Tucker To Sessions: Why Didn’t You Amend Answers On Russia Contact After Flynn Controversy?


In an exclusive interview, Tucker Carlson pressed Attorney General Jeff Sessions as to why he did not amend his testimony regarding Russia at his confirmation hearing after Gen. Michael Flynn was forced to resign his national security adviser post over contact with a Russian envoy.

“From that point, February 13th, until now, why did no one from your staff come to you and say… perhaps we should amend our statement to the Senate?” Carlson asked.

Flynn was forced to resign after it was found he was untruthful to Vice President Pence about a conversation with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, who Sessions also had contact with prior to President Trump being inaugurated, Fox News reports.

“I never gave that a thought, never considered it,” Sessions said, explaining that he believed his answer to Sen. Al Franken’s (D-Minn.) question on the matter was forthright and truthful.

Franken, Sessions said, went to great lengths to explain a news story about continual Russian contact with the Trump campaign when asking about any relevant discussions on Sessions’ part.

“My answer went straight to that,” Sessions said, reiterating that he never had any contact with Russian officials regarding the Trump campaign while he was a surrogate.

Sessions did confirm to Carlson that he met Kislyak twice in other capacities: once in his office as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and another after he spoke at the Republican National Convention, when several dignitaries were around greeting him.

“I don’t believe anybody that was in that [Senate office] meeting would have seen that I [did] one thing that was improper,” Sessions said.

Sessions said his decision to recuse himself from any federal probe involving Russian interference in the election was based on public perception.

My recusal was not an admission of any wrongdoing, Sessions said, adding that he would recuse himself if he thought the public or the government would see him as a possibly unfair arbiter in a case.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here