The New Zealand Herald

Appointmen­t puts new

Ex-FBI chief able to prosecute any crimes he uncovers Impeachmen­t can be a drawn-out process

-

The Justice Department caught much of Washington off guard yesterday with its appointmen­t of a special counsel to lead a federal investigat­ion into allegation­s that Donald Trump’s campaign collaborat­ed with Russia to sway the 2016 election that put him in the White House.

Former FBI director Robert Mueller will have sweeping powers and the authority to prosecute any crimes he uncovers.

The surprise announceme­nt to hand the probe over to Mueller, a lawman with deep bipartisan respect, was a striking shift for Trump’s Justice Department, which had resisted increasing­ly loud calls from Democrats for an outside prosecutor. It immediatel­y escalated the legal stakes — and the potential political damage — for a President who has tried to dismiss the matter as partisan witch hunt and a “hoax”. The announceme­nt, the latest in the shock-a-day Washington saga, was made by deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The White House counsel’s office was alerted only after the order appointing Mueller was signed, said a senior White House official, who was not authorised to speak publicly by name and commented only on condition of anonymity.

In a written statement, Trump insisted anew there were no nefarious ties between his campaign and Russia.

“A thorough investigat­ion will confirm what we already know — there was no collusion between my campaign and any foreign entity,” he declared. “I look forward to this matter concluding quickly.”

Mueller’s broad mandate gives him not only oversight of the Russia probe, but also “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigat­ion”. That would surely include Trump’s firing last week of FBI director James Comey.

Mueller, a former federal prosecutor at the Justice Department, was confirmed as FBI director days before the September 11, 2001, attacks that Impeachmen­t is the process by which Congress can put certain officials, including the president, on trial. The constituti­on lays out a broad scope of offences that can lead to impeachmen­t, including “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeano­urs”.

A move to impeach does not necessaril­y mean the president will be forced from office. A vote must proceed, like a bill passing through legislatur­e. First, a majority in the House of Representa­tives — 218 out of 435 members — must approve articles of impeachmen­t previously approved in committee.

The current makeup of the House favours Donald Trump. Republican­s hold 238 seats, while Democrats hold 193 (four seats are vacant). That means 25 Republican­s would need to be persuaded to vote to impeach Trump, which could protect him.

The vote then goes to the Senate, where a two thirds majority vote is needed to convict the president and oust him from office. There have been two presidents who have been impeached in the past and neither was removed from office.

Andrew Johnson went through the process in 1868 after he tried to replace the US Secretary of War without congressio­nal permission. His impeachmen­t passed to the Senate, where he escaped being removed from office by a one-vote margin.

The other president was Bill Clinton, over the Monica Lewinsky would ultimately shape his tenure. The FBI’s counterter­ror mission was elevated in those years, as the US intelligen­ce agencies adjusted to better position the US to prevent another attack of such magnitude. He was so valued that President Barack Obama asked him to stay on two years longer than his 10-year term.

Comey succeeded him, appointed by Obama.

Mueller was appointed yesterday by Rosenstein, who had faced criticism as the author of a memo that Bill Clinton was impeached over the Monica Lewinski affair. scandal. He was impeached for perjury and obstructio­n of justice in 1998, but he was acquitted in the Senate.

Richard Nixon would almost certainly have faced impeachmen­t in 1974 over the Watergate scandal, but the disgraced President resigned first.

There have been calls for action against Trump over claims that he shared classified informatio­n with Russia. But if true, it is unlikely he has broken any law.

The latest controvers­y could be trickier. Allegation­s of obstructio­n of justice were levelled against the President as soon as he fired FBI director James Comey, who was leading an investigat­ion into the Trump campaign’s links to Russia.

But the case against Trump would have to be damning and watertight for Republican­s to act against him.

— Telegraph Group Ltd preceded Comey’s firing. Rosenstein said the appointmen­t was “necessary in order for the American people to have full confidence in the outcome”. Republican­s have largely stood behind Trump in the first months of his presidency as the FBI and congressio­nal investigat­ions into Russia’s election meddling intensifie­d. But GOP lawmakers have grown increasing­ly anxious since Trump fired Comey, who had been leading the bureau’s probe — and after Comey associates said he had notes from a meeting in which Trump asked him to shut down the investigat­ion into the Russia ties of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

First reactions from Congress were mainly positive.

House Speaker Paul Ryan said the appointmen­t was consistent with his goal of ensuring that “thorough and independen­t investigat­ions are allowed to follow the facts wherever they may lead”. Republican Jason Chaffetz of Utah, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said

 ??  ?? Donald Trump claimed yesterday in
Donald Trump claimed yesterday in
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand