When asked by the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) if Trump ever directed him to hinder the Russia investigation, Attorney General Jeff Sessions refused to answer the question.
Manu Raju of CNN reported:
Schiff says he asked Sessions directly if Trump ever directed him to "hinder" the Russia investigation. He declined to answer, citing private conversations with Trump
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) November 30, 2017
Schiff’s question is easy to answer if the answer is no. The only reason for Attorney General Session to decline to answer is that any answer that he could provide would damage Trump. Anyone who has watched Jeff Sessions testify since he became Attorney General knows that the refusal to answer due to the privacy of the conversation is one of his favorite go-to moves when he is trying to avoid providing damaging information to the Russia investigation.
If the answer was no, all Sessions had to do was say no, and it would help boost the President’s claims that he did not obstruct justice. The Attorney General’s refusal to answer was an answer itself. There have been media reports for months that Trump wanted to fire Sessions because he wouldn’t interfere and make the Russia investigation go away.
This is as big of a jaw-dropper non-answer as one can get.
Jeff Sessions admitted by saying nothing that he can’t clear the President of trying to interfere in the Russia investigation.
That is obstruction of justice, and obstruction of justice puts Trump on the path to impeachment.
Mr. Easley is the managing editor. He is also a White House Press Pool and a Congressional correspondent for PoliticusUSA. Jason has a Bachelor’s Degree in Political Science. His graduate work focused on public policy, with a specialization in social reform movements.
Awards and Professional Memberships
Member of the Society of Professional Journalists and The American Political Science Association