Democrats call for Mueller protection
Houston’s Jackson Lee leads the charge to ensure Trump can’t oust special counsel
WASHINGTON — Amid swelling political rancor over the recent FBI raid of President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Democrats in Congress are rallying around a long-shot bid by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee and others to protect special counsel Robert Mueller from being fired.
The Houston Democrat and her allies on House Judiciary Committee proposed legislation Thursday to require federal court review of any move to fire Mueller or end his probe of possible Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Although the effort has little chance of getting backing from House Republicans, it comes a day after a bipartisan group of senators introduced a similar bill protecting Mueller as Trump grows increasingly agitated about this week’s FBI raid.
Among those who have spoken out against firing Mueller or his boss, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, is Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate. Cornyn, speaking to Texas reporters Wednesday, said it would be a “big mistake” for Trump to fire Mueller, adding “the repercussions would be
dramatic and overwhelmingly negative.”
Jackson Lee’s Special Counsel Independence Protection Act, first introduced in August, has since garnered 152 cosponsors — all Democrats. On Thursday, it was wrapped into similar legislation being spearheaded by New York Democrat Jerrold Nadler, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee.
While the House Democrats would put the issue directly before the courts, the Senate bill — backed by Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Cory Booker, D-N.J. — would require that the special counsel could be dismissed only for “good cause” — a determination that a fired prosecutor could then contest in court.
The congressional action comes during a week of increasing strains surrounding the Mueller probe, highlighted by an FBI raid on the offices, home and hotel room of Trump’s private lawyer, Michael Cohen.
Trump reacted to Monday’s FBI raid by openly musing about ending the special counsel investigation and criticizing Rosenstein, a Trump appointee who is overseeing the Mueller probe. Rosenstein reportedly had a hand in approving the necessary search warrants targeting Cohen, which were filed by federal prosecutors in New York.
Trump called the probe a “witch hunt,” and raid an “attack on our country.” He’s also inaccurately portrayed Mueller’s team as “Democrats, all.”
Collision course
Search warrants filed in connection with the raid suggest that investigators sought communications between Trump and Cohen over the 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape, which caught Trump boasting about grabbing women sexually.
Some legal experts say that may indicate prosecutors could be looking at a pattern of suppressing unflattering stories about Trump as he sought the White House — in particular, alleged payments to quash stories about romantic dalliances.
Cohen has acknowledged making a $130,000 payoff to porn star Stormy Daniels shortly before the election, a transaction that some critics contend may have violated campaign finance laws.
Trump has long said any encroachment on his personal finances would cross a “red line.” After the raid, he tweeted that “attorney-client privilege is dead.”
Government lawyers, along with Jackson Lee, an attorney, have argued that the attorney privilege cannot be used to commit or further crimes such as possible wire fraud, bank fraud and violations of campaign finance law.
The special counsel’s office original charter was to investigate foreign election meddling and potential campaign coordination between Kremlin agents and the Trump campaign. Trump and his defenders maintain there has been no “collusion,” but the investigation increasingly appears to be focused on potential financial entanglements between Trump or his associates and Moscow.
With the White House seemingly on a collision course with its own Justice Department and the FBI, there have been increasingly anxious calls among both Democrats and Republicans for the Trump administration to respect the independence of the Russia probe and let it run its course.
Nadler said any move by Trump to end the special investigation would constitute an “abuse of power,” adding that it would also be consistent with the “actions of someone who knows he is guilty of crimes.”
‘Checks and balances’
Jackson Lee warned of a constitutional showdown if Trump acts against Mueller.
“This is an Article I moment,” Jackson Lee said, referring to the opening section of the Constitution that vests legislative powers in the Congress. “The framers of the Constitution wisely divided power through a system of checks and balances. They envisioned moments like this.”
Earlier this week, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the president believes he has the authority to fire Mueller, though that is not currently under consideration. Trump fired back on Thursday at a New York Times article reporting that he considered firing the special counsel at least twice before, including once in December.
“If I wanted to fire Robert Mueller in December, as reported by the Failing New York Times, I would have fired him,” Trump tweeted. “Just more Fake News from a biased newspaper!”
While Mueller appears to have broad bipartisan support in Congress, Democrats have accused Republicans of timidity in standing up for an exhaustive Russia probe. Reacting to House Speaker Paul Ryan’s decision Wednesday to leave Congress after his current term, U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin challenged him to clear the way for legislation protecting Mueller.
“Speaker Ryan, long mute in the face of increasingly erratic and dangerous Trump behavior, should now find his voice and allow a vote to protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller from being fired,” he said.
Some Republican leaders, including Cornyn, have questioned the value of passing legislation specifically intended to constrain Trump in the Russia probe.
“The biggest question I have is: if it did pass, would the president sign it?” Cornyn said in a CNN interview earlier this week. “I think it’s unlikely he would and, as I’ve said, I don’t think it’s necessary.”
Lee responded that the goal is to pressure Trump. “I would like the bills — that’s pressure,” she said.