Search
Close this search box.

Schumer: Dems Set To Push Mueller Shield Bill Over Whitaker


Stepping up Democratic efforts to shield the Russia investigation, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Sunday he would seek to tie a measure protecting special counsel Robert Mueller to must-pass legislation if acting attorney general Matthew Whitaker does not recuse himself from oversight of the probe.

Schumer pointed to Whitaker’s “history of hostile statements” toward the Mueller investigation.

“If he stays there, he will create a constitutional crisis by inhibiting Mueller or firing Mueller. So Congress has to act,” Schumer told CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“We Democrats, House and Senate, will attempt to add to must-pass legislation, in this case the spending bill, legislation that would prevent Mr. Whitaker from interfering with the Mueller investigation.”

Schumer sent a letter to the Justice Department on Sunday along with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats that calls for Lee Lofthus, an assistant attorney general and the department’s chief ethics officer, to disclose whether he had advised Whitaker to recuse himself from oversight of the probe. The Democrats cited Whitaker’s past public statements, which have included an op-ed article in which he said Mueller would be straying outside his mandate if he investigated President Donald Trump’s family finances and a talk radio interview in which he maintained there was no evidence of collusion between the Russia and the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

The letter asked Lofthus to explain his reasoning for any recommendation he made to Whitaker regarding recusal and to provide all ethics guidance provided to the acting attorney general.

Whitaker, a Republican Party loyalist and chief of staff to just-ousted Attorney General Jeff Sessions, was elevated Wednesday after Trump forced Sessions out.

Whitaker has faced pressure from Democrats to recuse himself from overseeing Mueller based on the comments, which were made before he joined the Justice Department last year. He has also tweeted an ex-prosecutor’s opinion piece that described a “Mueller lynch mob,” which he said was “worth a read.”

The Mueller protection bill would give any special counsel a 10-day window to seek review of a firing and ensure that the person was fired for good cause.

It’s unclear if Republicans would agree to add the bill to the spending legislation. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has said there is no need for it, but other Republicans, like Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake and Maine Sen. Susan Collins, have called for the bill since Whitaker was appointed.

Schumer declined to say whether Democrats would be willing to force a government shutdown if Congress did not pass a measure protecting Mueller, suggesting it wouldn’t come to that because of bipartisan support. “There’s no reason we shouldn’t add this and avoid a constitutional crisis,” he said. “If that doesn’t happen, we will see what happens down the road.”

The bipartisan Mueller legislation was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee in April and was co-sponsored by Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., the incoming chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, described Trump’s appointment of Whitaker as “an attack” on the Mueller investigation and said protecting that probe will be his committee’s top priority. Nadler told ABC’s “This Week” if Whitaker is still acting attorney general when Nadler becomes Judiciary chairman next year, “one of our first orders of business will be to invite him, and if necessary to subpoena him, to appear before the committee.”

(AP)



6 Responses

  1. Mr Schumer
    Two things for you to ponder
    A. If your stakes for impartiality is so high, where we’re you when Rubaskin was in prison? Ok I will judge you favorably and assume that you were working behind the scenes.
    B. Why do we need a bill? Don’t you trust the government attorneys to make a recommendation in impartiality? Mmmm. You don’t trust the government? Think about that one.

  2. So by this line of reasoning, Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg (who openly made at least as severe remarks – even worse – about Trump) must recuse herself anytime there is a case that affects Trump? The difference is that by all precedent and standards a judge must recuse even if there is any appearance of bias, while no such thing exists in an administrative capacity.

  3. It seems strange that this is being made an open issue right at this moment when pre-mid-term reports stated that Mueller was going to release his finding shortly after the mid-term elections are over, which is actually – now! Is this some kind of open signal to Mueller for him to just stretch this thing out forever and not give any findings (as it is self-evident there are no findings!)

  4. President Trump should immediately make Matthew Whitaker the permanent Attorney General of the the United States. Mr. Whitaker has a backbone and won’t fold like a cheap rino camera just because Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler shook their finger at him. Mr. Whitaker is the Republican version of Eric Holder we’ve been looking for. Finally.

  5. Whitaker will be lucky to last as “Acting” AG. The WH is rushing their announcement of a new AG nominee (along the lines of Crispy Crème Christie to be Trumpian).. When running for office in Iowa primary, Whitiaker said that all his judicial appointees should have a “Christian” world view and other similar nonsense. The new WH counsel and Republicans in the Senate will push Trump to get Whitaker out of DOJ asap. As to Rubashkin, what is the possible relevance to the issues here other than both he and the President may share certain common concerns about the judicial system (one past and one prospective).

  6. Godolhatorah, the relevance to Rubashkin is that the Jeidel there wan NOT impartial. She assisted with planning the raid and though her husbands financial investments that were relayed to the raid are not completely her concern, she should have known better. In that case, I never heard Schumer concerned about impartiality.
    Though I’ll be מלמד זכות that he was working behind the scenes.

    Schumer is playing politics by trying to remove Whitaker. Schumer couldn’t care who would take office unless it was one of his guys or someone who would undermine Trump.

Leave a Reply


Popular Posts