Richard Wolf

USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Did the nation's top law enforcement official commit perjury during his confirmation hearing?

What's clear is that Attorney General Jeff Sessions met with Russia's ambassador to the United States in July and September — then told the Senate Judiciary Committee under oath in January that "I did not have communications with the Russians."

What's less clear is whether Sessions intended to lie, a requirement of the criminal perjury statute. A 1993 Supreme Court decision said perjury must include "the willful intent to provide false testimony, rather than as a result of confusion, mistake or faulty memory."

Sessions' way out of the morass likely rests with the multiple roles he was playing last summer — as a U.S. senator on the Armed Services Committee as well as a principal surrogate for Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

When Democratic Sen. Al Franken asked Sessions what he would do "if there was any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign," Sessions may have interpreted the question as pertaining only to political activities.

"I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign, and I did not have communications with the Russians," Sessions said then.

He explained his thinking on Thursday while recusing himself from the Justice Department's ongoing probe into Russian involvement in the campaign. When he met with Russian officials, Sessions said, he was not acting as a Trump surrogate. "My answer was honest and correct as I understood it at the time," he said.

Read more:

Sessions did not disclose contact with Russian ambassador, Justice Dept. says

Sessions was more than Trump surrogate in meetings with Russian envoy

Trump says he 'wasn't aware' of Sessions' meetings with Russian ambassador

Still, 17 Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee asked FBI Director James Comey for a criminal investigation Thursday. The statements "could potentially implicate a number of criminal laws, including lying to Congress and perjury," they said.

The American Civil Liberties Union also called for a probe. The liberal Alliance for Justice said Sessions should resign for having committed "outright perjury."

Pace Law School professor Bennett Gershman, a former prosecutor in the Manhattan District Attorney's office, said perjury can be difficult to prove. What's important is the context surrounding a false statement, he said — in Sessions' case, swirling allegations of Russian involvement in the presidential campaign.

"You always have to prove intent by the circumstances," Gershman said. Session's "blanket denial ... really does raise serious questions about whether he was trying to mislead and deceive the committee."

Kevin McMunigal, a former prosecutor who teaches criminal law at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, noted that perjury must include four elements -- the statement must be under oath, material or significant, false -- and the speaker must know it's false.

"I can’t believe that he didn’t meet all those requirements,” McMunigal said.

One potential twist could be the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause, which is intended to protect members of Congress from being questioned or arrested for statements they make in their official capacities. But the clause excludes "treason, felony and breach of the peace" — and perjury is a felony.

Sessions knows his way around perjury statutes. He voted to convict President Bill Clinton in 1999 for perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. "It is crucial to our system of justice that we demand the truth," Sessions said at the time.

On Thursday, he received support from Trump — but it wasn't definitive. Asked whether Sessions had testified truthfully to the Senate during his confirmation hearing, the president said, "I think he probably did."