The Hearings: A Summary

In the past week, there have been several Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) hearings. You may have heard about two notable ones with James Comey, the former director of the FBI, and Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General.

These hearings were held as a part of the SSCI’s investigation into Russian influence in the 2016 election and the Trump campaign’s potential collusion with the Russian government. Heavy stuff. (If you need a refresher on some of the major Russia stories, here is Part 1 and Part 2)

Yes. Russia. Again.

This investigation is “conducting a broad inquiry,” into this topic. There are several other Russia investigations going on simultaneously, but the most notable are ones by the House Intelligence Committee and by a special counsel with the Department of Justice. NPR wrote up summaries of each of those, plus the other lesser known ones.

Other people who testified in the SSCI’s hearings were: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers.

But, that’s not why we’re here. Let’s dig into the hearing with Comey and Sessions by looking at who was involved, why they happened, and what was revelatory.

Hearing #1: James Comey

Who was involved: Obviously, James Comey was the main focus of the hearing. But the committee leading this Russia probe is made up of 15 senators: eight republicans, six democrats, and one independent. It is being led by Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.).

Source: The LA Times

Why did this hearing happen: There are several reasons why Comey was brought in to testify, but they all stem from his recent dismissal from the FBI.

• When Trump fired Comey, his motivation for doing so came into question. Trump said in an interview on NBC that Comey’s investigation into Russia was a determining factor. “You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story,” he said. If this is true, it would mean Trump interfered in an active FBI investigation, which is a no-no.
• After that, Comey revealed he had documented his meetings with Trump with memos. And he released one memo that said Trump asked Comey to drop the investigation into Gen. Flynn.
• These two elements made it seem as though Trump were interfering with Comey’s investigation into the Russian influence in the election. By testifying, Comey would be able to lay out all of his experiences related to this issue.
• Richard Burr released this statement about Comey’s testimony: “The Committee looks forward to receiving testimony from the former Director on his role in the development of the Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections, and I am hopeful that he will clarify for the American people recent events that have been broadly reported in the media,”

What was revelatory: To be honest. There was a lot.

• The White House said Comey was fired because the FBI was is disarray. When questioned about it, he said, “those were lies plain and simple” and Trump “chose to defame me and, more importantly, the FBI.” Some people assume the Trump team lies about a lot of things, but someone who has as much power as Comey calling them out is a pretty big deal.
• President Trump tweeted that there were tapes of his and Comey’s conversations. When asked about this, Comey replied, “Lordy, I hope there are tapes.”

• One of the debated parts of Comey’s testimony is about what Trump said to him about the Flynn investigation. Comey quoted Trump as saying, “I hope you can drop this.” Some senators contended that was not sinister, but the President just stating something he was hoping for. But Comey believes it was a directive, ordering him to stop the probe. For example, before Trump said this to the former FBI director, he cleared the room so it was just him and Comey. However, Comey decided to ignore this alleged directive.
• Republican senators argued that Comey should have told Trump that his actions were inappropriate. In response to that line of questioning, Comey said, “I think the circumstances were such that it was — I was a bit stunned and didn’t have the presence of mind…What came to my mind is be careful what you say. I said, I agree Flynn is a good guy.”
• Comey revealed that he orchestrated a leak in order to prompt a special counsel on the Russia investigations (which it did). He gave one memo to a Columbia law professor who gave it to the New York Times.
• Comey said he wrote the memos detailing conversations with Trump because “I was honestly concerned that he might lie about the nature of our meetings.”

Hearing #2: Jeff Sessions

Who was involved: Jeff Sessions testified, and he was questioned by the same committee as Comey was.

Why did this hearing happen: Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation in March, which means he removed himself from any federal involvement in the probe.

But, when Comey testified he cast doubt on this recusal saying Sessions may have been involved in his firing. “I think it is a reasonable question if, as the president said, I was fired because of the Russia investigation, why was the attorney general involved in that chain? I don’t know.”

As a result, Sessions faced pressure from lawmakers and opted to testify in front of the committee.

What was revelatory: Sessions’ testimony was less informative than Comey’s, but much of that was because he refused to answer many questions.

• In Sessions’ confirmation hearing (yes, another hearing), he failed to disclose a meeting he had with a Russian official. In this hearing, he said he did not “recall” meeting with the Russian ambassador. “If any brief interaction occurred in passing with the Russian ambassador, I do not remember it.”
• In the SSCI hearing, Sessions said Comey was fired because he thought the FBI needed a “fresh start.” This rationale differs from the President’s.
• When pressed about Comey’s firing, Sessions continued to say, “I did not violate my recusal,” even though he signed the letter recommending Comey’s dismissal.

• Sessions also refused to disclose conversations he may have had with the President regarding Russia. This action was questionable. Democratic Senators stated that Sessions was required to disclose this information, and he had no basis to withhold it. Sessions said he was holding back because the conversations could be subject to executive privilege, which can only be invoked by the President and hasn’t been put in place yet. It gets complicated very quickly, but here is some information about what executive privilege is and how Sessions used it.

This investigation (and all the other ones) are far from over. But the testimonies from the last week have been so laden with information, they have been worth a closer look.