I have never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States.
Further, I have no knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected to the Trump campaign.
I was your colleague in this body for 20 years, at least some of you.
And the suggestion that I participated in any collusion, that I was aware of any collusion with the Russian government to hurt this country, which I have served with honor for 35 years, or to undermine the integrity of our democratic process, is an appalling and detestable lie.
Mr. Comey told us when he was here last week that he had a very specific recollection.
In fact, he chased it down through the intelligence community and was not able to find a scintilla of evidence of that effect.
Then he sought out both Republicans and Democrats up here to tell them that this was false, that there was no such facts anywhere that corroborated what the New York Times had reported.
Nonetheless, after that...
The failing New York Times leading the way in fake news.
We spent really substantially more time on that than we have on the Russian active measures.
We've been through thousands of pages of information, interviewed witnesses and everything else.
We're really no different than where we were when this whole thing started.
And there's been no reports that I know of of any factual information in that regard.
Are you aware of any such information of collusion?
Is that a rose from the dossier, so-called dossiers?
Senator Riggs, is that what you're referring to?
Well, we're anywhere.
I believe that's the report that Senator Franken hit me with when I was testifying.
And it, I think, has been pretty substantially discredited, but you would know more than I. But what was said that would suggest I participated in continuing communications with Russians over as a surrogate is absolutely false.
You're a long-time colleague, but we heard Mr. Coates and we heard Admiral Rogers say essentially the same thing.
When it was easy just to say if the answer was no, no.
Well, it would have been easier to say if it was yes, yes, but both would have been improper.
Deputy Rosenstein's letter dealt with a number of things.
when Mr. Comey declined the Clinton prosecution.
That was really a usurpation of the authority of the federal prosecutors in the Department of Justice.
It was a stunning development.
Bombshell.
That's bombshell.
And so that was a thunderous thing.
He also commented at some length on the declination of the Clinton prosecution, which you should not normally, you shouldn't do.
Mr. Comey, perhaps he didn't know, but I basically recused myself the first day I got into the office because I never accessed files.
I never learned the names of investigators.
I never met with them.
I never asked for any documentation.
The documentation, what little I received, was mostly already in the media and was presented by the senior ethics public responsibility, professional responsibility attorney in the department.
General...
I told Senator Feinstein and the members of the committee I would do when they confirmed me.
General Sessions, respectfully, you're not answering the question.
Well, what is the question?
The question is, Mr. Comey said that there were matters with respect to the recusal that were problematic and he couldn't talk about them.
What are they?
Why don't you tell me?
They are none, Senator Wyden.
There are none.
I can tell you that for absolute certainty.
This is a secret innuendo being leaked out there about me, and I don't appreciate it, and I've tried to give my best and truthful answers to any committee I've appeared before, and it's really people are suggesting through innuendo that I have been not honest about.
Matters, and I've tried to be honest.
So I want to ask you just point blank.
Why did you sign the letter recommending the firing of Director Comey when it violated your recusal?
It did not violate my recusal.
It did not violate my recusal.
That would be the answer to that.
And the letter that I signed represented my views that had been formulated for some time.
Mr. Chairman, just so if I can finish, that answer, in my view, doesn't pass the smell test.
The president tweeted repeatedly about his anger at investigations into his associates in Russia.
The day before you wrote your letter, he tweeted that the collusion story was a total hoax and asked, when will this taxpayer-funded charade end?
I don't think your answer passes the smell test.
There are two investigations here.
There is a special counsel investigation.
There is also a congressional investigation.
And you are obstructing that congressional investigation by not answering these questions.
And I think your silence, like the silence of Director Coates, like the silence of Admiral Rogers, speaks volumes.
I would say that I have consulted with senior career attorneys in the department, and I believe this is consistent with my duties.
Last night, Admiral Rogers spent almost two hours in closed session with almost the full committee, fulfilling his commitment to us.
I just want the record to show that with what Senator Heinrich stated.
I am on this side of the dais.
So a very simple question that should be asked is...
Did Donald Trump or any of his associates in the campaign collude with Russia in hacking those emails and releasing them to the public?
That's where we started six months ago.
We have now heard from six of the eight Democrats on this committee, and to my knowledge, I don't think a single one of them asked that question.
They've gone down lots of other rabbit trails about that question.
Maybe that is because Jim Comey said last week, as he said to Donald Trump, that on three times he assured him he was not under investigation.
Maybe it's because multiple Democrats on this committee Have stated they have seen no evidence thus far after six months of our investigation and ten months or eleven months of an FBI investigation of any such collusion.
Do you like spy fiction?
John Licoré, Daniel Silva, Jason Matthews?
Yeah, Allen first.
Do you like Russian salad dressing?
Do you like Jason Bourne or James Bond movies?
No.
Yes.
Have you ever, in any of these fantastical situations, heard of a plot line so ridiculous that a sitting United States Senator and an ambassador of a foreign government colluded at an open setting with hundreds of other people to pull off the greatest caper in the history of S- Thank you for saying that, Senator Cotton.
It's just like through the looking glass.
I mean, what is this?
I explained how, in good faith, I said I had not met with Russians because they were suggesting I, as a surrogate, had been meeting continuously with Russians.
I said I didn't meet with them.
And now, the next thing you know, I'm accused of some reception plotting...
Some sort of influence campaign for the American election.
It's just beyond my capability to understand, and I really appreciate, Mr. Chairman, the opportunity at least to be able to say publicly, I didn't participate in that and know nothing about it.
Let's turn to the potential crimes that we know have happened, leaks of certain information.
Here's a short list of what I have.
The contents of alleged transcripts of alleged conversations between Mr. Flynn and Mr. Kislyak.
The contents of President Trump's phone calls with Australian and Mexican leaders.
The content of Mr. Trump's meetings with the Russian foreign minister and the ambassador.
The leak of the Manchester bombing suspect's identity and crime scene photos.
And last week, within 20 minutes of this committee meeting in a classified setting with Jim Comey, the leak of what the basis of Mr. Comey's innuendo was.
Are these leaks serious threats to our national security?
And is the Department of Justice taking them with the appropriate degree of seriousness in investigating and ultimately going to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law?
Thank you, Senator Cotton.
We have had one successful case very recently in Georgia.
That person has been denied bail, I believe, and is being held in custody.
That's reality winner.
Some of these leaks, as you well know, But see, they're so obsessed with non-existent Russian hacking that they can't even address the deep state that is trying to undermine President Trump.
This is a total agenda to take Trump out, folks.
It's so obvious.
My brain will result in, is already resulting in investigations and I'm, uh, fear that some people may find, uh, that they wish they hadn't leaked.
Did you have any communication with any Russian businessmen or any Russian nationals?
I don't believe I had any conversation with Russian businessmen or Russian nationals.
Are you aware of any communications?
A lot of people were at the convention.
It's conceivable that somebody came up to me.
Well, you let me qualify.
If I don't qualify, you'll accuse me of lying.
So I need to be correct as best I can.
I do want you to be honest.
And I'm not able to be rushed this fast.
It makes me nervous.
Are you aware of any communications with any Trump officials, or did you have any communications with any officials about Russia or Russian interests in the United States before January 20th?
No, I may have had some conversations, and I think I did, with the general strategic concept of the possibility of whether or not Russia and the United States could get on a more harmonious relationship and move off to hostility.
The Soviet Union did, in fact, collapse.
It's really a tragic strategic event that we're not able to get along better than we are today.
And you referred to a longstanding DOJ policy.
Can you tell us what policy it is you're talking about?
Well, I think most cabinet people, as the witnesses you had before you earlier, those individuals declined to comment because we're all about conversations with the president.
Sir, I'm just asking you about the DOJ policy you referred to.
That's a longstanding policy that goes beyond just the attorney general.
Is that policy in writing somewhere?
I think so.
So did you not consult it before you came before this committee knowing we would ask you questions about that?
Well, we talked about it.
The policy is based...
Did you ask that it would be shown to you?
The policy is based on the principle that the president...
Sir, I'm not asking about the principle.
I'm asking when you think that you would be asked these questions and you would rely on that policy, did you not ask your staff to show you the policy that would be the basis for you refusing to answer the majority of questions that have been asked of you?
The witness should be allowed to answer the question.
Senators will allow the chair to control the hearing.
Senator Harris, let him answer.
Please do.
Thank you.
We talked about it, and we talked about the real principle that's at stake.
I have some appreciation as far as having spent 15 years in the Department of Justice, 12 as United States Attorney, and that principle is that the Constitution provides the head of the executive branch certain privileges, and that members, one of them is confidentiality of communications, and it is improper for...
Agents of any departments in the executive branch to waive that privilege without a clear approval of the president.
And that's the situation we're in.
Mr. Sessions, for a yes or no, did you ask your staff to speak the policy?
So the answer is yes, I consulted.
Did you ask your staff to speak the policy?
Apparently not.
At those meetings, if you spoke with Ambassador Kisiak in your capacity as a member of the Armed Services Committee, you presumably talked with him about Russia-related security issues that you have demonstrated as important to you as a member of the committee?
Did I discuss security issues?
I don't recall you as being...
Here we go.
John McCain having a senior moment again.
...on such issues.
Repeat that, Senator McCain.
I'm sorry.
Sorry, Senator McCain.
Your dementia got in the way of you making sense.
Did you raise those with him?
Can we get a translator for this man?
Yeah, in other words, Russia-related security issues.
In your capacity as the chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, what Russia-related security issues did you hold hearings on or otherwise demonstrate a keen interest in?
Politico recently reported in the middle of the 2016 elections, the FBI found that Russian diplomats whose travel the State Department was supposed to track had gone missing.
Some turned up wandering around the desert or driving around Kansas.
Reportedly, intelligent sources conclude that after about a year of inattention, these movements indicate, one, that Moscow's espionage ground game has grown stronger, more brazen, and that quietly the Kremlin has been trying to map the United States telecommunications infrastructure.
*Mario's music* Every morning before I start writing or shooting a video, I take two capsules of brain force for a sustainable burst of energy.
This is, without question, the most powerful nootropic I've ever taken.
And it comes without any of the crashes or the jitters associated with energy drinks.