CONYERS: Sessions Testimony Leaves Concerns About Independence & Integrity Of DOJ

At DOJ Oversight Hearing, Sessions Refuses to Answer Questions & “Cannot Recall” Russia Details

Attorney General Refuses to Push Back on Pressure from White House; Stands by Weak Civil Rights Record; Hedges on Special Counsel for Clinton; Admits to Taking No Action to Protect U.S. Elections

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Department of Justice Attorney General Jeff Sessions testified before the House Judiciary Committee for the first time during its annual oversight hearing. Every Attorney General before Attorney General Sessions has testified before the House Judiciary Committee during their first six months of taking office.

Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) issued the following statement after the hearing:

“The Attorney General’s testimony today leaves me with grave concerns about the independence and integrity of the Department of Justice.  Attorney General Sessions paid lip service to the rule of law—but hedged his bets on the appointment of a special counsel to investigate President Trump’s political enemies.  I take little comfort in his testimony suggesting that the Department does not yet have a factual basis to pursue these charges.  The Department of Justice shouldn’t act this way to begin with.

“The Attorney General could not give us a straight answer on any of President Trump’s attacks on the Department or attempts to distract from the Russia investigation.  He stood by his record on voter ID laws and other measures designed to discriminate against minorities.  He freely admitted that he has done nothing to protect America’s next elections from foreign influence.  He also offered no clarification whatsoever on his shifting Russia testimony, except to say that he ‘did not lie’ and ‘cannot recall’ any key details.”

AG Sessions Responded “I Do Not Recall” to Dozens of Questions

Throughout the hearing, Attorney General (AG) Sessions avoided taking responsibility for his own statements, claiming a foggy memory about most aspects of contacts involving the Russian government. AG Sessions said “I did not lie” but refused to correct the record on his previous Senate testimony when asked by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX).  AG Sessions acknowledged that he was not sure what he told Papadopoulos regarding a possible Russia meeting. 

When pressed about Carter Page and his travels to Russia, Sessions replied, “No, I didn’t tell him not to go to Russia.  I didn’t recall [Page] saying that.  Am I supposed to stop him from taking the trip?”  AG Sessions also did not recall any discussions about changing the GOP platform regarding the Ukraine with Michael Flynn.

Rep. Lofgren: Did you discuss with Michael Flynn the possibility of Trump or his surrogates meeting with the Russian government?
AG Sessions: "I do not recall such a conversation." https://t.co/obU9oYboRn pic.twitter.com/eDz1L5Xgpo

— CBS News (@CBSNews) November 14, 2017

Attorney General Sessions Offered Little Clarity About a Second Special Counsel

Sessions could not explain why his involvement in a review of matters related to Hillary Clinton, James Comey, and Loretta Lynch for possible referral to a new special counsel does not violate the terms of his recusal. 

At his Senate confirmation hearing, he said:

“The proper thing for me to do would be to recuse myself from any questions . . . that involve Secretary Clinton and that were raised during the campaign.”

Jeff Sessions, in testy exchange with GOP lawmaker: "'Looks like' is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel" https://t.co/d8zYEQpI3V pic.twitter.com/vC0ccPErbh

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) November 14, 2017

When Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) questioned Sessions today regarding the appointment of a second special counsel, Sessions responded that he believes that the Department has not yet established a factual basis that meets the standards of the appointments of a special counsel.  Rep. Jordan said it “looks like” wrongdoing took place.  AG Sessions responded: “‘Looks like’ is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel.” 

Sessions Refused to Answer Questions about Political Interference

Sessions refused to answer questions about whether President Trump could seek to fire Special Counsel Mueller. When asked about Steven Miller’s work on a letter describing the President’s motive for firing former FBI Director Comey, AG Sessions refused to answer—but also declined to invoke executive privilege.  Chairman Goodlatte refused Democratic efforts to compel an answer from the Attorney General.

Attorney General Sessions also would not answer questions regarding whether any one from the White House had contacted or attempted to influence DOJ regarding the AT&T/Time Warner merger, or efforts by Rupert Murdoch to purchase CNN. Before the hearing, Ranking Member Conyers and U.S. House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee Ranking Member David N. Cicilline (D-RI) pressed Chairman Goodlatte for a hearing on growing evidence of the Trump administration allowing politics to impact their review of mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. View the letter, below.

Attorney General Stands by Weak Civil Rights Record & Owns Election Security Failures

FBI Labeling of Black Activists 

When questioned by several Members, Attorney General Sessions said he had not seen the Black Identity Extremists memo released in August by the FBI and was unable to identify any current group that he would characterize as a “Black Identity Extremist.” The AG also was unable to identify any senior African-American staff in his office.

Sessions on FBI "Black Identity Extremists" report: 'I'm aware of groups committed to racial identity, transformed into violent activists.' pic.twitter.com/vdGrRhakVF

— NBC BLK (@NBCBLK) November 14, 2017

In October 2017, Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Cedric L. Richmond and Ranking Members John Conyers, Jr. (Judiciary), Bennie G. Thompson (Homeland Security), and Elijah E. Cummings (Oversight) sent a letter to  FBI Director Christopher Wray, requesting to meet about the origins of the assessment and how it will be used, and expressed concern about the assessment given the FBI’s “troubling history” of targeting black citizens, including Martin Luther King, Jr., and other civil rights leaders. View the letter here.

Supporting Voter Suppression

AG Sessions said that he will continue to defend voter ID laws that have been found to intentionally discriminate against minorities.  Session said that he believes he can “properly” enforce the laws without explaining how he plans to do so.

Lack of Action to Protect Future American Elections

AG Sessions acknowledged that the Department of Justice has not taken steps to secure future elections, and admitted our Nation is not where it needs to be to defend against foreign interference.

House Judiciary Ranking Chairmen Conyers & Cicilline Letter To Chairman Goodlatte Requesting Antitrust Hear... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Ranking Member Conyers Statement at Hearing on the Proposed Merger of AT&T and DIRECTV

(WASHINGTON) – This morning, the U.S. House Judiciary Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law held a hearing on, “The Proposed Merger of AT&T and DIRECTV.” During his opening remarks, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) delivered the following statement:

U.S Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

“Today, we consider the proposed merger of AT&T, the Nation’s second-largest seller of high-speed Internet and wireless telephone services, with DirecTV, the Nation’s second-largest paid television provider. While neither we nor the competition enforcement agencies should pre-judge this deal, there are several concerns that I want the witnesses to address today.

“To begin with, this transaction raises the concern that there may be too much and too rapid consolidation in the telecommunications industry, especially when viewed in the light of other recently announced or rumored deals. I fear that the trend toward greater consolidation in this industry may ultimately benefit large corporations and their shareholders at the expense of consumers. While I fully appreciate that the goal of antitrust law is to protect competition and not competitors per se, this ongoing wave of consolidation will, without question, result in fewer firms and may harm consumers by limiting choices and raising prices. After all, it is the very threat of losing business in the face of high prices or low quality products and services that drives competitive business practices. The preeminent purpose of antitrust law is to protect consumers by ensuring that no one firm achieves market power such that it no longer risks losing business because it can force consumers to pay higher prices or accept lower quality goods and services in the absence of a competitive marketplace. I hope that the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission will carefully consider the overall impact of industry consolidation as they review the merits of this particular transaction.

“One rationale in favor of the merger - that it would create a stronger competitor to large cable companies - may, in fact, spur further consolidation in the telecommunications industry. I do not doubt that the merged AT&T-DirecTV entity could be large enough to effectively compete against large cable companies, but what is to stop competitors from using the same argument to justify further consolidation? After all, cable companies could point to the merged AT&T-DirecTV to justify further consolidation among themselves, which, in turn, could justify further consolidation by competitors to cable companies. As a result, we could have a ‘race to the bottom’ whereby large companies seek more and more mergers and acquisitions in response to mergers and acquisitions by other companies, ultimately leaving fewer choices for all consumers.

“Turning to the specifics of the proposed transaction, I am concerned about the loss of a competitor for paid television services in many of the largest markets. As a national satellite-television provider, DirecTV is a competitor to AT&T’s U-Verse video service in the 22 states where U-Verse is offered. And, U-Verse currently competes with DirecTV in 10 of the 20 largest metropolitan markets for paid television. The loss of a paid television competitor in those markets where AT&T and DirecTV directly compete with each other would reduce consumer choice and could have the potential to raise prices. Although AT&T has committed to continuing to offer DirecTV as a standalone option for three years after the acquisition, there are no guarantees that consumers will continue to have a such an option after that time. The burden remains on AT&T to show that this merger will not harm consumers.

“We should also consider whether smaller video providers, in the aftermath of the sheer size of a combined AT&T-DirecTV, could face increased content prices, potentially driving some of them out of business. In addition to being a video distributor, DirecTV is a video programmer that owns three regional sports networks and has interests in some national networks. Small competing video distributors fear that the size of a combined AT&T-DirecTV – as both a seller and a buyer of programming – could harm smaller competitors in two ways. First, a vertically integrated AT&T-DirecTV could discriminate against rival distributors by withholding or charging higher prices for its own programming. Second, such a combined entity would be a large enough distributor to command discounts from other programmers, potentially forcing smaller distributors to pay higher prices for content to make up the difference.

“Finally, we must consider whether imposing behavioral remedies would, in practice,  be effective. As a condition for approval of the Comcast-NBC Universal transaction, the FCC and the Justice Department required Comcast-NBCU to take affirmative steps to foster competition – including voluntary compliance with net neutrality protections –  as well as steps to benefit the public interest. AT&T has indicated that it will voluntarily commit to similar types of commitments to its proposed acquisition of DirecTV. Some observers, however, are concerned that the behavioral remedies imposed in the Comcast-NBC transaction were ineffective and difficult to enforce. Accordingly, we should consider whether such commitments should be strengthened and made more enforceable to better protect the public interest in this case.

“I look forward to having a fruitful discussion of these issues so that all stakeholders, particularly consumers and the enforcement agencies, are better informed about this significant transaction.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

House Judiciary Committee Announces AT&T-DirecTV Merger Hearing

Washington, D.C. – On Tuesday, June 24^th at 10:30 a.m., the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law will hold a hearing on the proposed merger between AT&T and DirecTV. Witnesses testifying at the hearing will include Randall L. Stephenson, the CEO of AT&T, and Michael D. White, the CEO of DirecTV. Additional witnesses will be announced closer to the hearing date.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.), Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Subcommittee Chairman Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), and Subcommittee Ranking Member Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) issued the following joint statement on the upcoming hearing:

“The House Judiciary Committee is pleased to announce our hearing on the proposed telecommunications merger between AT&T and DirecTV. The hearing will both allow the Committee to undertake a serious examination of what might be the fourth-largest telecommunications merger in history and provide a forum for proponents and critics of the proposed merger to publicly discuss its potential competitive impact on the telecommunications marketplace.”

All House Judiciary Committee hearings are webcast live on www.judiciary.house.gov. The hearing will take place in 2141 Rayburn. 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

House Judiciary Committee on AT&T and DirecTV Proposed Merger

(WASHINGTON) – Following the announcement of the AT&T and DirecTV proposed merger, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Subcommittee Chairman Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.), Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), and Subcommittee Ranking Member Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) issued the following joint statement:

U.S. Representative
John  Conyers, Jr.

“Yesterday’s announcement of the proposed merger between AT&T and DirecTV comes on the heels of the House Judiciary Committee’s review of the Comcast and Time Warner Cable merger. The proposed AT&T and DirecTV merger would be the fourth largest telecommunications merger in history. The Committee has a strong record of reviewing proposed transactions that could have a significant impact on consumers and the competitive marketplace. We intend to continue that record by conducting a hearing to examine the proposed AT&T and DirecTV merger to ensure that consumers’ interests are protected in an increasingly consolidated telecommunications marketplace.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©