with you . A. G. Sessions i have not thought that through. If it deals with the special counsel, the communication would need to be direct to the person who supervises special counsel, the Deputy Attorney general. Is the special counsel were removed, would you protest or consider resigning in order to clarify the importance of the position in the investigation . A. G. Sessions i will not attempt to deal with hypothetical. It will be best to leave my answer as i gave it. Sen. Coons let me move to another recusal. In your confirmation hearing, you said, in response to a question from the chairman, you had offered it be the proper thing to do. It was raised during the campaign. When you saysaid, you will recuse, you actually recuse the decision and will fall to the Deputy Attorney general. You say after sentences, there is a procedure for that, which i will follow. You shared with meat that you will follow it. Rosenstein s conduct comey during the investigation and concludes the director handled incorrectly. Is that correct . A. G. Sessions yes, you are talking with the recommendation . Sen. Coons yes. You put a memo to the president relied on the memo, where you recommended director connie be removed, correct . A. G. Sessions correct. Sen. Coons if you were recusing yourself from any investigations for issues relating to secretary clinton in the investigation, why did you write a memo to the president exclusively relying on the matter . The administration stated reason for removing director coming was conduct relating to the clinton email investigation. Why would you participate directly in the matter if you were recused from considering it . Attorney general does not recuse himself from fbi, a 7on of the billion dollar agency, he is responsible for. He may have recuse himself about one or more matters the fbi was working on. Case had been closed. It was not an ongoing matter at the time. The discussion about whether or not mr. Comey conducted himself properly did not deal with whether or not there was sufficient evidence to go forward or not. It dealt with whether or not he acted properly when he closed the case without instead of the attorney Generals Office. The prosecutors in the attorney Generals Office. I am glad to have the opportunity to discuss it. I am confident i did not i was not required to recuse myself on the decision of cheat onr not to director comey. Conclude, you say, i am committed to the will of law. Have ancerned we difference it is the cited reason of the fbi director. A. G. Sessions i will respond id say i am comfortable did not violate what i told this committee in not recusing myself on the decision of mr. Comey. It was not based on the merits of the investigation. It was based on his performance, publicly and in regard to announcing a decision he was not entitled to announce. Sen. Tillis. Thank you. I hope you know ive been a strong supporter of yours. Timeframe,e summer i thought the present was wavering his support for you, i had the confidence in you. I will continue to. The good news is i preside at once. I cannot go over if i wanted to. Nominee a division before us. Thean drill on it during confirmation. Your office responded to a you thatat we sent to the program is effectively over. When you go out and talk to businesses and depository institutions, they are still concerned with what is going on out there with examiners and people out in the various and the various precatory agencies of knock on the memo. I would appreciate any effort the doj can do to communicate to these lowerlevel bureaucrats, who think they will transcend us and well begin this program at some point. If they do it now and if we can find out they are doing it, i hope it means it comes at the cost of their jobs. I do not want to talk about it now. I want to talk about a subject. I need to get better clarity for people of these to the Operation Program under the Obama Administration. We have to get surgery of the examiners. I was everything i can to make sure they are not working there again. Thank you for your leadership. We believe we took immediate and strong action to stop it. If there are other problems out there, in the world, but me know. Sen. Tillis we can work with people in North Carolina. It needs to go down to the name of the people who are not paying attention to what the leadership has told them to do. If they do not change their behavior, we need to shed light on those individuals. They can be terminated for the behavior. Im going to push every button i can to make sure it happens. They need to follow their leadership. You to respond to a question i get from citizens. Does anybody really want to throw out a good educated accomplished young people, some serving their country . Brought to the country to move out of their own . What do you say to the citizen . A. G. Sessions it cannot be the policy of the United States. It is not a sustainable policy. However sen. Tillis i agree with it. That is a citizen who happens to be a United States president. Would you say to him when he says it to you directly in the oval office . A. G. Sessions the president made clear he would like to deal with people young people who came here and let bigger a long time and have had and have performed well in our country. He would like to have reform in that area. He wants other things essential to go with it. As i think you do. Sen. Tillis i do. I appreciate your chairmanship. I characterized it as a debate club. A. G. Sessions you are an active and by the participant. Sen. Tillis i want to ask another question about daca. It is your opinion it is an executive Branch Overreach. A. G. Sessions exactly. Sen. Tillis it would also be your opinion that the present is condoning an executive Branch Overreach . Wouldve ended the a. G. Sessions the department of Homeland Security is committed a lot of effort to start the program. They need some time to wind it down. It is an appropriate program. Sen. Tillis what about january . It is what they requested. It is appropriate to wind down sen. Tillis i am running out of time. What do you think the president meant in a tweet back in Early September when he said, we have six months to legalize daca, six legalize daca, or i will visit the issue . Would you advise and he has no administrative issue to revisit the issue . A. G. Sessions im not sure what the president meant exactly in the short statements. He wants to fix this problem, as you do. Sen. Tillis i do. You were in the senate for 20 years, is that right . A. G. Sessions that is correct. Sen. Tillis how many successful immigration outcomes have you seen . A. G. Sessions not many. Sen. Tillis any . A. G. Sessions ive seen bad things happen. My line has been every time you have brought anything in his body about immigration that would work, to reduce lawlessness, it never passed. Sen. Tillis if we go down the there are two extremes in this debate. There is sen. Tillis we do not there is we borders, not bridges. We have another group that says he entered this country even ugly, even if they are minors, they need to go home. If we allow either of those ends of the spectrum to dominate the debate, where do you think will be be 20 years or not immigration perform . A. G. Sessions it is not a fair analysis of it. Wantthe American People and what i would like to see is us and the laws us end the laws. Sen. Tillis i will finish of the second mark. You are the attorney general, but you and a number of your staff are actively engaged in the Immigration Reform strategy. I would ask people to think reasonably about how we can go about taking care of every layer of issues we have. Whether it is the daca population, the work the subprogram, the abuses of our the work visa program, the abuses of rb subprogram. If we and the basis of our visa program. It did not get done when the democrats had a super majority. We need people in a constructive dialogue. I will not be one of the people 20 years from now. It will be guilty of the same failure. I look for to working with you and having people in your office inductively engaged in something that produces an outcome. Thank you. A. G. Sessions thank you. I want to Say Something center for something senator feinstein and i know. He provided some specific information, i think would result senator frankens concerns about the attorney general. We are not at liberty to Say Something given to us in secured briefing. After the briefing, the Ranking Member and i wrote to the fbi and requested the fbi give the full committee, alternative members of this committee, to know what the two of us over the briefing. The fbi did not do that. Now that we have conflicts could have been avoided if the fbi would have been more transparent with the oversight of this committee. We will adjourn now a senator has not have an opportunity. Sen. Grassley to have not, i announced for the benefit of sessions. A. G. Sessions if it is critical to the schedule, i can stay of it. Willgrassley i said i have a break after we were done with him. We will reconvene at 1 25 exactly. [murmuring] Jeff Sessions served in the. S. Senate this is his first appearance before the Judiciary Committee since his confirmation earlier this year. The committee will resume its those rations, or questions ahead at 1 25 eastern, according to chairman grassley. Will be back with live coverage we will be back with live. Overage attorney general sessions, welcome. For all of the people in the audience, we welcome you as well. Think general sessions for being here for this oversight hearing. Oversight is one of the critical functions and Constitutional Responsibilities of our branch. It is an opportunity for congress to investigate and question the policies and actions of any executive branch. It is an opportunity for the executive branch to take responsibility for any of those policies and actions. It is an opportunity for congress to defend its constitutional powers and check any abuses by an overreaching executive branch. It has been that way for 230 years. That wee complained have not had an oversight hearing with this attorney general earlier. Was then for deferring attorney general should have in place before appear before us. Attorney general holder and attorney general lynch did have the respective teams in place by the time they appeared here, as you are now here. The other side has been blocking executive nominations for the past 10 months. Significantly, delaying the department of justices abilities to get management in place and things in order. We are here now and ready to our oversight. The department of justice is an incredibly important part of the executive branch. Enforcing laws and ensuring Public Safety against foreign among other, responsibilities. Our citizens look to the department of justice to provide federal leadership and preventing and controlling crime. We rely on the department to seek just punishment of those guilty of unlawful behavior and to ensure fair and impartial and ministration of justice. The department currently faces many difficult issues. Our country is challenged with the over going threat of homegrown terrorism. We have seen terrorist incidents involving around the world, especially impacting europe. In the u. K. Alone, there have been at least half a dozen major terrorist incidents in the past nine months. I have a couple of paragraphs here of other things going on, both in europe and the United States. I am going to skip over, but there has been a lot of people inled and terrorist attacks the western world are something we ought to be very concerned about. They are real and we must protect our country by lawful means. Congress has tried to do so by providing lawful authorities such as section 702 of the fisa amendment act. Congress passed the legislation and president bush signed into law 2008. After more debate and president obamas support, congress reauthorize the law in 2012 unchanged. The law is up for reauthorization. Section 702 is scheduled to expire at the end of this year. It is up to congress to reauthorize this Important National security tool, while preserving privacy and Civil Liberties and increasing transparency for the american public. General sessions, i am interested in hearing your thoughts on the important legislation. In september, the fbi released crime data for the second year in a row, Violent Crime increased across United States. Cities like baltimore, chicago, kansas city, missouri, has seen massive increases in homicide. Baltimore is on pace to top the number of homicides in new york city, even of the population is almost 80 million less. Almost 8 million less. This country is mired in overdose death and of use of opioid drugs. Over 47,000 people died in 2014. Fentanyl is an example, destroying lives. It is a national issue. I cosponsored the comprehensive addiction and recovery act, known as cara. It passed through this committee , signed into law last year. Cara addresses the opening bysis in a conference in way authorizing almost 900 million over five years fo. This past weekend, reports adjusted Congress Gave a pass to Big Drug Companies, making prescription opioids by enacting the insurance access and effective Drug Enforcement act. Dea signed off on this bill last year. Former dea employees are really against the law, pointing fingers at lawmakers. If dea had problems with this bill, they were the ones that could have given had the expertise to warn congress. They did not. The Obama Administration provided language for the bill and signed into law. I am planning on having oversight hearing that will include your department to see , it needsnything changing. October 1, this country suffer through the deadliest mass shooting. I do not need to go through the history of it. It will be in our printed state in my printed statement. Recently briefed the judiciary staff on the addition of guns called bump stocks. We will look closely at the issue. The president announced the wind out of the deferred action against childhood arrivals daca. Ms, my office received preliminary individuals 2000 who had daca status terminated for criminal activity. We want to know who these criminals are, what kinds of crimes theyre committing and if there are any gains. You announced earlier this year, to dojs recommitment immigration enforcement. Judges were supposed to be added to the bench this year. 75 more gear. What steps doj has taken. There is another issue i want to address that came up in the news yesterday. 2015 and last week, i wrote to the Justice Department about russian acquisition of uranium one, which was approved during the last administration. The transaction resulted in russians only 20 of americas uranium mining capacity. During the transaction, the Justice Department had an ongoing criminal investigation for bribery, extortion, money officials into making the purchase. They were reportedly correlating with highlevel officials. ,hile all of this was going on the Clinton Foundation reportedly received the lanes of dollars from interested parties on the transactions. Secretary Clintons State Department was one that gave the thumbs up for the takeover. Despite this, the Previous Administration approved the transaction. In my letter, as the agencies involved in improving the transactions if they were a ware of the probe. This committee have an obligation to get to the bottom of this issue. The committee is waiting for responses to 11 oversight letters sent to the Justice Department on matters from what the internet what the attorney general have not been recused. There have been letters not answered. I expect these letters will be those fromncluding the Previous Administration. I also want to ask you about the firing of former director james comey. It was an important moment for the department of justice and for this country. The American People have a right to know why he was fired, especially in the middle of highprofile issues going on, including the investigation into russian interference in the 2016 election. Thank you, general sessions, for being here. Senator feinstein. Sen. Feinstein thank you. Mr. Chairman, good morning. This is the first time you have appeared before the midi. Welcome. As a former member, you know the Oversight Authority behold. Authority we hold. At your confirmation hearing, i have a deep belief of the independence of the attorney general. Although we have had attorney generals who do their job as serving the president and as an extension of the white house, i do not believe that is the job of the attorney general. Is theorney general people in the law. Importantly, his job is to enforce federal law fairly and equally for all americans. Which is why i was surprised in april, you declared the Justice Department is in a new area. This is the trumpera. I want to explore a few issues of what you mean by it. Let me begin with Voting Rights. During your confirmation hearing, you testified, the aggressive enforcement of laws to ensure access to the ballot for every eligible voter without hindrance or discrimination woul. I was pleased to hear it. This year, the Justice Department discarded its longstanding position on a texas voter id law. Nearly six years, the department of justice had argued the texas law was unconstitutional and intended to discriminate against minority voters. A just a, portion of it on minorities. Two weeks after your confirmed, the department dropped its opposition to the texas law. The Department Also changed its position on another key voting sights case, involving ohio purge of voters. Who had not cast a ballot in six years and failed to return a postcard were removed from state voting roles. This process reportedly resulted in the removal of 40,000 voters in one county alone. It covered cleveland and its surrounding suburbs. Civil rights organizations challenge the process, arguing the National Registration voter act for bids the states from removing individuals for failing to vote. In july 2016, the Justice Department told the court it opposed ohios purge. Sixthtember 2016, the circuit agreed that ohios process of removing voters was illegal. This ruling cleared the way for thousands of ohioans to cast ballots in the 2016 president ial election. However, the decision is being appealed to the Supreme Court. Now, the department of justice is taking the side of removing voters from the rolls. The roels. The roles. Would like to turn to lgbt writes. Lfgbt rights. It is important to me we preserve these protections. This committee should not tolerate efforts to undermine the progress it has progress made. After confirmation hearing, you testified we must continue to move forward and never back. I will ensure the statues protecting the lgbt communitys civil rights and their safety are fully enforced. I was pleased to learn the department is sending a top aide crimes lawyer to top hate crimes lawyer to iowa. According to the time, the decision was personally initiated by you. Andver, i was surprised concerned to learn this summer, the Justice Department switched its position on title vii. It is not arguing the law does not protect lgbt workers. On october 5, two weeks ago, issued a memorandum to all u. S. Attorneys and agency heads, infecting them the department instructing them the Department Must take the position the title vii does not protect transgendered employees in all cases. In other words, it appears your department is urging the courts to allow employers to discriminate against all lgbt workers across the country. I hope you will clear it up in your testimony. There are other controversial policies being implemented. The president s travel ban, for example. Multiple federal courts found the muslim ban unconstitutional. Including another court in hawaii yesterday. Inse travel ban efforts are a front to our nations commitment to bridges liberty. The Justice Department staunchly defends the ban. Indaca, you recommended september, the program be terminated. I think we believe these young people have placed their trust in the government. They have come out of the shadows. They are provided all of the information to authorities. Basic the opportunity to get right with the law they seek the opportunity to get right with the law. Most of us believe these dreamers embody the american spirit and have made, positive contributions and have made positive country since the country. We should stand by them. Hear about the firing of fbi director james comey. President trump initially said he fired director comey based on your recommendation and that of Deputy Attorney general Rod Rosenstein. Within days, the president admitted to lester holt, on nbc news, he actually fired comey because of the russia thing. Days also reported the before he fired director comey, President Trump summoned his top advisers and told them he had prepared a termination letter. It is important, i believe, to understand what role you had in this process. Included conversations with the president s and others in the white house. Last week, the democratic members of this committee sent a letter, making it clear we would be asking about director comeys firing at this hearing. Answers or thed assertion of a valid claim of executive privilege by the president. Department is incredibly important. You are as well. Our country depends on a department independent, committed to protecting the rights and freedoms of all americans, not just some. We look forward to hearing from you on these and other important issues. I think you, mr. Chairman i thank you, mr. Chairman. General sessions, i would like to swear you at this point. Will you a firm that the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god . Before you speak, i would like we have a long session ahead of us. There are going to be a lot of questions. Since we do not get a copy of your opening remarks, i was wondering if it be possible for you to submit your longer remarks and summarize so we can get to question sooner. Whatever time you need, take it. A. G. Sessions thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to be all of you. Ranking member feinstein and members, former colleagues and friends, i appreciate this opportunity. It is an honor of a lifetime, you have to know, for me to serve as attorney general of the United States of america. You can understand and know, with my 15 years in that department in my 20 years in this committee with oversight of that department, i understand the responsibilities i have and the duties i have to undertake. I will do my best every day to be worthy of the trust you place in me. Men andngle day, the women of the department of justice are working to protect our National Security against terrorists threats, defend our civil rights, reduce Violent Crime,. Sto deadly but Violent Crime, stop deadly drug dealers, strengthen the rule of law. Justice isent of resolutely focused on dealing with the terrorism threata we face terrorism threats we face. The military advises us an increase in attacks. The president s etc. Order is important step to ensuring we know who is coming into our country. It is a lawful and necessary order we are proud to defend. Most may not know, the Supreme Court has already vacated one injunction against the order. We are confident, as time go es by. We know Violent Crime is rising after a most 30 years of decline. For two years in a row, we have seen the fastest overall increase in Violent Crimes in 25 years. 20 homicide rate increased in two years. Was the the increase greatest in 49 years. It is a trend we must confront. The president understands this. In one of his First Executive orders, he directed us in civil terms to reduce crime in america in simple terms to reduce crime in america. We are doing something about it. Weerstand the key fact need to understand this 85 of Law Enforcement officers in america are state and local. They are more trained and more professional than ever. It is a huge factor in the decline in crime. We know crime in america will never be reproduced without a partnership between federal and state officers. Theres no doubt federal state, local, and tribal impact the crime rate. Asyou look at our cities, mr. Chairman noted, new york has dedicated itself, over decades, to highly effective, proactive, communitybased policing. Yearsaw 334 homicides last. Chicago, on the other hand, while only one third of the size of new york, launch more than twice as many murders. Twice as many murders. Produced a brilliant set of initiatives. I was pleased with their plan. Whatever the Violent Crime may if thesell be lower policies are followed. I can assure you of it. Not to see how may people can be incarcerated, but to focus on the most in dangerous repeat offenders and reduce crimes and violence in america. An effective Crime Reduction strategy means starving criminal enterprises of their profits. The asset seizures and program is one of the most effective tools congress has provided. A number of you are concerned about the operation of the program. Here i hear your concerns. I have established a director who oversees the entirety of this program and to ensure it operates in an accountable and responsible way and be able to report to you at any time you need information about it. The department is committed to protecting the civil and Constitutional Rights of all americans. American, regardless of race, religion, sex, or Sexual Orientation, must be safe from violence and criminality. We will not shy away from defending First Amendment rights. We stand ready to enforce law. The right to assemble peacefully and exercise religion. Idst of thee m deadliest drug epidemic in this country. We have never seen anything like it. Our ability of drugs, along with a deadly substance fentanyl, has resulted in climbing death tolls across the country. Dying of,000 last year overdoses. 62 4000 in 2016. 64,000 died in most dive from opioid overdoses that began with Prescription Drug addiction. It then moved to parent and fentanyl. And fentanyl. Theeed stricter in distribution of addictive opioids. We do not need to delay it any longer. It leads to death through other drugs. Most of the hearing, cocaine, methamphetamine, and fentanyl fueling the drug crisis was brought across our southern ,order by powerful drug cartels bringing violence, addiction, and death. An important factor in our longterm success requires securing our borders. The American People have asked system offul immigration. They are rightful in their demands. We can end the illegality. President trump has said that has sent an enemy use message. Message. Mbiguous we can end the lawlessness. The president has sent out a plan with numerous priorities for the body. According a border wall, asylum reform, porter returns, and enhanced interior enforcement. With the progress already achieved, our country is on its way. Whether it is an end to century city policies or a verification e verification system, they are supported by a vast majority of americans. There has been, i am afraid, and erosion in the respect for the will of law. Medicaln, advancing agendas has been substituted for following the law. This department of justice respects congress in the constitution. We intend to enforce the laws, as you have written them. A daca policy produced by the last administration could not be sustained. It was unlawful and contrary to the laws passed by this constitution by this institution. Congress, you have the ability to act on this issue. The president has said he wants to work with congress. He has a heart for young people. We have got to have more than just an amnesty, friends. We need a good improvement in the you legality that is going on in the even gallery that ty going in the ilegali that is going on. The department is directing taxpayer dollars to the overwhelming numbers of cities and states operating with federal enforcement might Grant Funding enforcement by Grant Funding. Weto advance the goals are to cooperate with federal officials, stop letting criminal aliens back on the streets that further victimized your communities. It does not make sense. Citiesgrateful the injured restrictions cooperate fully and to those who have hurt our message and are now cooperating. After 20 years in his body, i understand the responseness. Thank you. Welcome back, mr. Attorney general. Welcome back, committee. I want to pursue a question that was asked before the break. I do not believe it was answered. Counsel contacted you regarding a potential interview or testimony . Maybe we should leave that with the special counsel. Sen. Al blumenthal you are not aware that the special counsel has contacted your office . A. G. Sessions how do you know who the special office has contacted the special counsel has contacted your office . Has your office been contacted to request an interview with you by the special counsel . It is a yes or no a. G. Sessions i do not think so. You do not think so, are you sure . Ifm asking you this question you can be clear. A. G. Sessions i am willing to answer to the council in any way. I do not have recalled i have been called. Sen. Blumenthal the special counsel has asked her office for interview with you, correct . A. G. Sessions i will be glad to let you know within hours. Sen. Blumenthal i am asking you now. A. G. Sessions i do not know. I do not recall of providing interview with the special counsel. You seem to know. I do not want to come here and want to be trapped. Maybe you shared it with somebody in my office or something. I would check and let you know. Sen. Blumenthal it make sense for the special counsel to ask for interview, correct . A. G. Sessions that is his decision, not mine. Sen. Blumenthal have knowledge relevant to the investigation to collusion and potential objection of justice, correct . A. G. Sessions it would be up to the council, not me. Sen. Blumenthal the question to you was whether your office has been contacted. You would certainly know the answer to the question. A. G. Sessions i have no knowledge of any meeting, interview to be conducted, no dates have been set if there has been conversation with somebody. I would verify before i gave you an absolute final answer. What more can i tell you . Can you give an answer before the day is out . Sen. Blumenthal just i would just like to check. You seem to know. Do you have a source . Mr. Attorney general, you were the one answering the questions here today. I will welcome an answer to my question as soon as possible following the steering. Andhe chairman suggested, as i think you have agreed. Let me ask you, my understanding is that the president of the United States has interviewed a number of candidates for United States attorney positions around the country, including new york. Is that correct . A. G. Sessions yes. We have done quite a number. Throughlete but working the u. S. Attorney process. Is in that quite unusual for the president to interview the line prosecutor in an office like United States attorney . A. G. Sessions it is a big district, take state, important office. I dont know how many people the u. S. Attorney the president of the United States has interviewed in these situations. It is his appointment, as you know. What we do in the department of justice is do a review. The president make the appointment. Sen. Blumenthal do you know of any president anywhere in our history previously interviewing a candidate for United States attorney . I certainly was not interviewed by the president. You were not interviewed by the president before we were appointed United States attorney. Has it ever happened before . Sen. Blumenthal a lot of them a. G. Sessions a lot of u. S. Attorneys are friends or president s. Sen. Blumenthal youre not answering my question. You are correct that president s sometimes no candidates for United States attorney, but to my knowledge no president previously has ever interviewed the chief federal prosecutor in any United States attorney district. I consider it quite unusual. How many other attorneys general candidate has the president interview besides new york . A. G. Sessions i am not aware. Im not sure i remember he had interviewed for new york. If you say so, i assume so. Sures the right to for because he has to make an appointment and i assume everybody would understand that. Sen. Blumenthal my understanding, general sessions, is that certain grants have been terminated to the city of new allegedause of its violation of section where he city policy sanctuary city policy. A. G. Sessions we are reviewing those grants. They mayt than well have been slowed under review, but it could be a final decision has been made. New york was on the list of one of the cities that was considered to be probably in violation of the existing law 1 373 under the Obama Administration. We reviewed a number of them. They have not been yorkblumenthal new stayed such an order stopping any grants to new york. Im asking whether the department of justice is potentially violating that order. If you could come back to me with a response, i note you may not recall, but if you could let me know about that i would appreciate it. A. G. Sessions i would say my step handed me a note that i have not been asked for an interview at this point. My office certainly has not been contacted with regard to that. Maybe you better check your source. Sen. Blumenthal let me ask you finally, you said the pardon power is very broad. But if that pardon power were used to prevent or forestall testimony in a lawful investigation, that could be obstruction of justice, could it not . A. G. Sessions i dont know, senator blumenthal. I have never researched that. I know you served in the department of justice as United States attorney and you may well be more familiar than i with it, but i have understood my understanding is a pardon can be issued before a conviction occurs. Do you understand it that way . Since i am over my time, i will come back to this issue in our subsequent questioning. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to note for the record regarding the moments lawsuit of attorney general sessions. You said it had no merit, by the clause says the president without consent of congress cannot accept any present from a foreign state. Of no merit is the money does not a directly to him but to a company or those kinds of entities, it is up to the court to decide if the clause can be so easily evaded. A. G. Sessions fair enough. Sen. Hirono that was just a statement. A. G. Sessions the court will decide. Yes, we have taken a position on the question. In response to a question from senator feinstein, you provide an excellent nation as to why director comey was fired. The thing is that the lanation would directly was directly contradicted by the president and public where he said he fired the director because of the russia thing and he said he would fire director coming anyway regardless of any memo you presented. Are you now contradicting the president s explanation . A. G. Sessions all i said was that the Deputy Attorney general and i were asked to give our opinion. We did so in the president made the decision. He has talked about it to some degree publicly. Sen. Hirono excuse me. You were asked to give a nice nation of why director comey was fired. You said it was because the letter that was sent to the president and he directly contradicted that. I think that stands for itself. A. G. Sessions if i did let me correct myself. That intended to say was we were asked to give an opinion and i gave it. The president makes the decision. Sen. Hirono i believe you were providing the next one nation as to why the president fired him. Lets move on. When you were here for your confirmation hearings, i specifically asking questions about decrease the department of justice had entered into at that time. There were 20 of them. In 1994, congress enacted a statute that authorized lawsuits specifically to target a pattern or practice of unconstitutional behavior in Law Enforcement agencies. During your confirmation hearings you made it pretty plain that you are not a big fan of these kinds of consent degrees calling them, a dangerous exercise of raw power. I ask you at the time of it you were going to amend any of these existing consent degrees decrees, but my recollection is you were not sure. In fact you are reviewing all these decrees. Can you tell me why you are reviewing them and if you are planning to amend any or intended make public any of the findings of year review of the existing consent decrees . A. G. Sessions consent decrees are never to be permanent. The federal government nor the court to the permanently in charge of Running Police departments and sheriffs departments in any city. That is a situation in one state where a sheriff was sued about a jail that was improperly being run or improper jail. A new jail has been built and perhaps we should see about removing that from the jurisdiction of the court since he has apparently met the challenges that he was given. Sen. Hirono i am running out of time. I hate to be rude. You have some concerns about the time frames of consent decrees. My understanding is they do not thats what they want to see is some improvement occurring. Why dont we get to the question of whether you intend to make public the findings of your review of the consent decr in existenceees. A. G. Sessions i dont know that we have any systematic plan to review consent decrees with the idea of terminating them. We should begin to terminate decrees that are ready to be terminated. Secondly, i dont have the unilateral power to do so. The court has already taken jurisdiction. If the parties dont agree, even if the attorney general recommends a termination, a judge would have to find that as appropriate. Sen. Hirono are you going to make your recommendations public as for your review . A. G. Sessions we asked for a termination, give would be public. It would have to be filed in court. Sen. Hirono i think you are you know i asked a very simple question as to whether you would enable the public to understand the basis of your review. Of course by the time it has to be terminated you have to go to court. I understand that. Ok, you are just not responding to that question. Let me get to your religious liberty memorandum. October 6, you issued new guidance probably directing federal agencies and attorneys 20 rentals of religious liberty. You wish in a memo i have the department of justice shouldnt limit these principles. Any cases and opinions or other agencies. Im wondering if you issued principles relating to whether doj should do with regard to civil rights issues are individual liberties issues or Voting Rights or Second Amendment cases. A. G. Sessions we have not issued such a statement of principles on other issues. Sen. Hirono on religious beliefs you did. Section 8 of your memo says your government cannot selectively impose regulatory burdens on some denominations but not others. Frankly, mr. Attorney general, this provision leads me to grant anther exception to the formal care act to a Business Owner who claims to adhere to a religious faith that only practices faith healing and believes any other sort of medical intervention is morally wrong, or raises the question such as whether a Business Owner who has a demonstratively false religious belief that all vaccines contain fetal stem cell tissue or cause autism to provide coverage of vaccinations to his employees is a substantial burden. Principles,these 20 ited one that raises concerns that i have. Lgbtq writes. Rights. And a case before the Second Circuit your department submitted a brief and argued title vii of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of Sexual Orientation. I believe you extended that in a directive to include Sexual Identity. This is inconsistent with the 2015 eoc guidance and the decision from the seventh Circuit Court of appeals. Does this violate federal law to fire an employee because they are gay . A. G. Sessions we carefully reviewed the law on that. My staff has since the 1964 Civil Rights Act, in which title vii is a part, it has been interpreted that way. All Circuit Court of appeals interpreted that way, except this year there was a reversal. I believe the southern circuit you indicated. The position we have taken in the litigation is consistent with the president Obama Department of justice. All but one of the courts of appeals, and it has been that way for quite a long time. We took the lawful position. It is distantly the minority position to hold otherwise. Sen. Hirono i just need to have a clarified. Senator feinstein for five minutes. Sen. Feinstein under federal law fugitives cannot purchase or possess guns. It is my understanding eight months ago the Justice Department issued a memo redefining who qualifies as a fugitive from justice. Since then more than half a million names of fugitives without outstanding arrest warrants have been removed from the fbis National Criminal background check. We are hearings of local Law Enforcement, which has concern about this. Why did the department reject the fbis view that the law blocks sales to anyone with an arrest for it . A. G. Sessions i will have to review that. I would. Sen. Feinstein thank you. A. G. Sessions i am assuming there was no conviction. Sen. Feinstein i would like to know the detail of that. A. G. Sessions i should know but i dont. Sen. Feinstein let me for a moment on the dark web. The New York Times ran a tragic piece about the use of the dark web by drug traffickers and other criminal enterprises to secretly do business with users. Usedf the dark web being by criminals is going to grow in the coming years. Do you have any plans to address it, or would you begin to think about it so we might have some because ions on this think there is a lot of concern out there and Law Enforcement about the dark web being used to commit crimes. A. G. Sessions i would be pleased to do so. Were very concerned about that. The fbi is very concerned about that. They did take down i think the , theiggest dark websites last one, alpha bay, they took their recently. 240,000 sites are people were selling illegal substances or guns on that site, including fentanyl. They use bitcoins and other untraceable financial capabilities. It is a big problem. Sen. Feinstein i would like to work with you on it. If it requires legislation in particular. I will quit while i am ahead. Senator whitehouse. Sen. Whitehouse i would like to pick up what about left off on this question of executive privilege. You had a number of questions since, so let me refresh your recollection. We were talking about the process under the reagan 1982 order for the assertion of executive privilege. Your concluding remarks were about the importance that there actually be an executive privilege so that the president hishave conversations with immediate staff and cabinet members and so forth. And that is a principal i think everyone in this room agrees to. There is an offsetting principle which is congress having the power of oversight over the executive branch, and as best i can tell where those conflicting principles and together isnt that 1982 is in that 1982 reagan order. I think you have conceded that is the prevailing order right now under which the department of justice is operating. I go back to that order, which says that executive privilege shall not be invoked without special specific specific president ial authorization. Order,o on through the as we discussed, there is a provision that allows for a not even proper assertion of executive privilege. Request tod as an the congress for the abeyance of information while the second executive branch makes the determination to use executive. Privilege it makes perfect sense there should be a abeyance. Of thedetermine which subject of executive privilege and what should not. Or whether it is a live question from a requesting senator that may touch on executive privilege, and you have to make a temporary assertion because you cant make that call necessarily from your chair at that moment. I get all of that. Here is my problem. I dont see any effort on the part of the administration to specific president ial authorization for the assertion of executive privilege as to anything. There were some very specific questions that were asked of you in the Intelligence Committee. One by senator warner. To your knowledge has any official been involved with conversations about any possibility of president ial pardons about any individuals involved with the russia investigation . Another from sen. Heinrich if the president ever expresses frustration to you regarding your decision to recuse yourself. In both of those cases i think you appropriately did not abeyanceecause of the period when you had a chance to sort out if those questions estimates the president wished to seek executive privilege. Right . A. G. Sessions i think so. Sen. Whitehouse at some point he has to assert executive privilege. You cant just have that period of abeyance go into the indefinite future consistent with the executive order under which you are operating. Can you . A. G. Sessions the way it has been done historically, as i understand it, is specific requests have been made. Various steps occur. If agreement is not reached, an accommodation process is supposed to occur to see if this cant be fixed on some way outside of litigation. Most of these are documents. I am unaware of the Supreme Court ever saying that congress has the right to inquire of the president s private conversations between top cabinet officials. Sen. Whitehouse it actually works the other way according to president reagan. Congress has the ability to inquire into absolutely anything and congressional requests for information are to be complied with those properly and fully as there is anless assertion of executive privilege. The default is you have to answer our questions. It is only when there is an assertion of executive privilege that the default is no longer the case. And father is a perio and while there is a period of abeyance, this administration is de facto rewriting Ronald Reagans executive order about executive privilege so the period has no and to it end to it, and congress is stonewalled on information without ever getting an assertion of executive privilege. And assertion to which i believe we are entitled if we are going to be prevented from getting information. A. G. Sessions has you indicated as you have indicated, you have the ability to work your way through the complexities of this. I would say we are not at that point. I believe before you have an assertion of executive privilege by the president he must know precisely what it is he is being asked to provide, number one. He also has the right to be informed as to why his privilege is of high value, quite a should be waived in exchange for the request and the reason the request is made. One thing i think you raised or somebody did, senator whitehouse, i think i may have misunderstood. It is true the attorney general by talking to the white House Counsel is present to speak for the president. But really the white House Counsel is considered under those circumstances to be an extension of the president. Sen. Whitehouse fair enough. My time is up. We will have to pursue this. I would like to pursue it a little bit from history. Im not sure what i want to stay , directly response to what you and senator whitehouse were talking about. I have had the same problem with previous attorneys general and it got answers similar to what you are giving, senator sessions. I will read when attorney general holder was in that chair, i asked him questions about why he would not give us information about the department cozy false statements that were made to this committee about gun lcoocking. The information had nothing to do with communications with the president and not advocate any constitutional privilege. Still he would not answer. And then chairman leahy did not direction to do so. Almost thetime when exact same questions you have been asked sometimes, senator general sessions, when holder testified on fast and furious he said the exact same thing that attorney general sessions is saying today. Quoting holder, we will act in a way that is consistent with what other attorneys general have made determinations as to what information can be shared with congressional oversight committees. These are republican as well as democratic attorneys general. I will act in a manner that is consistent with the history and the tradition of the department. Then i said, you are refusing to provide drafts of that february 4 letter . That goes way back to 2010 or 2011, and emails about the drafts even though they have been subpoenaed by the house without a valid constitutional privilege that risks contempt of congress. Why would you risk contempt of congress to prevent us from finding out who reviewed the draft of that letter and whether they knew they contained false statements . This is what the attorney general holder said. Well, i will certainly try to work with you and providing all the relevant information that we can. We will however act in a way that is consistent with what other attorneys general have made determinations as to what information can be shared with congressional oversight committees. Hes a republican as democratic attorneys general. I will act in a manner consistent with the history and tradition of the department. Senator leahy is next for her second round. Sen. Leahy i think it is generally accepted the people here, the press knows this Rod Rosensteins memorandum tying director comings pardon to his handling of the Clinton Administration serpas a pretext. President trump fired director coming due to the russia investigation. President trump has said as much. Reportedpress recently an earlier onset letter penned by President Trump to justify firing director coming because of the russia investigation. One report says you are involved in discussions in the oval Office Running the initial letter, to the clinton one, the russia one. When you signed off on the may 9 memorandum, you did, the president did, when you signed up on the may 9 memorandum time comings determination to the clinton investigation were you aware of the initial letter . A. G. Sessions senator leahy, i it consumes a possible communication for the president of the United States in the same privilege would apply. Sen. Leahy you are not going to answer if you are aware of the russia one . A. G. Sessions i think that is the proper course for the attorney general at this time. Sen. Leahy do you think that, i dont. My concern is you are part of the russian facade and went along with it. Im sorry. I have no you for years. Im sorry you would do that. Let me ask you another area. President trump says he believes the cuban government is responsible for sonic attacks against our diplomats. I have heard all the reports. We cant find anything that connects the cuban government to a sonic attack. I doubt they have the capability for such a thing. Took weubans, we told him about it. Said bring the fbi down. They said please feel free. It took us weeks to get around to doing that. You know of any evidence to support the president s assertion that think y that they cuban government is responsible . He said this openly. Do you share the president s conclusion that the cuban government is irresponsible . A. G. Sessions i almost called the mr. Chairman again. Senator grassley might get upset with me. I did serve a long time in a year chairmanship. It did hurt me to say you think i am part of a facade. I am not part of a facade. It iss question of cuba, i cantat may be confirm or deny the existence of an investigation into this matter. Sen. Leahy i know there is an investigation. That is public. A. G. Sessions it has not been confirmed by an authoritative government agency. I dont believe. Sen. Leahy are you aware the cuban government the you have any evidence the cuban government is responsible . A. G. Sessions i am not able to comment, senator leahy. It tookhy general, why so long for the fbi to accept the invitation and go down to investigate . Saying bring anything you want. It took us weeks to make up our minds to do it. Any reason for that . A. G. Sessions i would say to you i will consider your concerns. Well, ive had enough briefings on this and yet to see any evidence the cuban government was responsible. If there is, somebody meet with me. They can tell me. When you do that . A. G. Sessions we will evaluate that, yes. Ow, decision is citizenship a reliable indicator of a terrorist threat . A. G. Sessions i dont know exactly what you mean by that. Well, it forms the basis of the president s travel ban. In both and both former come i will ask you one must question and feel free to answer it anyway you want. We are talking about daca. Your statement announces the end of daca. Failure to enforce the laws. You then claimed failure to enforce the laws that is what our nation at risk for crime, violence and even terrorism. Recipients have been involved in terrorism . A. G. Sessions i think in the Previous Year in you asked one of my attorneys from the department of justice about that. I believe you are incorrect in the quote to him. Sen. Leahy i asked if he could provide a single example of a Daca Recipients involved in terrorist activity. He said he was not aware of any examples. Is that accurate . A. G. Sessions i want to correct that my comments did not focus solely on Daca Recipients. There were others that entered the country unlawfully. I believe that is correct summary of the matter. Sen. Leahy of fact or civil did not know of a single example of a Daca Recipients involved in terrorism activities. A. G. Sessions there are 2000 that already been taken off as Daca Recipients for serious criminal crimes. Drugs in capital murder and rape. Sen. Leahy the Cato Institute says the dreamers are less likely to the incarcerated of other born americans of the same age. The Cato Institute is not some leftwing group by any means. A. G. Sessions i believe in open borders. 2000 out of 780,000 daca applicants were fed have disqualifying criminal records, is that what you are saying . A. G. Sessions i am saying after they were accepted into the daca program, actually accepted, 2000 have been removed as a result of serious criminal 2000 out of 780,000 . A. G. Sessions i think that is the right number. Im not contending there are any disproportionate amount of crime among that group. Although we are seeing young gang members being infiltrated. They have come in after the deadline for daca. I want to make sure i am clear. They are escaping the criminal background check, fingerprinting, requirements of daca, and they have criminal records . No, what i was saying was after they have done a background check, been , i believe 2000 have subsequently been convicted of some sort of serious offense. Sen. Durbin out of a hundred thousand . 800,000 . Have been turned down buying guns because it felony records. I dont think people are talking about ending the sale of guns because of the likelihood a fellow would buy a. G. Sessions that is not the basis for our daca difficulties. It was a legal matter from our perspective. Durbin, i senator know you care about it. If they could seize this opportunity, some good things might happen. Sen. Durbin i hope they will. I want to understand the guidance you have released from your department when it comes to lgbtq writes rights and religious freedom. Under the guidance you released to all executive departments on religious liberty, let me ask you this question. Could a Social Security Administration Employee refused to accept our process spousal or Survivor Benefits paperwork or a surviving samesex spouse . That is something i have never thought would arise, but i would have to give you a written answer to that if you dont mind. Sen. Durbin i would like to have that. A federal contractor refused to provide services to lbj to keep people, including in emergencies without risk of losing federal contracts . A. G. Sessions likewise, but i are youo you citing title vii for this or the guidance . Sen. Durbin the guidance. A. G. Sessions im not sure that is covered by it but i will look. Sen. Durbin there are others. Issue, a challenging when you have said and i believe you you do not want to discriminate. People are discriminating in the name of their own personal religious liberty. It is a real challenge for us to reconcile those. Would you like to speak about . A. G. Sessions i would say wherever possible a person should be allowed to freely exercise their religion and not to carry out activities that further something they think is a contrary to their faith. But at the same time, if you participate in commercial exchanges you have limits on what you can do under those laws. Accommodation type laws. The balance needs to be properly struck. And i think we have. Those issues were discussed. Sen. Durbin we will send you a list and ask for your response to those questions. Historically we have struggled with some aspect of that. Oner criminal sentencing, the smart on Crime Initiative was announced by the Previous Administration they went through an extensive review of criminal Justice System to establish what practices and sentencing revested deter crime, protect the public in reduce recidivism. You on may 10 of this year issued a new memo. I would like to ask you before rescinding smart on crime and enacting the new policy, did you conduct a conference of review process . A. G. Sessions we had our career attorneys work intensely on evaluating what a good crime policy is. Project saved neighborhoods system had proven to be successful. That is what we would like to implement. I would say under this previous for the first time in 30 years have seen significant increases in Violent Crime in america. To the degree im very worried about it. The murder rate particularly is up 20 in two years. Sen. Durbin are you concerned about gun violence and gun crimes . A. G. Sessions yes. We have a substantial increase in gun prosecutions. It would be a top priority of mine at the department of justice. I think the Second Quarter of the year, the Third Quarter of the year we had a 25 increase. Third or Fourth Quarter of this year we have a 14 increase in gun prosecutions. I have encouraged that. I think it does reduce violence. Senator klobuchar . Sorry, imey im hoping that the republican would come back. I would like to note for the record you said that, you said that and not me. Got you, got you. I appreciate it. Thank you for enduring today. I recently filed an amicus brief regarding the ninth Circuit Decision and the Sanchez Gomez longstandingd safety protocols are restraining detainees in a courtroom during pretrial arraignments and hearings. It is obviously very important for arizona. We have a busy docket as a pretense immigration. This amicus brief i filed at the support of the western sheriffs States Association and the arizona sheriffs association. We have historic courthouses in arizona that do not lend them selves well to separation between detainees and the public. Often having to share hallways or doorways without the longstanding restraint protocols that existed. It makes it impossible to actually bring a number of people through the system. You will really hollow Law Enforcement in arizona. Have you looked at this and have you believe this decision will impact the courtroom . A. G. Sessions im not familiar with it. The issue has been out there for a long time. Judges decidede fairly day after day. Some people just need to be shackled, i have always thought. They dont do it unless they feel like it is really necessary. Circuitthink the ninth the case would reverse that longstanding policy . Sen. Flake that is correct. Obviously we have protocols and Court Decisions with regard to jury trials and the appearance of somebody who is restrained. This is just arraignments. It really puts our court officials, security officials, the public at risk in many circumstances. Or it ties up shares and other Law Enforcement officials from actually going out on the beat and doing what they should do, actually having to be in the courtroom at all times. It is really a problem, particularly with regard to implementation of Something Like operations streamlined which we have spoken about many times. It really inhibits the ability to move the number of people through the system quickly enough because where we used to be able to have 30 or 40 individuals arraigned at the same time, now they can only do six or seven. It simply makes it impossible to move through the docket. Position onhe dojs this and i hope the u. S. Supreme court grants cirt there. With regard to human trafficking, earlier this year the permanent subcommittee on investigations concluded an investigation of backpage. Com, knowing they facilitated online sex trafficking. In july, the subcommittee referred the case your office for criminal investigation. Can you tell us to the extent you were able what the status of that investigation is . A. G. Sessions i dont believe i can. Now. Not able to sen. Flake we will check back with you on that. I have letters of support from the stop enabling sex traffickers act that would prevent companies from committing online sex trafficking crimes. These are letters from the National Center for missing and exploited children and other antitrafficking advocates that i would like to submit for the record. Sen. Grassley without objection your letters will be entered. A. G. Sessions it is this human trafficking, a priority of hours. My Deputy Attorney general feels strongly about it. The associate attorney general rachel brand has made that one of her interests and made a couple of speeches on that recently. We can do more and we will do more. Sen. Flake one other item. You mentioned in your opening remarks with regard to civil forfeiture that he would put some protocols in place in terms of more speedy notification. Those whose assets were seized. What are we doing to ensure we have a better system than we had in the past . Im convinced this has been a v that just about every level of Law Enforcement at state and federal. A. G. Sessions we intend to respond to any problems out there that we identify in the future. When you make when the government has probable cause and feels able to seize money, Drug Trafficking money usually, they have a certain period to respond. We cut that to at least half if not a little more than half. Our assistanted United States attorneys to monitor the state authorities in the dea to make sure the systems are working well. We have required that before we that a case from the state they be trained in proper procedures or federal Court Systems and not just any Police Officer so they know what they are supposed to do. I think that will be a big help. I believe there are other things. I dont know if you were here but i did announce send out monday a directive to establish an Asset Forfeiture accountability officer who will be in the deputys office and be monitoring all these cases, complaints that may occur so we can get a response properly promptly. This system is really important. It is a top priority of hours. Every Law Enforcement agency in america, but it has to be run right and i will be our goal. Sen. Flake cutting the time in half for notification is comfort for some who have this stretch on for months and years. I hope we do more than cut the time in half or some of these. A. G. Sessions that is just one of the things that would happen. We want to take nothing but good cases. We are winning at a 90 level. Most of these cases are pretty open and shut. I hear what you are saying. I know your concerns and thats why i am not taking it lightly. We will monitor this program. Sen. Grassley senator flake at seven minutes because he was on his first round. Senator klobuchar, five minutes. Sen. Flake i will turn to election sen. Klobuchar i will turn to senator graham and i have a bill we tried to get on an inmate to the mdaa to provide more funding for states to beef up their infrastructure. That would include things like backup paper ballots. We dont dictate exactly what they would do. The bill is carried by the head of the Freedom Caucus in the house. There is strong bipartisan support for this. Are you aware of any efforts between the department, other federal agencies to assist states in this upcoming election from protecting our elections from hacking . A. G. Sessions the fbi has capabilities and has experience in many of these matters and have some really superior capabilities. I do think its an important matter. I look forward to working with you on it. We do not need in any way to subject our election process to some sort of electronic alteration of the vote totals. That would be a stunning disaster that cannot happen. Sen. Klobuchar thank you. My asked you about Voting Rights at your here in january, you acknowledged the discriminatory that led to the passage of the Voting Rights act. With the specific purpose of blocking africanamericans from voting, and it was just wrong. Ics facing some of the same problems today. As you know, the Circuit Court in North Carolina voter id case said that the North Carolina laws were crafted with surgical precision to give certain people from voting. My question is do you believe voter id laws that are found to be intentionally discriminatory serve a legitimate policy objective . Why the Justice Department changes its position on the texas voting case . A. G. Sessions they cannot be that you have voter i do you laws or other laws that deliver the seek to diminish one groups vote total. Objectivehere can be criteria set that could have e impact on different disparaging impact. With regard to taxes, the way when i became attorney general texas has been sued over its voter id law. It was being challenged as being discriminatory. And election was coming up. The court, the federal Court Approved an interim procedure for the next election so they could go forward. The Texas Legislature then took with a federal court had approved and adopted it as a law of texas. We felt at that point the department of justice should not continue the lawsuit against as because it was actually it had enacted a law the federal court had approved. Sen. Klobuchar we can maybe go back and forth in writing on that. I have some different views. I wanted to finish up with two issues key to me. This is on freedom of the press. We talked about it at your last airing. You said you wanted to look at what was going on with the ongoing regulations. The department has now taken action and i will ask the same question. When you commit to not putting reporters in jail for doing their jobs . A. G. Sessions i dont know if i can make a blanket commitment to that effect, but i would say we have not taken any aggressive action against the media at this point. Matters that involve the most serious National Security issues that put our country at risk. Authoritiesize the we have legally and constitutionally if we have to. We always try to find an alternative way, as you probably confrontingctly media persons. But that is not a total blanket protection. Sen. Klobuchar we are just really concerned because of the president s recent communications about fcc licensing with some of the media content. We are working with the sec on that and did not get it positive answer from chairman pai about that. I will put on the record some important questions i have in the antitrust area concerning thist a provision with september court filing. It was before the new antitrust head was in. I asked you review that. I support the decision but there entry in thatng order i would like you to look at. The second is just committing to follow guidelines that have been in place and criminal justice already covered by my colleagues, something i care a lot about. I will put a few more questions on the record. Thank you. Sen. Grassley senator franken. Sen. Franken i would like to just touch on a less conversation and then move on. A. G. Sessions dont spend all your time on it. Sen. Franken i would like my five seconds back. I want to touch on the dojs record on lgbt people, and their rights. I wanted to get this clear. Youhe end of your answer said i felt the need to respond and i responded on the spot. This is an interim transcript so i may have it wrong, but this is how i recollect it. It has been six hours in the hearings. It is at the end of the day and i said i am not aware of those activities, which is a surrogates key medication to the russians. And i wasnt and am not i dont believe they occurred. Was that what you were saying . You dont believe that surrogates from the Trump Campaign had communications with the russians . A. G. Sessions i did not and i am not aware of anyone else that did. I do believe it happened. Sen. Franken you dont believe it now. Let me ask that is what i wanted to ask. The you believe Michael Flynn was a surrogate for the campaign . A. G. Sessions he could probably have been defined as that. Sen. Franken he believed Paul Manafort was a surrogate for the campaign . A. G. Sessions for a short time he was the chairman of the campaign. Sen. Franken to you believe Jared Kushner was a surrogate for the campaign . A. G. Sessions i really dont know whether his role i sort normally speaks on behalf of sen. Franken do you believe donald trump jr. Was a surrogate . A. G. Sessions the was his son and he spoke. Sen. Franken i would like to talk about the departments records of protecting the rights of lgbt people. On, monday you personally directed doj dissent a federal prosecutor to assist in the hate crimes prosecution of a man charged with murdering a transgendered teenager in iowa. I will be the first to say doj should be lauded for doing so. Far too often crimes targeting lgbt people and specifically transgendered women of color go unreported and uninvestigated. But, your decision to prosecute this hate crime incident does not tell the whole story. Since your confirmation doj has wasted no time and systematically undermining attempts to safeguard lgbt people from discrimination by revoking policies designed to protect them and declining to defend their rights in court. Designeded guidelines to make schools safe and welcoming places for lgbt students. Federal civilt rights laws do not protect lesbians, gay or bisexual workers from jobs from a nation. Doj asserted transgender people dont deserve federal protection from discrimination. At work doj lawyers are defending the president s ban on transgender troops in court. Doj issued a sweeping the order directing the government to accommodate people with antilgbt views which could potentially allow them to sidestep laws banning discrimination at work, in school and in public accommodations, all in the name of religious liberty. General session, there is an argument to be made that no Administration Official has done more to hurt lgbt people and you. Then you. Your actions stand in stark contrast to promises you made when you last appeared before this committee. You said he would understand the demands of justice and fairness made by our lgbt community, and you promised to assure the statutes protecting their civil rights and her safety are fully enforced. Once said under your leadership doj has demonstrated an unrelenting hostility to lgbt people. Attorney general sessions, the doj argues they are not worthy of protection from his termination and harassment at work or at school, or that businesses should not have to serve lgbt pupil people if they dont want to, that emboldens those who seek to do them harm. How do you reconcile your decision to prosecute and antitransgender hate crimes which i applaud, which is meant to deter future incidents of with aggressively pursuing an agenda that gives cover to discrimination and hate . A. G. Sessions center franken senator franken, i reject the phrase unrelenting hostility. This department has no hostility to transgender or Sexual Orientation issues. In fact we follow the law scrupulously, as i promised to do. Several jobto employment issues you raise, that is directly controlled by title vii of the Civil Rights Act. Title vii of the civil rights for at never been held, least by the department of justice under the entire eight years of the Obama Administration, to include these protections. Are 11 courts of appeals. My understanding that 10 of the 11 courts of appeals all agree it is not detected by the Employment Law under title vii. Only one circuit has recently reversed that decision. The position we are taking is the president eric holder, Loretta Lynch position in the title vii issue. On title ix, the schools question, did likewise is not covered in our opinion in the same way title vii is not covered does not cover this employment issue. The department of justice or the department of education, sent a directed to states telling them they had to accommodate transgendered individuals in their choice of bathrooms. We felt the law did not answer that. We felt that the states and localities could make their own and that is at odds . A. G. Sessions we do think it is at odds. Senator blumenthal. Sen blumenthal i am troubled by the president s attacks on the press, seemingly repeated and relentless mother suggestion that reporters should be prosecuted for stories that are adverse to him, not a violation of any National Security interest but simply unfavorable that and his suggestion broadcast licenses should be challenged simply because he disagrees with the network reminiscent of, Richard Nixons encouragement of a challenge to the Washington Post broadcast license for coverage he claimed was inaccurate. I have asked every member of the fcc to reject and repudiate these threats which have a Chilling Effect on coverage. I would like to ask you now to do the same. What net be illegal to deny a broadcast license or revoke a broadcast license simply because the president s dislike of its content . If you let me respond to senator franken, there is a violence against the ron white act. Mentions explicitly Sexual Identity and orientation. As you wouldose want them enforced. The other laws dont. Senator blumenthal, i would suggest he went above his time. You get another 30 seconds. I hope no republicans come back. Weve got 15 more minutes for democrats. Still have my second round we have votes at 3 00. A. G. Sessions the president is open, direct and expresses himself when he wants to express himself. It is a free country. There are limits. Sen. Blumenthal it is a free country. This issue is so profoundly serious. For the fcc to deny license or revoke a license based on content of tv coverage would be absolutely illegal, dont you agree . A. G. Sessions the fcc would need to decide how to handle those matters with integrity and consistent with law. The president can make his own expressions. Sen. Blumenthal mr. Attorney general, im quite a followup on this line of questioning in another form. Considerationder any analysis of a potential any of the following individuals. , donald trump jr. , Paul Manafort . A. G. Sessions i dont think it is appropriate for me to comment on the pardon process is at this time. That an investigation probably should not be discussed in this forum. I will review it if i am wrong. Sen. Blumenthal would you agree the president , even though he has brought pardon power, does not have the power to pardon himself. A. G. Sessions i have not researched that. I have beenhal joined by 199 colleagues in a lawsuit against the president. Blumenthal versus trump. He is taking foreign payments forout coming to congress consent. The department of justice is defending him in court. Benefits are a violation of the clause. The department of justice is challenging that lawsuit on the basis of our standing even though the law clearly requires he come to us for a consent. When you agree we have a legitimate case here of agreement and injury when the president is stopping us from doing her job . A. G. Sessions senator blumenthal, we believe lawyers in the department, this is a proper defense of the president , that having a business abroad, if interpreted broadly would ean they would have to sell everything theyve got abroad. If they receive something from are right, you have the right to challenge it, take think, thisbut we law has never been enforced in that way. Im glad youal agree we have a right to go to court. I did not intend to concede standing. He was alert to something i said. Senator cornyn. Cornyn it is good to have you. It has been a long day. Many of us have conflicting appointments including at the white house to talk about tax reform and other issues. Proud of say that i am the job you have done as attorney general. Those of us who know you personally and have worked with you, none of us are surprised you are the same person of character and committed to the rule of law. I just want you to know how much we appreciate it. Serving in public life sometimes is not fun. You have caught your own slings and arrows in the process but i want to encourage you to not be discouraged. Youve got a tough job to do after eight years of mismanagement where i think the American People lost confidence in the departments ability to do things in a nonpolitical fashion. I know you are the man to help restore the reputation of the department. I know how much you care about it and how many years you have given to that. Keep up the good work. Thank you. A. G. Sessions thank you. Sen. Cornyn this may sound of secure. I know you are thinly with the committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Steals our intellectual property on a regular basis through cyber theft and espionage. They have found creative ways to invest in u. S. Companies, in ways that circumvent traditional thatw of that investment give them access to the crown jewels of a company. U. S. Ay that blunts the technological advantage when it comes to National Security and undermines our Industrial Base at home. If it takes 10 years to do the research and development, and china can steal it through cyber or invest as a Minority Access tor and get that without having to go through the same expensive delay , that is a threat to National Security. I might just ask if you would comment on whether you support the effort to modernize and reform the process to deal with this threat to National Security. A. G. Sessions i absolutely do. We have looked at that hard. I have talked with attorneys and agents who investigated these cases. Our lossworried about of technology. ,e certainly need legislation just as you said, you can buy an interest in a company and gain access to the same technology. They are not able to be effective enough. Your legislation is first rate. We think it has Great Potential to push back against the abuses and dangers we face. Im excited about it. Anything i can do to thank you for that work, and to call on congress to move on it rapidly, you would be winning the confidence and support of people who investigate these matters every day and know what is going on. They support what you are doing and Hope Congress can follow through. To internet sen. Cornyn i want to mention the Internet Task force program we are trying to reauthorize, a National Network of 61 task forces of local and state Law Enforcement focused like a laser on trying to fight the scourge of child pornography and predators who take advantage of the dark side of the internet to harm children. Senator blumenthal am a new i guess has just left, we joined a bipartisan bill called the protect our children act. I support the consultation we as far asetting this we have. And the strong syntel it sends the signal it sends that all of us are standing together to fight this terrible scourge. In the two minutes i have left, 702. T to revisit section many of us have been working on this because we have been told by people like you and the fbi director this represents the crown jewels of our ability to detect terrorist activity and attacks, andrist keep america safe. There are some who worry about this capability of the federal government but it is focused exclusively on foreign targets. Just like a wiretap that a Police Officer or Law Enforcement officer may have access to, there may be more than the person whose phone is tap who comes on the line. The fact somebody else that is not the target of the investigation comes on the telephone and you hear their conversation doesnt mean that represents any legal or unconstitutional search under the fourth amendment. Theres multiple levels of supervision. To protect the privacy of u. S. Persons who may be incidentally collected as part of this process. There are audits. Theres congressional oversight. The house and the senate have Intelligence Community that take this very seriously. Senator feinstein and i both represent on the Intelligence Committee for that purpose because we take that and all of the committees, the work done very seriously. People dont realize theres also federal court supervision, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that monitors the activities of the Intelligence Community to make sure privacy rights of americans are protected and the constitution is enforced. The chairman is giving me a little latitude here but would you mind summarizing your support for section 702 . If you disagree please feel free to say so. A. G. Sessions thank you for your support. I appreciate how you have been able to find time to master the details of this. It is a complex subject. Can you give a short answer . To him . A. G. Sessions there is no doubt you have a right to Surveillance Communications of a person who is a noncitizen abroad. The reason you do that is to find out who they are talking to. If they are talking to a terrorist. You want to know if they are talking to a terrorist in the United States. We dont have the money or the time to surveillance world. We have some basis before we undertake to do so. The purpose is to find out who they are talking to and who they might be plotting. It is not necessary to have the warrant. Unimaginabled be problem for officers. Maybe there are things we can do to create confidence but i hope as you wrestle through with that we dont add things that arent valuable but make it problematic for agents to be effective using this constitutionally approved procedure. Would it be dangerous to erect obstacles or to allow it to lapse . A. G. Sessions there is no doubt about it. Head of the National Security agency, head of the fbi of all testified. Im going to take my five minutes now. You testified you discuss the issue of james comeys firing before either of you were confirmed for your current position. Mr. Comey was fired may 9. Why did you talk to rosenstein comey,he firing of mr. And what did you discuss with him . When did you come to the conclusion he needed to be terminated . My view, afterin discussing with director comey, my possible new Deputy Attorney general rosenstein, we discussed it. We love the department. We know about it. Judgment, as i expressed it that a fresh start at the fbi was appropriate. Think mr. Comey needed to be removed . He. Sessions i dont think was essential at that time but that was my best judgment. And i think his. I believe a few weeks before he testifyingted he was before congress and at that time asserted he believed he was clintonto take over the investigation and announces conclusion it was being closed, and testified he would do it again. Eventas a fairly stunning for both of us. It did highlight the problem more significantly than it had been performed. In regard to opioids, we passed the addiction and recovery act. Tools what is the department of justice doing to prevent Overdose Deaths in our communities . What further steps do you feel need to be taken by the department of justice . Chairman,ons mr. This is a top priority of hours. Anything likeseen 52,000 deaths in 2015. That was unprecedented. Last year it was 64,000 deaths. We have sent 12 new prosecutors into the f, directed solely to this problem in key areas where we are having the biggest problems. They will focus on pharmacies, distributors, and drug dealers. If we can keep people from getting addicted by Prescription Drugs we will have fewer people becoming addicted to heroin and dying from fenton now. We had big success prosecuting a number of physicians and professionals for improperly prescribing drugs. We have a new system that you ,an identify what outlets doctors, hospitals, pharmacies, who have a disproportionate number of Prescription Drugs agencies and those doctors. You can convince use that to identify problematic areas. We are going to be calling on physicians in america. Be careful about what they are prescribing. People tell me they are being prescribed more pills than they needed. The more you give someone the more likely they are to be addicted. Research shows that. The president cares about it deeply. We are going to give it a huge emphasis in the years to come because it deserves it. Grassley you ordered recommendations be delivered by july 27. No recommendations have been made public today. I assume they would be made public. Have those recommendations been made to you . A. G. Sessions i dont believe we have made that public. We will review the situation. We have certainly been discussing it. I think we are close to a point to make that composite. Senator grassley what steps have you taken to make a strategy for the foreign agents registration act to address how that fits into the department National Security efforts . Some monthss for we have discussed that in the office. We have not reached a final conclusion. Probably we will go through the Deputy Attorney Generals Office but i personally talked to lawyers who do these cases. There have not been many of those cases. Theyre probably need to be more. There is some legislation being proposed that we might be supportive of that might also be beneficial. Up on acould follow point the chairman was making, Violent Crime is a concern for many of us. Fighting Violent Crime and the increase in Violent Crime is one of the top priorities. Im eager to hear recommendations of your Violent Crime task force. My hometown is saying not just a surge but a record high level of shootings and homicides. Local Law Enforcement is doing everything they can. I would welcome the chance to work with you for what i think is a pressing issue. A. G. Sessions we can provide leadership. We have completed our review of andcrime problem in america how best to address it. Professionals have impressed me dramatically with an updated project safe neighborhoods policy that focuses on the key areas where crime rate is high. The whole idea is you shouldnt see where the crimes are occurring and investigate those crimes as a mistaken thing. New york and others have proven if you do this systematically you can reduce crime and make communities safer. We are going to do that on a localized basis encouraging u. S. Attorneys to take the lead and we have statistics that prove those policies have worked. Crime has dropped. I dont want to be overconfident. I dont now how strong this rising crime is that i think we can make a difference and i am determined to do so. We are deploying a similar strategy making some progress. But the combination of the Opioid Crisis, the easy availability of guns, is making it particularly tough. In your confirmation hearing you stated a special priority for you would be the enforcement of laws to ensure access to the ballot for every eligible voter but earlier after six years of litigation the department dropped its claim the texas legislator passed a law to discriminate. Only weeks later the courts found that had merit. A. G. Sessions it should pursue that one supported by the evidence. Let me say this about voter id. The Supreme Court has upheld voter id policies if properly conducted. Taxes passed a voter id law. Effective andd it struck it down. An election was coming up immediately. The Court Approved a new version of the voter id law. Texas Legislature Passed that courtapproved modified version, we withdrew our opposition to it. We think that was the right and per thing, and not really department of justice was still in the case. In a way we reversed it but i would say the department of justice won the battle and got the law improved. My broader concern would be to hear how many cases the administration has brought to enforce access to the battle ballot box, and how many questions you are bringing to prosecute discrimination against the lgbt community. I appreciate your comment against hate crimes but one of the Court Challenges is to prosecute against cases of active discrimination. If you have some update on what is being done to be an effective advocate prosecuting cases of denial of access to the ballot box i would appreciate it. A. G. Sessions we are open for business. Anybody denying someone the vote , is in violation of Constitutional Rights and quitel law, and we are willing to defend that. Your other was lgbt writes. Rights. We are going to take lgbt citizens with vigor and determination and not going to look the other way. We will enforce the law as written and continue to do so. Letter acted i got a listing seven cases they were concerned about. I made sure everyone was looked at to see if there was one unified person or group threatening the news. Insee if there was a pattern them, and if anything more could be done to prosecute them. At least one case they found new evidence and maybe we will go forward with that. Thank you. Mr. Attorney general, the end is nearing. In april, the district judge thed in a case relating to president s executive order travel ban. You made a remark that not that you were ignorant but the remark was ignorant. You said im amazed a judge sitting in an island in the ific can issue a statement that island happens to be a. Ahoo oahuy a. G. Sessions the birthplace of my wonderful granddaughter. It tends to legitimize views that people who think the racial diversity in my state makes us somehow less american. Do you stand b your statement . A. G. Sessions i had no idea it would be interpreted that way. Judges in600 just are america and the president issues with i believe is a lawful order that i believe will be held up by the Supreme Court. One of those judges happened to be on an island in the pacific. It stopped the entire process. I think judges need to be careful they are not just setting policy let me get to one more. I heard you and you gave your explanation. Clearly all district jordan judges can issue rulings that impact the entire country. That happened in the texas situation where a tester district judge prevented the implementation of president expansion. A youre not saying district judges do not have the authority a. G. Sessions . Under the Current Authority . A. G. Sessions under the current law they do. It is the subject to criticism. Judges need to be careful. Who was involved in the decision to dismiss all of the u. S. Attorneys without any warning . Why was it done . We had gone for a number of months, half of the United States attorneys in the country had already resigned. It is traditional they are replaced by the next administration. Clinton didesident thing, there is precedent for it. To complete the process of change over. President trump made that decision, you were not involved in that . Responsibilitye is the president s. Think a. G. Sessions i cant believe i cant remember that. It is an important issue. The president appoints United States attorneys. It was appropriate i thought at that time to make the change. So you were involved . A. G. Sessions i was. I have a question about daca. Whate relying on they were told, the information they provided would not be used to target them for deportation. Now there are three pending lawsuits in new york and california on the basis that there are due process concerns about the president s action to in daca. Did you consider the bait and switch problem in issuing your opinion on the legality of daca . A. G. Sessions i believe it was known and considered. Obviously if the department of Homeland Security decides how to administer and gather evidence in what cases to make priorities. You are the one that said it is unconstitutional. That was your opinion. Right. Did you consider any due process considerations when you issue that opinion . A. G. Sessions i dont believe there was any explicit , anyssion about anything documents from the department of justice. Is it is it is a valid issue. You are right to raise it. I dont think, and security has any policy to do as you suggest. There are a large number of Daca Recipients who have renewed their daca status for two years. They have different expiration. Imes what happens to the recipients of daca if it ins and five months . Or if these pending cases determined it is unconstitutional . What happens to these Daca Recipients, who status has not expired but if the court says this is based on unconstitutional law what happens to them . You will done be done when you get to more questions. Then we are going to go vote. Go ahead and answer. Then senator blumenthal lasky his questions. Will ask his questions. Ends in five months and the congress has not acted, and they are still Daca Recipients, there are three pending court cases. What happens to these people . A. G. Sessions the answer to that is in your hands. Congress has the ability to deal with this problem in any number of ways. The president has indicated hes , andng to support reform try to work to fix this problem and help these young people that justify help if congress so decides. We need to get on with it. We are not going to work with simply amnesty without improvement in the problems weve got an immigration. If we Work Together something can be done on that. Thank you. Senator blumenthal thank you for answering our questions today. You first of all, just to say i think many of my colleagues and i feel you have stretched the concept of executive privilege maybe to the breaking point and we need to its a validat purpose and effect is. Im not going to pursue it in light of the time but i want to ask you about a tweet from the 25. Ident on july attorney general Jeff Sessions has taken a very weak position on Hillary Clintons crimes. Intel and dnc server, and leakers. Effect on yourny thinking about these issues . A. G. Sessions the core of any clinton matter is within the refusal i promised this committee. Simply nott is something i can personally be engaged in. I expect the department of justice to investigate matters that need to be investigated. When there is new evidence, perhaps it would justify reopening a case or not. Just speaking in general terms. I can understand the president s , the people who will be handling these cases, if im handling them, we will do it according to the law as we are given to understand it. Senator blumenthal without respect to the president s tweets, immediate reported at least six of President Trumps closest advisers used private email to discuss white house business, including current members of the administration and two former members, steve annan and reince priebus. If Jared Kushner or others send or receive classified using private gmail l accounts, would you prosecute them . It would have to be evaluated at the time. Inadvertence, things of that nature, it can make a prosecution in proper. I would note that it is different in the executive branch. In the senate we used campaign funds, so we never got in trouble using official phones for what might be a political discussion. Branch, you use almost exclusively now, i get almost no emails on my personal phone. Everything comes on your phone but you could receive emails, maybe even send them inadvertently on a personal phone, and the procedure is set up so you should full board those to the official records system so it would be part of the federal records act. It is provided some problems might arise and there is an american there is a mechanism. Are you investigating any of those individuals . A. G. Sessions i am not able to confirm or deny an investigation. Blumenthal does the department of justice have reason to believe those accounts included classified information . A. G. Sessions i am unable to comment on that. Senator blumenthal have you had any conversations to ensure those in males are preserved . Those emails are preserved. A. G. Sessions i have not. I assume appropriate steps will be taken by appropriate attorneys that i have not been involved. It may not be required. I cant even confirmed it is being discussed. In light of the constraints of time i have other questions which i will put on the record. Thank you mr. Chairman. Clarify, i had heard of this trump tower meeting from news reports. No other way. I did not know at the time it was occurring. Nomy view, there was communication by others. That is simply my opinion. I have no knowledge of it and dont believe it happened. I didnt hear you when you asked for a minute to respond, if you want to respond to that at this point. A. G. Sessions i think i am fine. Grassley thank you for accommodating us for five hours. Thank you sir. [inaudible conversation] the Judiciary Committee wrapping up nearly five hours of testimony from Jeff Sessions. A number of votes on the senate floor, follow that on cspan 2. We have been watching our facebook page. Lots of comments. Edward writing such a liar, he is leading some things the president said that bolster voice of evidence, but them like the plague. Facebook. Com. We will reair the hearing nearly five hours tonight beginning at 8 00 eastern here on cspan. You can find it online. Questioning byhe the ranking democrat senator dianne feinstein. You aanted to ask the firing of the fbi director, specifically, i have your later letter dated to the president , specifically what was your designated role in the decision to fire director call me . A. G. Sessions it is a matter i can share some inform
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.