Sessions' 'lie' doesn't meet definition
Democrats say that Attorney General Jeff Sessions lied under oath. They argue that telling the truth forms a vital support of a democratic government; thus, they imply that they always tell the truth.
Their claim reminds me of something that Sam Johnson said more than 200 years ago. I paraphrase, "Sir, a (Democrat telling the truth) is like a dog's walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."
The legal standard requires a false, material statement uttered willfully. The claim of falsity fails if the statement has an innocent interpretation. The statement must have relevance to the matter of inquiry. "Willfully" means the person knows he is committing a crime. Democrats' accusations fail on all three counts.
Does talking twice with the Russian ambassador in Sessions' capacity as a member of the Armed Services Committee constitute evidence of "ties" with Russia? Does such talk mean proof that he discussed Trump's campaign? Not at all.
George Kocan
Warrenville