My impression is that the Republican Senators have little respect for Sessions and have no interest in preserving his reputation which comes as a bit of a surprise. Bipartisan hard line of questioning.
I didn't watch the Comey hearing, but watching this one on the back of reading the comments, I couldn't really tell who's R and who's D.My impression is that the Republican Senators have little respect for Sessions and have no interest in preserving his reputation which comes as a bit of a surprise. Bipartisan hard line of questioning.
Shame he wasn't able to push him on how him signing the recommendation to fire Comey didn't violate the recusal.
But surely recommending to fire the leader of the Russia investigation would be interfering with it, even if the same person's job description extends beyond that? Maybe I'm wrong on exactly what a recusal entails.He did only recuse himself from the investigation regarding collusion in 2016 elections from Russia. The Comey situation was an HR issue inside the DoJ. As he didn't fire him based on his own evaluations but from Rosenstein, I don't see the problem with than. The jury is out on the judgement of letting your Nr. 2 handle the situation of the director fo the FBI.
Heinrich finally. Some good questions should follow
Why is her voice so shaky?
Illness.Why is her voice so shaky?
Deja vu to the guys testifying last week.Heinrich accusing him of obstruction of justice for avoiding questions with no leagal grounds to.
But surely recommending to fire the leader of the Russia investigation would be interfering with it, even if the same person's job description extends beyond that? Maybe I'm wrong on exactly what a recusal entails.
As I said: no, because the reasons for firing Comey were not based on his handling of the Russian investigation.
Not publicly and according to him. But the timing is peculiar and is worthy of questioning. Why would he decide, on May 9th, to fire Comey for something that happened in, what, October? If the public reason is his handling of the Hilary e-mail stuff?As I said: no, because the reasons for firing Comey were not based on his handling of the Russian investigation.
As Heinrich just said - that's not true. Trump said it was because of the Russia investigation. No previous concerns to the state of the FBI or Comey's performance had been raised, in fact the total opposite.
Just because they have a weak excuse doesn't make it true and that's why he is here today.
Yes, but you're confusing the reasons for Trump with those for Sessions. Trump can still make up his minde, Sessions only recommended to that. There is no obligation that those are coherent. I'm not saying there is nothing spooky about it, just that there is nothing to nail Sessions on in this situation.
Sessions just lost it.
He just testified he was asked to comment on Comey before the firing. So an independent report of his is not the reason Comey was fired. He just said it there.
Does Lankford have any questions or is he just going to try rescue this for Sessions?
Just flicked on and Sessions seems rattled, hows it going?
He seems like a man trying to remember what he's said before and what his story is supposed to be.Both sides pressing him well. He's slipped a few times.
He's a dour prick.
Seems my stream is behind, that prick Lankford just came in here.
I remember him from Comey's hearing and thinking he was a prick, then I googled his positions and knew I was right.Go make a cup of tea.
BBC and Sky both showing it live mate. Although I bet your Mrs is watching BrokenSeems my stream is behind, that prick Lankford just came in here.
FFS I assumed I'd need CNN from the US.BBC and Sky both showing it live mate. Although I bet your Mrs is watching Broken