Transcripts For CSPAN Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein 20180111

We have nearly 1000 people. Thats amazing. Sir, you do not know how dire the situation is. If you look out on the crowd, you will see men wearing socks. Im tony. I am your forum Club President and we are excited to have Deputy Attorney general Rod Rosenstein here with us today. [applause] it is now my pleasure to introduce our keynote speaker. He helps in providing overall supervision to all organizational units in the department of justice. As such, Deputy Attorney general Rob Rosenstein was responsible for appointing Robert Mueller in charge of investigating russias involvement in the 2016 president ial election. He also currently oversees the ongoing investigation. Deputy attorney general rosenstein has spent more than 20 years in government service. After graduating from the Wharton School of business and harvard law school, he started his legal career as a law clerk with Justice Douglas h ginsburg for the district of columbia up in a began columbia. That was in there twice. My bad. Ladies and gentlemen, without further a do, deputy general Rod Rosenstein. [applause] deputy general rosenstein thank you for that. I want to thank members of the Foreign Press for inviting me to join you in palm beach day. Typically, i express my gratitude to bruce reinhardt. Im glad to see that my good friend alex acosta, who served with me as a u. S. Attorney in the Bush Administration will be here as your speaker next month. It was snowing when i left maryland yesterday. When i arrived in florida, someone mentioned it was unseasonably cold. [laughter] i hadnt noticed. Yesterday, i hosted a forum about Human Trafficking at your local bunch Attorney Generals Office. A headline reads rosenstein visits miami and does not talk about russia. [laughter] you will find the same headline here in palm beach today. When my teenage studies when my teenage daughter first learned that i would be Deputy Attorney general, she wondered if my picture would be in the newspaper. I told her, no. [laughter] Deputy Attorney general is a lowprofile job. Resend i have known several Deputy Attorney general. Nobody knows Deputy Attorney general. Well, those were the days. [laughter] im happy to be here for several reasons. One thing, i appreciate the opportunity to spend a few hours outside of our nations. D. C. Is a great place to work, but it is no day at the beach. I am very lucky, i already have a dog. I have seen stories speculating that i may be sued, fired, or held in contempt. And that is just in the last 24 hours. [laughter] my father called me and asked, are you ok . I said, yes, i had a great day. He said, really . When my parents grew up, it was a time when news happened twice a day, once in the morning newspaper and once in the Evening Network broadcast. There were only a few suppliers of news. Most people accepted the news as gospel truth. And usually, it was true. In those days, facts were different than opinions. Newspapers and Television Networks labeled their opinions as editorials and they made efforts to distinguish between the news and the opinions. It wasnt a perfect system. The line between fact and opinion was blurry sometimes, but there was a line. But the truth is yesterday really was a great day for me. It was a great day because i spent it working with exceptional Public Servants with state and local Law Enforcement officials. We spent the day protecting our nation and to promote the rule of law. Im proud to work for a president and an attorney general who support our efforts to achieve those goals. Im also honored to work with your state attorney general, who is a strong advocate for the rule of law. Today, i want to speak about the importance of the rule of law and how the american constitutional structure protects it. Our constitution establishes a government based on the principle that the law must be enforced fairly at applied evenly to all persons. But the rule of law is not just about words. Even the most eloquent written rules require interpretation. Because decisions need to be made, the rule of law depends on the character of the people who are charged with enforcing it. If the people who enforce the law uphold it faithfully, the result will be a high degree of predictability and stability. That stability provided by the rule of law is one of the reasons why our nation has thrived. When you follow the rule of law, it doesnt mean that you will always be happy with the outcome. To the contrary. You know for sure youre following the rule of law, but you are not always happy with the outcome. The rule of law permits the public to hold people accountable for violating rules set in place by elected officials. It also protects people from arbitrary government actions and arbitrary punishments by requiring officials to follow fair processes before depriving anybody of their life, liberty or property. One of the finest as his of the rule of law appears in robber golds brilliant layabouts or thomas more, a man for all seasons. In an argument with his soninlaw, william wrote he is argued he is angry the kids he would allow the devil the benefit of the protection of the rule of law. Roper says he would cut down every law if necessary in order to destroy the devil. Moore replies, oh. And when the last law was down and the devil turned around on you, where would you hide . The laws all being flat. Moore concludes, i would give the devil the benefit of the law for my own safetys sake. Moores point is that we need to defend the rule of law, even when it is not to our personal interest so that it will be there for us when we need it. A german theologian made a simple as a similar point. He failed to defend the rule of law and later regretted it. He expand, when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out. The founders of our nation understood the importance of the rule. Thats why the president and all officers are required to take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States. President Abraham Lincoln spoke about the oath. By the time he was and i graded in 1961, the slave states had already begun to secede from the union. Lincoln explained that he could never accept the nations destruction. Lincolns concern was about geography, the unity of the United States. But lincoln also talked about another kind of unity that is afforded to you. He spoke about the union of the american people. Partisan differences are exacerbated by the news media. American people. In lincolns time, people were at war literally. Differences of opinion then were far deeper than any differences today. But nonetheless, lincoln insisted that his opponents not be treated as aliens, because they were all americans. Lincoln said we are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. Lincoln invoked the mystic chords of memory that type people together. And he concluded his speech by appealing to the better angels of our nature. A shared commitment to the rule of law is a bond that ties americans together through the generations. In 1951, 90 years after lincolns address, if we must keep our democracy, there must be one commandment thou shall not ration justice. At the at the department of justice, our employees work tirelessly to pay to painfully discharge the duties of their office. Priorities change, but the principle of the department of justice are timeless. We will defend those principles and pass them on to jet to future generations. One of the most important things we do is to enforce the laws wisely and justly. Faithful execution of the law requires discretion and sound judgment. One of our nations great attorneys general was robert jackson. In 1940, he great he gave a classic speech about the role of a prosecutor. Jackson said he prosecutor should play fair and follow the rules. Thats not surprising. Jackson also sprained also explained the prosecutors should deal with kindness, serve the law, rather than partisan interests and approach the task with you melody. At the department of justice, we must always pursue justice and justice must be based on truth. The truth, as i learn from bruce as we were putting together my first case, truth is about credible evidence, not strong opinions. Many people sincerely believe that its just not true. Sincerity of belief is not the temperature. People who seek the truth need to remain open to the possibility that it may not match. President john adams famously observed the facts are stubborn things. Whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of the facts and evidence. A pursuing truth means always yielding to facts, even if they run contrary to our expectations. One of the ways that we protect the truthseeking process in our legal system is that investigators and prosecutors do not get to decide which facts are true. Allegations made by prosecutor are presumed not to be true. So when we make an allegation, we meet we need to be prepared to prove it. Some people look at the High Conviction rate of criminals in our federal courts and mistakenly assume that the job is easy. The opposite is true. Conviction rates are high because federal prosecutors exercise great care for the alleged wrongdoing. We need to introduce documents that satisfy strict rules of admissibility. Our witnesses must be credible under cross examination. We need to robot any exculpatory evidence. We must prove our case to the unanimous satisfaction of 12 randomly selected citizens. Consider how difficult it is to get 12 random citizens to agree on anything. We need to persuade them all. If the defendant persuades wonder that we are wrong, the possession of innocence carries the day. Those requirements deter most prosecutors from making frivolous allegations. There is a humorous scene that illustrates the need for solid evidence. Thomas mores family is discussing whether they should prosecute a man because they dont like him. His wife says, arrest him. But more replies, for what . His daughter says, father, that man is bad. He goes on to explain that, as a judicial officer, he must be concerned with what is legal, not about what is right. What is right is a subjective opinion. What is legal is an objective in line first, the alleged conduct must unambiguously pilot the law. The evidence must prove it discretion is inherent. The department of justice wields a norm is power over other peoples lives, most of it beyond judicial or political review. With power comes responsibility, moral, if not legal. It is prudent to refrain exercise. That point is made more concisely in a remark attributed to voltaire. With great power comes great responsibility. If that sounds similar, it was also said by another legendary person spidermans uncle ben. And tony whispered it. My point about solemn responsibility is that the department of justice does not measure success by the right motive. It is based on particular on articulable reasons. One of the longstanding principles of the department of justice is that we try not to make any Public Comments about things that are not already in the public realm. There are many reasons for that policy. One is that it may interfere with our investigations if people learn details about it. Another is that it may be unfair to the people that are not charged. Because when we make allegations of wrongdoing, our allegations are given considerable weight in the arena of public opinion, even though they are presumed not to be true in a court of law. Lots of people are allowed to talk to reporters. About federal investigations. Witnesses are allowed to talk to reporters. Suspects are allowed to talk to reporters. Private lawyers are allowed to talk to reporters. But all of those people have friends who also are allowed to talk to reporters. One of the consequences of the people who do talk to reporters usually do not know the relevant facts. So the stories freely are wrong in either start or subtle ways. The mistakes revealed to us that the source probably was not one of the officials conducting the investigation. Then we turn to one of the most important structural protections established by our constitution. In theory, there is a division of labor in our federal government. Each of the three branches of government plays a vital role in the loop the rule of law. The lectures role is to enact the law. The executive branch implements it. The Judicial Branch interprets it. Our framers did not want any branch to be entirely the system includes checks and balances. Each branch is subject to some degree of influence and control by the two other branches. The framers believed that that was essential to preserve the liberty that they literally fought for. The lines between the branches are not selfexecuting. Each branch has the power to overstep the line. And interfere with the other branches. There is no umpire that sits above the three branches to resolve disputes. The system requires good faith and humility. Each branch sometimes makes may defer to the authority of the other branches, even if it does not like the decision. Conflicts arise in disagreements about which branch should exercise humility in a particular circumstance. I want to be clear that humility requires acquiescence, not endorsement. When i speak of respect in the separation of powers and demonstrating institutional humility, i do not mean to suggest that it is wrong to criticize. There are certain ethical restrictions on judges and lawyers. But members of the executive and legislative branches are free to critique the policy choices of the other branches. Principled differences of opinion help to challenge assumptions. Expressions of disagreement help to keep everybody honest. When the president and members of congress are unhappy with the policy choices of the other branches, they are free to discuss them. By judges are not politically accountable but judges are not politically accountable. Theyre bound by ethical restrictions. So a judge that dislikes the trump administrations policies about vetting foreign visitors or finding sanctuary cities, for example, is still supposed to uphold the policy if it is legal without express any opinion about whether or not the judge believes it is a good policy choice. That is challenging. Many people presume that the judge must agree with the substantive outcome, when in fact, the judge is not supposed to care about the outcome. Supreme Court Justice john roberts explained that it is best to view the judge as an umpire. A good umpire does not care which side wins. As long as the umpire makes the right decisions in calling balls and strikes, people do not hold the umpire responsible for who wins and loses. But a litigation, theres no scorekeeper. The judge has a duty to declare which side wins. So it is sometimes difficult to distinguish the process. The judge is supposed to respect the president is policy choices, as long as the choices consistent with constitutional and statutory law. Under the leadership of the tourney general jeff sessions, the executive branch respects the other branches. Attorney general sessions reason we announced that the department will longer take actions and have the effect of adopting new regulatory requirements for amending the law. Congress has given agencies to make regulations or make rules on particular subject areas, but only if the agencies are congressionally approved. Our policy change arose from rachel brands efforts to pursue regulatory reform. Jesse penns show is working closely with general brand on that reform. From now on, our department will not serve congresses job of making rules. We will stick with enforcing rules. Another example of our commitment to not encroach on powers role, our department often negotiates settlements with companies accused of wrongdoing. The money collected should go to the victims who were harmed by the wrongful contract. If the money is left over after the mud after the victims are reimbursed, the money belongs to the american people. Stop exercising the power of the purse by using the threat of prosecution to appropriate money from either defendants and directed to favorite interest groups. It is congresses job to decide how to spend the governments money, not the prosecutors job. Those policy changes implement the rule of law. Those are process decisions, not substantive decisions. I do have time to discuss every one of our department priorities. That may talk about Violent Crime and illegal drugs. The Violent Crime rate in america climbed steadily for 20 years. Unfortunately, in 2014, the decline came to it best to an abrupt halt. America suffered a stark increase. When i was in baltimore, many of my fellow residents in baltimore were very much affected, as were people in chicago and other major american cities. In 2015 and 2016, the Violent Crime rate jumped by about 7 . In baltimore, this year, 2017 had just concluded, baltimore experienced the highest murder rate in history, in the history of baltimore. Murder skyrocketed nationally by over 20 during that twoyear period. People are afraid to leave their homes. That community is not governed by the rule of law. Drug Overdose Deaths surged in recent years and i suspect many of you and your families have been affected in semi by that. In 1990, in some way by that. In 1990, 6000 people died to drug overdoses. Last year, drug overdoses is now the leading cause of death of americans under the age of 50. Those statistics are facts, not opinions. President trump responded to those heartbreaking faxed by directing the department of justice to support state and local Law Enforcement and work with them to restore Public Safety for all americans. 85 of our Law Enforcement officers in the United States are state, local and tribal, not federal offices. The attorney general recognizes that we need to support those partners if we want to reduce crime. Our department reinvigorated the project Safe Neighborhoods Program by improving and updating the original program that went into effect in 2001. It is a nationwide strategy to reduce Violent Crime by tasking a u. S. Attorneys to work wobbly to work core operative way with our partners to make to work cooperatively with our partners to make our streets safe again. We launched the Public Safety partnership that provides extra assistance to places that are experiencing high levels of crime. In addition to that, we are hiring more federal prosecutors. Thanks to federal hiring grants, more Police Officers patrolled the streets. I want to think for a moment about those Police Officers. America is the home of the brave, the home of the free in part because it is the home of the brave. One of the highlights of my job is a chance to work with courageous Law Enforcement officers throughout the country. When i arrived on stage here today, i noticed the club motto on the wall behind me. Promote dialogue. Let me conclude now, as president lincoln did, consistent with your club motto, with the hope and a pair that nonpartisan forums like this one will help us all to remember our shared bonds of affection and always to be guided by the better angels of our nature. Thank you very much. [applause] our first questions from our students. Please stand and introduce yourself and ask your question. Mr. Rosenstein you may need to shout. I apologize. I did not hear the entire question. She asked about recent criticism of the department and whether that justifies the conclusion there is partisanship in the department. The answer is absolutely not. As bruce and his wife can attest, that is not the way that we do business. We have processes in place to make sure those opinions do not influence conduct. It includes levels of supervisory review and the culture of our Attorney Generals Office is, which do not permit partisanship to enter into the decisions. That isnt to say that people dont make mistakes. We had publicity recently about some agents who reportedly were making partisan comments while they were at work. Certainly things like that happen. But the processes we have in place are designed to ensure that does not impact the substantive result. We can be criticized. People are free to criticize our department. But we will make sure that we follow the rules and principles. We consider criticism, but we need to make sure we are comfortable with our internal processes. Just about anybody who has worked in the department of justice can expand to you how these principles and processes work and why i am so confident that, in almost every case, they will be effective. One of the reasons is because, when people violate the rules, we hold them accountable. We have internal watchdogs that work in the department of justice who have access to all of our files. The office of Inspector General. When they receive an allegation that someone in the department of justice has engaged in misconduct, they do not cover it up. They are very tough and aggressive and independent and have the right to pursue that evidence and review all of our files. So those checks are a guarantee of propriety. They could lose their license to practice law. Theres also congressional oversight. I have a high degree of confidence, both for the integrity of the people in the processes of the department. My question for you is how would you assess the confirmation process and would you like to see some changes in that process . Mr. Rosenstein i want to answer that question without considering my personal experience. I was considered as a federal judge in 2009. It is a fair process and there are Political Considerations that go in the evaluation in some cases. The process is designed that way. I have no hard feelings. But i do have a critique of the process, my criticism of the process, not just for judges, but for people who staff the department of justice and our federal agencies, is that it takes too long to get through the process. People are going to be rejected, it might as well take forever. But if people are unobjectionable, there is no excuse for this process being delayed. When i see senators saying they are upset about something that has nothing to do with the nominee, it would be better if we get to the conclusion. It is disruptive for me. We have no attorney general in our john demurs is exceptionally experienced and is not partisan and wants to do his job and has not been confirmed. There is no legitimate explanation for why somebody like that cant yet on the job. My personal interest in this is there are only three officials in the department of justice that are authorized to sign applications, the attorney general, the Deputy Attorney general and the assistant attorney general for the National Security, in that order. The attorney general did it from february through april. And i have been doing it from april to january. And when john gets her, i will have a next half hour every day. That is my personal stake. The more important issue is it just is not fair. Lets find a way to get it done. [applause] does everybody agree with me on that . How could you not. In your testimony, you declined to discuss the specifics of the mueller investigation. Mr. Rosenstein because i was waiting for this opportunity. [laughter] can you comment on the process . How do we know there is a bias in either direction . Mr. Rosenstein that is a legitimate question. Let me talk about the kind of work that bruce reinhardt, carolyn bell, and i have done most of our careers. We are charged with investigating a case. There are two different biases. The bias in favor of the person investigating does not lead to prosecuting. You will not know publicly. We do have our internal checks. Who is the supervisor and the chain of command . There is no one person in the department of justice making a decision. Then what kind of external review is there . If i find some evidence of bias, what will be done about it . Will they investigate themselves . The answer is, yes, we do. We have our Inspector General. They read the newspapers. They read every letter of complaint that comes in. They look at the evidence and make an independent determination about whether to investigate. Its not just one person. People with chains of command on both sides. What if youre biased against the person being prosecuted. We will not be able to satisfy 12 jurors. We dont want tv cameras in our offices while we conduct investigations, but the can just the judge the outcome. Look at the people making those decisions. One good thing about the processes they dont miss anything. That is the check you have against bias impacting our work. Our government has concluded that russia weaponize to social media and attacked our democratic process. What is the prescription to protect our democracy . Mr. Rosenstein remember what i told you about the headline today. Let me talk generally. We have a lot of people working to defend american democracy. We have agents in the fbi. And other agencies with other responsibilities. Since 9 11, those departments have been beefed up to identify threats and respond to threats. Most happens out of the public eye. Theres a lot of good people, a lot of work responding to those threats. How does the doj plan to attack state sanctioned marijuana usage . Mr. Rosenstein this is a rule of law issue for us. The attorney general believes that marijuana is a dangerous substance. That is a very common view. There are differences of opinion about it. That is a decision about the merits, whether or not you think marijuana is good for you. You are allowed to have an opinion about that. The facts are that the United States congress has decreed that marijuana is unlawful throughout these United States of america, every one of the 50 states. And no state or local government has the authority to overrule federal law. The states that have decriminalized marijuana and for the court to be regulating, for medical purposes or recreational purposes, it has never been the case that it is legal. It is very confusing for my teenage daughters when i tried to expand this to them. Consider, for example, if the federal decreed that the speed limit is six to five miles an hour and the authorities in palm beach didnt the speed limit is 65 miles an hour and the authorities and paul meech did not like that. You can say whatever you like. The federal law still rules. That is a rule of law question. That is the fact. That is the challenge for us. What the attorney general has done is shared his opinion that marijuana is bad as a moral matter and a legal matter. But the department of justice has full discretion to enforce the law. An analogy might consider is gambling. Congress has decided to leave it to the states to make individual decisions on whether or not to allow gambling. Thats fine. They have not made that decision in regards to marijuana. The policy doesnt dictate how u. S. Attorneys will prosecute people for using marijuana. There are almost no federal prosecutions for mere use or personal possession of marijuana. Federal prosecutors are busy prosecuting larger scale cases. But the new policy is simple to say there have been a number of members written about this by Department Officials who are trying to grapple with this issue and misinterpret it to suggest that somehow the department of justice has overruled the congress. That is not the case. Our u. S. Attorneys are free to prosecute violations of law regarding marijuana. And what they do is what they do in all cases, evaluate the facts and circumstances for prosecution. Our job in the department is to respect the fact that it is unlawful under federal law. Given that you were on canvas stars special counsel tame and dealt with both white houses ability to fight about ken starr special counsel teams and dealt with both white houses ability to fight, which is better . Mr. Rosenstein i believe in the constitution. The independent counsel was appointed i who . A federal judge. The independent counsel is not accountable to the department of justice. You may agree or disagree with the decisions i make, but i have been appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate and i am accountable to the political process. A special counsel is a term is accounted is appointed by the attorney general or me. If our special counsel or his employees were to violate the rules and regulations of the department of justice, our Inspector General would have the authority to investigate and to punish them because they are employed by the department of justice. It is a different animal. The goal is to provide some degree of independence from the typical executive branch processes. But an independent counsel is really independent because there is no cowbell of it. But a special counsel is responsible to the department of justice. You were appointed by president bush. You are one of three attorneys president obama caps on. Now you hold the secondhighest position a mr. Trumps justice department. What is it about you that people with two different worldviews say i have to have you on my team. Mr. Rosenstein nothing personal. I would interview candidates who wanted to join the department of justice. I always ask them about their career goals to see if they are realistic. One time, someone said i want to be u. S. Attorney just like you. And i said, that will never happen. Bruce knew me. I had no idea what i was doing. I was just fortunate to be in the right place at the right time and to work with the right people who taught me how to go about exercising this responsibility. Theres nothing special about me. You are a son, husband, dad, number two person running 100,000 plus government agencies. How do you manage stress . How do you find balance . I am not running the department. Im helping. I have known most of the former attorneys general. Couple have been colleagues of mine. I have talked to some of them. I remember talking to one of our former colleagues and said we are having a challenging issue. Where did you leave the manual . There isnt one. I was talking to Larry Thompson the other day. He was Deputy Attorney general on 9 11. That was a bad day. Larry thompson said we didnt know what to do. The department of justice on september 11 did not have a National Security division. That was a challenging, difficult day. It wasnt just a day. It was years of trying to get a handle on this problem. There were other people out there who word you would want to launch other september 11 actions. Im grateful to be here now and not when Larry Thompson had to make those decisions. Having a family and a dog does help alleviate the stress. Given all the information that you have seen with the investigation, do you think you know how it will turn out . [laughter] mr. Rosenstein is he going to keep this up . [laughter] i hope i made clear in the beginning we do not start our investigations with a conclusion in mind. We have one last question for you. The College Football National Championship is monday. You and the president are the most famous alumni from the university of pennsylvania mr. Rosenstein im not sure that is true of me. Do you talk fighting quaker football . Rosenstein fighting quaker isnt exactly [laughter] i dont have an opinion about that. I try to stay neutral in all partisan disputes and that is one of them. Thank you so much for taking time out of your day. We will see everybody next week. [applause] on thursday the house is back debate the reo the foreignn of reauthorization act. Brookings with border security. 10 00 a. M. The u. S. Meeting to continue work on judicial nominations. 10 00, the Foreign Relations will review the strategy in syria. Have been out from the in raqqa. Former emergency secretary talks Nuclear Proliferation at 4 00 p. M. On cspan