Transcripts For CSPAN2 Deputy And Associate Attorneys General Testify At Confirmation Hearing 20170314

Good morning, everybody. I am pleased to be able to hold this nomination hearing for two very outstanding nominees. Rod reosenstein and rachel brand. They have been nominated for two very important senior positions in the department of justice. Deputy attorney general and associate attorney general. The deputies attorney general who was the second in command at the department oversees the day to day operations. The associate attorney general oversees the departments civil litigation departments. It is critical that we fill these two important positions so the department can operate at full capacity. We could not have two better nominees for these positions. Mr. Rosenstein and ms. Brand share a lot in common. They both are dedicated Civil Servants. They are both been confirmed by the senate before. In ms. Brands case twice. And they both served in Senate Confirmed positions during president obamas administration. They are both extraordinarily talented and fairminded lawyers dedicated to the full and even happened enforcement handed of our laws and they will serve the department with distinction. Mr. Rosenstein has served for three decades. He was u. S. Attorney for maryland and served throughout president obamas two terms in office. I am sure senator Cardin Van Hollen will speak to his accomplishments in these roles. I would also like to submit for the record a letter from our former colleague and friend senator mccull ski and without objection that letter will be entered. With respect to mr. Rosensteins nomination, i have a few things to say about the attorney generals announcement and the supplement testimony he sent to this Committee Just yesterday. During his conformation, attorney general session told this committee that what he would do if specific matters arose where he believes he might be questioned and he said he would consult with the Justice Departments professionals and listen to their advice. To those who question his independence from the president , attorney general sessions proved them wrong already by recusing himself. Last week, he kept his word and unlike attorney general lynch, attorney general sessions recuseed recused himself and that means if there is any ongoing matter with the Trump Campaign it would be handled by the attorney deputy general. So if mr. Rosenstein is confirmed and i expect him to be the responsibility for any decisions would fall on him. I have already heard some calls a special counsel should be appointed to take over. Any talk of a special consul is any insinuation he lacks the professionalism to handle these matters is out of line. He is a career Civil Servant who has served with distinction in the bush and Obama Administration. In 2012, there was a series of high level leaks to the media of high lay classified information. The leaks looked like they were design to make the Previous Administration look good. Rather than appoint his special counsel, attorney general holder placed mr. Rosenstein and another u. S. Attorney in charge of the leak investigations. At the time, the chairman of this Committee Said attorney general holder made a good choice when he put mr. Rosenstein in charge. He described mr. Rosenstein as a tough, honest prosecutor and the epitome of the professional prosecutor. Another senior democrat on this Committee Said she opposed the special counsel because it takes a long time. The Ranking Member always had this to say about mr. Rosenstein and other u. S. Attorneys assigned to the matter quote these are two scrupulous men and both independent and i have no season to think they cannot work with the fbi and establish a strong Prosecution Team when warranted end quote. Presumebly the democrats havent changed their mind since now president is a republican not a democrat. Please remember, a special counsel are not the best way to ensure transparency and accountability that my collea e colleagues have called for. There is no mandatory public report at the end of the finding if no charges are filled. The investigations can just disappear into a black hole without the public every understanding what the facts were. The Intelligence Committees are investigating these matters and the other side has asked the Inspector General to investigate as well. Unlike special counsel, congressional ig investigations can get the facts and present them to the public. So, the notion that somehow a special counsel will bring facts to light just isnt true. I cant help but notice the selective nature of the latest calls for special counsel. Where were these calls from the other side when the attorney general lynch was overseeing the clinton investigations . Attorney general lynch had been appointed by president clinton to be a u. S. Attorney and her law form represented the clintons and her ability to continue in her job as attorney general depended on a clinton victory and she had a private meeting with bill clinton while the department was investigating secretary clinton. Where were the calls from democratic leadership for a special counsel at that time . Where were the calls for special counsel when congress referred a criminal contempt citation against attorney general holder for withholding documents on the fast and Furious Scandal . Where were the calls on the other side to have hearings about that . The u. S. Attorney was ordered to ignore the criminal contempt citations and my friends on the other side of the aisle were fine with that. It would be easier to credit calls for special counsel if they were made with some cons t consistency and intellectual honesty. There are times when special counsel are appropriate but it is too soon to tell at this time. Even if there were evidence of a crimerelateded to related to the matters, once confirmed mr. Rosenstein can decide how to handle the matter. I will have more to say about ms. Brand when i introduce her. But for now, let me say she is a dedicated Public Servant and her nomination is supported by attorney general and deputies attorney generals, a letter from them will be entered into the record without objection. Before i turn to senator feinstein for Opening Statement let me say after her Opening Statement we will have the introduction of nominees. Senator ernst and i will introduce ms. Brand but i will do it after my three colleagues have spoken. And van hollen will introduce mr. Rosenstein. Then the nominees will give their Opening Statements. We will have seven minute rounds of question. I know there are a number of issues senators would like to cover with the nominations so i will stay here until everyone has had the chance to ask all the questions they want. We will do more than one round of question and if dwi that will be five additional minutes. I am prepared to work through the noon hour unless the nominees need time off. Senator feinstein. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. As you have said, today we begin our consideration on the nominees to fill two important positions within the department of justice. The Deputy Attorney general essentially leads the day to day operations of the Justice Department and directly oversees the solicitor generals office, office of Legal Counsel, and the Law Enforcement components like the fbi, the dea and the aft. Significantly, the Deputy Attorney general steps in when the attorney general cannot, or should not, be involved in a particular matter. The associate attorney general is effectively the number three position and oversees critically important components of the Justice Department including the Civil Rights Division, the environment and Natural Resources division, the civil division, and the office on violence against women. From National Security, to Voting Rights, and from Consumer Protection to immigration litigation, both of these positions carry tremendous responsibility within the Justice Department. So, i want to take a moment to welcome the two nominees here. Rod reosenstein and rachel brand and congratulate them for being nominated to such major posts. I had the pleasure of meeting with them yesterday and both seem well qualified. If confirmed they will be part of a Senior Leadership team that will help shape policies and priorities that will affect all of us in america and help determine the direction of the Justice Department over the next four years. Unfortunately, at this early stage in the new administration, there have been some concerning developments argument. First, the acting attorney general, sally yates was fired by the president by taking principle stand on the executive order which was vindicated by the 9th circuit. Instead of taking strong stands to protect the Voting Rights and civil rights of all the department has taken step to further aroad those rights. Specifically, we see the Civil Rights Division switching positions with the texas identification law or withdrawing guidance relating to transgender students. This reversal of course away from policies that uphold and protect civil rights for all americans is unfortunate but it well may reveal the intended path of the future. Over the past several weeks, there have been numerous press stories about the white house attempting to direct communications for ongoing investigations and even direct u. S. Attorneys on how to argue cas cases. I continue to strongly believe that the case can be made for an independent investigation that is insulated from any potential political influence. So i very much support the appointment of a special prosecutor to lead the investigation into russian influence in the election. I believe we need an independent criminal investigation into russian influence. It is vitally important that the American People have trust in this investigation. And that there is not even the appearance of a conflict of interest or political influence. So that is why i continue to support the appointment of a special prosecutor to lead the investigation. To be clear, i do not say this because i question the integrity or the ability of mr. Rosenstein. I do not. But this is about more than just one individual. This is about the integrity of the process and the publics faith in our insteinsteitutions justice. They provide for a special counsel when there is a conflict of interest for the department or other extraordinary circumstances and where the appointment of a special counsel would be in the public in the. By his own words, attorney general Jeff Sessions was a surrogate for the Trump Campaign and admitted to meeting with the Russian Ambassador and the attorney general announced he believed he should recuse himself and he has. In addition, the investigation into russias interference could very well involve officials in the Trump Administration. All these factors demonstrate at the minimum there is an appearance of a conflict of interest which is what is needed under the regulations. In addition, if you look back to december 2003, when attorney general ashcroft recuse d himself from the valerie plain case that very same day, then Deputy Attorney general comey, appointed a special prosecutor. He said he did so out of an abundance of caution and to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest. I believe the same abundance of caution is warranted here. As has been done in the past, a special prosecutor should lead this investigation. I believe it should be a respected prosecutor, someone free of any partisan or political background. Someone who has a reputation for integrity and Decision Making and who was independently selected not by the attorney general. From the outset, we need a respected prosecutor who was independently selected free of any partisan or political background. I am also concerned about the Justice Departments role in dismantling important rules and regulations that among other things help protect consumers, keep people safe, and protect our environment. Through executive orders and congression appeal, President Trump and allies are taking unprecedented steep help big business but harm average americans. I have had an opportunity to meet with both mr. Rosenstein and mr. Brand as i said. They both had impressive cred credentials but we all know the test of leadership and suitability is not how nice you are or how well you get along. It is whether the Justice Department, or the court, whether in those departments we need independent, fairminded, Public Servants who ad hehere t the rule of law and look out for everyone in the country. We need steel spines not weak knows when it comes to political independence in the department of justice. There is a real danger the Justice Department could become politicized so i hope to hear from the nominees what they will do to guard against that. Thank you, chairman. Thank you, senator feinstein. Now it is my privilege to be here to introduce a native iowan, rachel brand, who has been nominated to be associate attorney general of the United States. After graduating from Pella Christian and the university of minnesota, ms. Brand went on to receive a law degree from Harvard Law School and embarked on a career in public and private practice. At one time or another, she has served in all three branches of government. She was previously confirmed as assistant attorney general for legal policy at the department of skruss and before that she clerkeded for Justice Kennedy on the Supreme Court of United States and worked as an intern for senator grassley. Ms. Brand has had a distinguished career and taught as an adjunct law werefess fpro serves as a board member for doorways for families which helps set a pathway out of Domestic Violence and sexual assault. Ms. Brand has shown a commitment to Public Service and if confirmed it is my understanding she will be the first woman to serve the country as associate attorney general of the United States. I am honored to be here today to support her for this position. I look forward to what i hope will be a speedy approval of her nomination. Thank you, chairman grassley. Thank you, senator ernst. Now senator cardin. Thank you, senator grassley, senator feinstein. It is a pleasure to be back before the judiciary committee. I want to thank both of your nominees for being willing to serve our country and thank their families because this is a family sacrifice to serve in government and thank them for being willing to do this. Pleased to be here with senator van hollen to introduce and support rod reosenstein to be the Deputy Attorney general. This was a welcomed nomination by President Trump. Rod reosenstein has demonstrated throughout his long career the highest standards of professionalism. He is dedicated his entire professional career to Public Service. He is an experienced prosecutor and administrator. Very impressive credentials graduating from Harvard Law School where he was editor and clerked for judge ginsburg, been a u. S. Attorney since 2005, served among many leadership positions and as chairman grassley pointed out he has been given sensitive assignments by the department of justice because of his known professionalism. I am very impressed by his responsibilities as u. S. Attorney for the state of maryland. He is led a major criminal investigations and prosecutions in regards to contrabrand smuggling with inmates and correction officers. He has supervised the coordination of Anti Terrorism efforts recognizing each sta stakeholders can add to the strength of fighting terrorism. He did that without regard to turf issues, providing a coordinated strategy in our state of maryland. He has handled sensitive Corruption Cases from Police Officers to elected officials and he has protected maryland citizens through his commitment on consumer issues and on environmental issues. What impresses me the most is the fact he has done this in a totally nonpartisan, professional manner. When i was elected in 2006 to the United States senate, rosenstein was already the u. S. Attorney. He being appointed there by president bush. So i first met mr. Rosenstein when he was a u. S. Attorney for our state. When i was elected, where was approached by approached i was by many u. S. Officials and impressed by the first phone calls i received from the law officials in Baltimore City responsible for the protectio of the city all urging me to encourage president obama to retain rod reosenstein as u. S. Attorney. He has received strong support from the justice leadership in the state of maryland. State and local officials strongly support his appointment to the Deputy Attorney general position and strongly support his work as u. S. Attorney. When making a decision we recommended to president obama he retain Rod Rosenstein as the u. S. Attorney from maryland and we are pleased president obama did in fact retain mr. Rosenstein as our u. S. Attorney. He has the support of state and local officials and the attorney general of maryland supports this nomination. The former attorney general of maryland supports the nomination, our controller, the former state attorney of Baltimore City all support mr. Rosenstein because of his record and professionalism. He is supported by our local police, kevin davis, the chief of police for Baltimore City, supports this nomination. And baltimore is under a Consent Decree as a result of a pattern investigation in baltimore and the state bar associations supports the nomination, former u. S. Assistance attorneys support the nomination. Mr. Chairman, i think mr. Rosenstein is the right person at the right time for Deputy Attorney general. I share the concern of many members of the committee as to what russia did in attacking our democratic institutions. I support a complete investigation to understand exactly what happened. I believe the facts need to be done by an independent commission. And that would be the best way for us to get all the facts necessary in regards to what russia was doing. The attorney general offices must follow the facts including the standards for the use of a special prosecutor. Based on mr. Rosenstein prior record, i am confidant of his judgment on these issues. Thank you, senator cardin. Now senator van hollen. Thank you, chairman grassley, Ranking Member feinstein, members of the committee for the opportunity to join senator cardin in supporting Rod Rosensteins nomination to become Deputy Attorney general. As you heard, he has had a long career and earned a reputation as a fair administrator of justice. He served in republican and democratic administrations and earned the distinction of being the longest serving u. S. Attorney in the country. Rod has prosecutored dangerous gangs and criminals in maryland but also elected officials who violated the publics trust. He has shown impartiality and led to reforms in maryland. In addition to being a top notch lawyer, he is known for the professional manner in which he runs his current office. In his letter of support, marylands attorney general writes that wrote quote rod inherited an office of trouble but created a department nazis now universally respected. That is. Those skills will be put to test in the coming months. It is so secret it is a tough time for the department of justice and his job will be to serve justice and not prolitical leaders. As rod and i discussed yesterday, the ultimate question is the same one that senator sessions posed to sally yates during her hearing to be Deputy Attorney general. You have to watch out because people will be asking you to d o think things you just need to say no and asked do you think the attorney general has the right to say no to the president if he asks for something improper. Like sally yates, he said he would put his job on the line to do the right thing. I share the concern about the russian ties of interferance in the election and i believe they require an aopponent of a special prosecutor and joined senator cardin and others in calling for a nonpartisan independent commission. I made it clear if the fbi director has in fact requested the Justice Department deny the claims about the wire tapping of trump tower the Justice Department has a duty to let the public know the truth. I think we would agree it is important the American Public has faith that our laws apply to all americans regardless of rank. Rod rosenstein applied that faithf faithfully during his time in maryland. Members of the committee, i do not hold what the future holds on these issues of great importance to our democracy but i know Rod Rosenstein has a record of truth and i support the nomination and wont to support graditute for his wife daughters for joining us and his familys commitment to Public Service. I will take my time now to introdu introduce rachel brand and you have been told she is a native iowan. She may not have lived in iowa for a few years but loved the iowa state fair and goes home fairly regular to visit a 94yearold grandmother and both sets of her grandparents were dairy farmers. S she has appeared to us as a nominee and expert witness. I am glad to see she is nominated once again this time as associate attorney general. I will note this is the third time she has been nominated for a Senate Confirmed position with president bush and obama nominated for roles in their respective departments or administrations. Before ms. Brand graduated from Harvard Law School she was an intern in my d. C. Office as you have been told by my colleague and clerks for injuthe justice the Supreme Court of maryland and Justice Kennedy and served as counsel to president bush and assistant attorney general of office of legal policy and prepared nominees to be sitting at the very place she is now. She specialized in counterterrorism and National Security issues. In 2011, she became chief counsel for regulatory litigation of the u. S. Chamber of commerce. She was a member of the privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. Of course, that board oversees federal agencies counterterrorism activities. In addition to her vast career accomplishments, ms. Brand is on the board of an Organization Called doorways that helps women and children who find themselves abusive situations and provides support to these people. I am pleased to support someone who is well qualified with her previous positions and Civil Liberties and Oversight Board. She has experienced touches at every part of the federal government. As the assistant attorney general for the office of legalal policy she was a member of the Senior Management team of the department of justice working with components and Law Enforcement agencies across the department. Similary, at the privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board she worked with diverse agencies to ensure privacy and Civil Liberties are taking into account while carrying out the Important Mission of protecting the nation from terrorism. During ms. Brands tenure she gained experience that will serve her well. Congratulations on your many accomplishments, ms. Brand. I think you will do a very fantastic job and proud to support your nomination. Will you come to the table and before you sit i would like to swear you. Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you god . Now it is up to you, mr. Rosenstein, to give your statement but before you do that you may want to introduce your family or anybody else you want to introduce that is here to urge you on. Thank you, chairman grassley, Ranking Member feinstein and members of the committee. Thank you for scheduling this hearing and taking the time to meet with me in your office. I am grateful for senator cardin and van hollen for their generous introductions. I would like to introduce my wife for 22 years who is a former assistant u. S. Attorney who devotes much of her time to our daughters, julia and allyson. This hearing i am sorry to say required alley to break her Perfect School attendance record. My older daughter julie writes for the newspaper but journalist ethics prevent her from covering this event today. These young people are excellent students, suburb athletes and good people. My parn parents are here. My mom worked as a book keeper and served on the school board. My parents encouraged their children to take full advantage of the promise of america even when they required us to move far from our town in pennsylvania. My sister spent her entire career in Public Service also. She traveled from georgia where she is a Center Director at the centers for disease control. She is also a uniformed officer, a captain of the Public Health service. I am disappointed she wasnt permitted to wear her uniform today. My mother in law flew from california with lisas aunt rita. They are immigrants to america, senator and quite proud to be here as well. Many other relatives, friends, and colleagues are in this room or watching the broadcast. Senators, i am so fortunate to be part of one of our nations crowned jewels. The u. S. Department of justice stands for the principle that every american deserves equal protection under the rule of law. I want to thank the attorney general and the president for placing their trust in me to help manage the department and to enforce that principle. The Justice Department has been my profession home for almost three decades. I served under five president s and under nine attorney generals. I want to assure you senators, based on my personal experience, our department is filled with professionals, devoted Public Servants who conduct independent investigations 365 day as year. I was fortunate to join them in 1990 and had the privilege of working directly with the attorney general at the time. I served in other positions around the Justice Department and in 2005 i expected to serve for four years. I am so grateful to president obama to demonstrating his confidence and allowing me to serve for eight years in his administration with the support of our home state, senior senators, cardin, mccull ski and scar bane. Political affiliation is irrelevant to my work. Our goals of protecting crime and National Security require us to work are all partners, be vigilant and proactive. We also need to be role models because contacts with the police create memories for citizens. As Deputy Attorney general i will draw on my personal experience with thousands of honorable Law Enforcement officers around the country as i seek to implement change and to build public trust. Justice is our name and justice is our mission. Attorney general Robert Jackson said a prosecutor who seeks the truth and serves the law and approaches the task with humility. For me, the grand hallways of main justice, echo with the voices of mentors and friends who taught me to ask the right questions. First, what can we do, second, what should we do, and third how do we explain it. Senators, before taking on a position of his solemn responsibility it is important to know who you are and what you stand for. My oath is an obligation that requires me to support and defend the constitution of the United States, to bear full faith and allegiance to the constitution and to well and faithally discharge the duties of my office. As you know, i have taken an oath a few times, administered that oath many times. I know it my heart. I understand what it means. And i intend to honor it. If you confirm my nomination i will work to defend the integrity and independence of the Justice Department, protect Public Safety, preserve civil rights, pursue justice, to advance the rule of law and promote Public Confidence as members of this committee are indepensable partners in achieving those goals and i know ms. Brand shares that view. I am proud to be here with ouven the finest one of the lawyers of my generation and would be the first female in that office. Thank you for allowing me to speak. Ms. Brand, you can give your statement and intr introduce anyone here to support you. I would like to thank the president and the attorney general for the opportunity to be considered for this position. I am grateful to you mr. Chairman and senator ernst for my kind introductions. I have not lived in iowa for a time but i always consider myself to be an iowan. With me is my husband who i met at Harvard Law School and is one of the smartest lawyers i have known. He was born and raised in manhattan so was a novelty the first time i brought him to iowa. He took it all in stride and put up with it and now enjoys going back. Sitting with him are our sons, garret age 7, and william age 9. They are not looking too happy to be here. This is the second conformation hearing william has attended and five years ago hawse four and sat still as long as could be expected as a 4yearold and senator leahy counsel asked him to get something to play with. Garret was excited to eat cookies and drink juice. This is the first thime as worn a blazer. My parents planned to be here but unfortunately their flights were canceled but they may be watching the livesteam on the website. My mother in law is here traveling from new york. She immigrated to the United States from the netherlands and my kids call her oma, the dutch word for grandma. I have been blessed with opportunities in both the Public Service and private service to work in policy. Working with top notch lawyers i learned a great deal about law and lawyering and i had the opportunity to manage litigation concerning a broadspectrum of legal issues. High heart has been in Public Service where i spent the majority of my career. It dates back to College Years when i studied Political Science at the university of morris. My First Experience with the Justice Department was way back during my summer when i worked as an honors intern at the fbis National Security division. Chairman grassley and senator ernst described my professionalal biography so i will not take time to repeat but it was a privilege serving in the Justice Department working to craft policy solutions to the challenges being faced. I am honored to be nominated to be associate attorney general and humbled by the opportunity to take on such a serious responsibility. I have deep admiration and respect for the institution for the department of justice. If confirmed, i will strive to undertake my role with integrity, independence and fidelity with to the rule of law. I will look forward to serving the department of justice, its client, the United States and the Public Interest if confirmed. I look forward to working with mr. Rosenstein if we are confirmed. Thank you for the attorney to appear before you and i look forward for your questions. For the benefit of republicans and democrats on the committee, we will take you in the order you were here when the gavel falls and then for people that came in later on, if we, according to how they arrived. I would also ask that including this chairman not to take more than the seven minutes. So if you still have one second left when you can answer, go ahead and ask the question and i hope at that point our nominees will give a shorter answer and i hope after your time has run out you will not carry on dialogue that is kind of a debate going on between the nominees and you folks as well because we got a lot of work to do today. I am going to start with mr. Rosenstein but before i asked three or four questions on this first point, the attorney general has announced she will recuse from any existing or futu future investigations of any matter relating in any way to the campaigns for president of the United States that would include any question into campaigns for president , and any communications with representatives of the ranking government, the attorney general made clear that his announcement did not confirm the existence of any such investigations in accordance with the department practice. In the event such an investigation were to take place, however, it would fall then to the position you have been nominated for as Deputy Attorney general in light of the recusal. Four questions you can take as long to answer or short answers. I will do one at a time. Have you ever met with representives of the russian government . Representatives. An government . Push the button. Sorry, senator, over the course of my career i have spoken to group of visiting lawyers and judges from Foreign Countries and it is possible there may have been russian officials there. But i dont recall any such meetings, no. When were you first in contact with the attorney general about your nomination . Have you ever spoken to the attorney general about the question of russian contacts with president ial campaigns . My First Contact with attorney general sessions, i believe, was approximately november 28th when i received a phone call from him. I dont believe i ever had any direct contact with senator sessions prior to that date. And no, i have had no conversations with attorney general sessions about that matter. About the russian contacts . Correct. Is there any basis on which you would not be able to handle such an investigation given that the attorney general sessions has announced his intention to recuse . Senator, i am not aware of any. I should tell you, of course, since i am not involved in the matter, i dont know what, if any investigations, is currently ongoing within the department. If i were confirmed, i would need to familiarize myself with the facts. I would need to consult with the experts in the department. We have complex sets of rules that govern recusals so i am not aware of any at this time but as a lawyers i would have to know what i am recusing from and as a department of justice official i would have to rely on the advice i get from the career staff. I hope this next question isnt impossible. How would you handle such an investigation . Had you discusseded with the attorney general the appointment of a special prosecutor to handle such investigation . How i would handle is the way i would handle any investigation. Every investigation conducted by the department of justice is an independent investigation. We prosecute tens of thousands of people every year and every defendant deserves an independent prosecutor. I would be sure along with Law Enforcement agents who are trained to conduct investigations in an appropriate way and comply with the statutes, regulations and constitution and policies of our Law Enforcement agencies. That is the way i would do that, senator. With regard to the special counsel in this or other cases i know this is the issue on capitol hill but i anticipate if i were the Deputy Attorney general we would have a lot of matters coming before the department over time and i would approach them all the same way. Evaluate the facts and the law, considering the applicable regulations and exercise my best judgment as acting attorney general or provide my best advi advice about what i believe is the right course of action. I would like to go the ms. Brand and ask you about your work at the department of chamber of commerce. In that capacity you signed a number of briefs opposing the positions of government agencies. Of course, at the department of justice your job will be to defend these agencies and their missions. Can you discuss how you will approach that from a different angle . Sure, senator grassley. As you say, as a lawyer i have spent my career representing clients and more in Public Service of one time or another. Just as when i was at a lawfirm, at the chamber of commerce, i had a client. The chamber of commerce. As a litigator my job was to file lutes. I will have a different role and client in this job. My client will be the United States and my role will be to serve the Public Interest and representing that client as best as i can. That is a role i am comfortable with. I have spent more of my career in Public Service and private practice and honored to take that role back on if confirmed. Back to mr. Rosenstein. You served as associate independent counsel and referred to the decades of experience you have had in the department so you are familiar with the role of independent counsels and special prosecutors in federal investigations, appointment of a special counsel requires both there is evidence of a crime or wrongdoing and the department is unable to handle the matter fairly. Is that right as you see it . Generally that is correct. I believe what you are referring to is the departments regulations on special counsel as opposed to the independent counsel statute which requires under the current regulation a determination by the current acting attorney general that an investigation is warranted and number two there is a conflict of interest for the department to conduct that investigation and number three that the Public Interest justifies the appointment of a special counsel. Let me ask the question but i think you answered it. But if you want to say more. How would you decide whether a special prosecutor would be appropriate in a particular Department Investigation . Well, whatever it is, senator, and there are various formations of this. I was assigned by attorney general holder to conduct investigation and wasnt a special counsel but the bottom line is it my job to make sure all investigations are conducted independently and whether it is a law, statute or another mechanisms i would ensure every investigation is conducted independently. My time is up and i have two more points but i will do it in the second round. Senator feinstein. Thank you, chairman. Earlier this year, mr. Rosenstein, the Intelligence Community made public the assessment that Vladimer Putin ordered a Russian Influence Campaign designed to interfere with the 2016 president ial election. The goal was to undermine public faith in the United States democratic process and to harm the campaign of secretary clinton in favor of President Trump. I am very concerned. I have been six years chairman of the Intelligence Committee and on it for 16 years. So i follow this closely. I have had the gang of eight briefings and feel very certain that the reports of the Intelligence Committee are in fact correct. Have you read either the final classified or unclassified versions of the Intelligence Communitys assessment regarding the russian governments interference with the 2016 president ial campaign . Senator, certainly familiar with the issue. I obviously have not read any classified reports concerning it because it is not within my official responsibility as u. S. Attorney for maryland. I dont believe i have read the unclassified reports but summaries in the media. I am going to ask you to do that before your nomination comes up, if it does on the floor, if you will. Will you read those reports . I think, senator, if i were to become Deputy Attorney general it would be essential for me to read those reports, probably the classified as well. If there is such a report. I dont think i am authorized why dont we find out . You will be number wo. I think it is important and a valuable point and appreciate you raising it. The media reports have created confusion about that. I am the u. S. Attorney for the district of maryland and i have no role in managing the department. Right. I understand that. It is my fault. I misspoke so thank you. Let me go on to the question of special counsel. I meningitis i mentioned when valeries identity was revealed by someone in the bush white house, attorney general ashcroft recu recused himself and Patrick Fitzgerald was assigned to be special prosecutor. Now, given the recusal by the attorney general and the intense political interest in this matter, and the strong potential that the investigation will involve individuals associated with the white house it would seem this situation rises to the level of circumstances that warrant a special counsel. Given the heightened level of distrust on all sides, do you support the appointment of an independent counsel to look into thes matters . Senator, my understanding of this and it is based on media accounts, at least one of your colleagues called for a special counsel for something related to this matter while attorney general lynch was in office in early january and she rejecteded the accounts and i believe she said she had confidence in the career professionals. But she knew the facts and idea didnt. We have an acting attorney general for this matter. Dana bent was appointed attorney general by president obama and if there was a need for special counsel he has full power to appoint one. Special counsel, he currently has full authority to appoint one. I dont know at this point if attorney general lynch or acting attorney general boente are right or wrong. I wouldnt be in position to overrule them without having access to the facts that are the basis. Their decisions. So im trying to figure out what your bottom line is. I is that fair . Im not in position to answer the question because i dont know the information that they know. The folks who are in the position to make that decision. When i am in that position, i dont presume that attorney general lynch and acting attorney general boente are correct. If i determined theyre mistaken, i would overrule them. Thank you. I understand. Miss brand, if i may, while at the National Chamber litigation center, you against regulations to protect workers rights and thenst environment. The president has issued two executive orders aimed at eliminating regulations. The first requires to federal regulations be identified for elimination for every new be regulation. The second requires regulatoryew task forces in each agency to make recommendations on repealing, replacing and modifying existing regulations. As you may know, not all of the rules required by dodd frankon have been finalized or fully implemented despite the fact that its been nearly seven years since it became law. By one measurement, over 100 rules still remain to be finalized. Nearly a third of all the rules required by dodd frank. It is concerning to me that these rules may not be proposed or finalized all under the regulatory position of this administration. Simply because there are hundreds of others found to offset. What is the legal justification for arbitrarily failing to issue a regulation called for undera h wall simply because there are not to regulations o two regulas to eliminate . Thank you, senator feinstein. I am aware of the orders. I havent studied them yet as i am not in the department. With respect to the executive order, ordering the review of regulations on the books, the recollection is that president obama issued something quite similar during his term inng q office, and i havent studied what the results of that study were. In terms of the other executive order again i havent studied ei it, the i think any regulatory action taken as a government hav to comply with the requirements of the administrative procedure act that require decisionmaking that statute remains in place r but as to the interplay betweena the apa and executive order, those decisions have fallen the first instance to the regulatore agencies themselves, but i would have to study them further. Senator hatch . Let me first say that i agree there is no legitimate sanction for asking th the attorney genel to appeaattorney generalto appe. It is before the attorney general has had a chance to address this matter further as he has now done. Skipping the basic step of fairness makes it look like partisan fostering more than anything else. At least it looks that way. Responding to the questions the attorney general stated if he believed the impartiality might be questioned he would consult with Department Officials regarding the most appropriate way to proceed. That is exactly what he did. I wish i could say the same thing about the predecessor. She would not refuse herself into secretary clintons misuse of classified information. Our democratic friends have nothing to say about that. And like i said, this double standard makes it look likef d partisan politics. I hope we can start politicizing the Justice Department. Or each both mr. Rosenstein andyou. Ms. Brand are each qualifiedink being asked to lead the justiceg department. A let me ask you this question. I am the senate sponsor of the rapid dna act that would help analyze crimes and present the analysis backlogs. Do you allow them with the use of rapid Dna Technology to bee included in a national dna database. Im not familiar with the detailed legislation that it would be a valuable tool for lawenforcement. So they are best able to do their job of keeping us safe and i know many cases dna has been used effectively both to catch a dangerous criminals and rapists in particular. We hear cases like that all the time and also, to exonerate persons some of whom have been wrongfully convicted so they can be a valuable tool and i believe that we should allow that sort of technology. I am concerned about a lack of transparency and federally funded programs. Individuals are often released without paying any bail to return to court and meet the conditions of the pretrial program. If they complete such a program they become fugitives and the taxpayers have to pay the price for billions in unpaid bills. They introduced the right which required state and local governments to receive federal funding to report to the attorney general on thesereportt programs. What is your assessment on the program . I read that i am not familiar with those challenges. I know that in cases that i supervised, we believe somebody poses a significant danger to make sure they are detained, and if somebody is eligible for the pre trial release, they might need a candidate to be out in the community and we would support that as well. But its important to make sure in either case. You are here as part of the deployment process and that processed the president nominates him of a point without the advice and consent of the senate. Under previous president s appointed some officials withoud Senate Consent they tried to define when we were in session and in recess to bypass the advice and consent requirement. Iin that capacity with the u. S. Chamber of vacation center, if the president exceeded his power under the constitution in my right t the Supreme Court unanimously held that those wert unconstitutional. He it divideda divided government r whether it is divided among t federalism lines were divided is horizontally with the separation of powers is a critical protection of individual liberty and freedom. Cri in 2008, you advocated against capitalizing the justice with the number of experts and policymakers that are cautioning against the over criminalizing behavior. Ive long been a proponent of. The criminal intent requirement of the federal criminal code. What are your thoughts about the default criminal intent requirement . I understand the legislation has been introduced. Im not sure if it is pending now. I would have to study the details of the legislation. I do think it is appropriate to have a clear mens rea for the provision in the code. That is all i hav i have tod. Appreciate your willingness to serve in the federal government and citizens in this country. S senator leahy. Thank you mr. Chairman. I do recall asking my staff to tell your child is a place to be more interested in the testimony and as a father and grandfather i understand that. I know you said that you dont really need to invite the attorney general back before the committee. I would note the testimony last night didnt even attempt to answer the misleading response to the question and concerning what the russians appear to be doing to us. Many people testified to the nominees that theyve fallen short of this testimony that came to light after the press reported on it. Will you commit to me in the event you need to clarify to the committee he will await the press calls you on it . I dont know if you have ever had the opportunity to be on my side of the table. t we certainly make every effort to answer the questions fully. Go the witnesses have let us know. Will you commit to do that before youre forced to do it because of something in the press . Now, they asked about the special counsel and i recall i was not in the senate when Elliot Richardson was asked the same question. Watergate was unfolding and he promised if confirmed they would say it was necessary to create the degree of Public Confidence and integrity in the process and of course he named archibald c cox. He did that before the committee finished the hearing. The russian hacking of one of the National Committees in this case the Democratic National committee influenced the effor efforts. Just as serious as watergate. Do you agree that accessing a Computer Network without authorization and another documented email i agree read the report both public andtellig classified and see about russia they intended to undermine the public. Do you agree that investigating with russia is a matter of extraordinary importance . I dont know the details but. If it is america against russia or any other country i think everyone in the room knows which side i am on. Which you also agree they have confidence in the integrity ofth it. E it is important to have integrity in the investigation, yes. So you find those under thed investigation would you agree that raises challenges you might not have in the investigation . Yes it would. Its one of the worst things ive seen in my years in the senate. I thought about this over the weekend and spent a lot of time going over it and i couldnt remember anything in my years and to have another country tried to interfere. The National Security resigned in the week used himself and they seem to be in the middle of an investigation. Have you discussed with anyone if he would appoint a special counsel if confirmed . I had no communication nor have i had communication with the attorney general about that issue. Are you willing to appoint a special counsel to examine the interference and other criminal activity . Im willing to. We havent determined that its appropriate based upon the Justice Department. I would ask you to go back and read what Elliot Richardson said. I have, senator. The president said theyha wiretapped histones, the trump tower phones. Did the president have the authority to wiretap somebody . I have no information on that other than what i read in the paper. The question is does the president have the unilateral authority to wiretap someones phone fax i dont know the detail and im reluctant to comment on that in an investigation the answer would certainly be no. I would assume that if the president isnt telling theou truth about this, those that know the truth would tell you what the truth is. Thank you mr. Chairman. Congratulations on your nomination. I think that you are both exactly the answer to the chaotic times that we are living in. Professionals that are dedicated to the rule of law and not politics. Im a little confused by some of my colleagues statements today because theyve called for an investigation. There is an investigationme ongoing by the Intelligence Committee. I was at the headquarters yesterday and i observed the binders full of classified a information that has been made available to the committee too conduct that bipartisan investigation. One that chairman and vice chairman have authorized. I think that is the appropriate place for the investigation to take place rather than some sort of select committee or media circus. I am also puzzled that mr. Rosenstein, and yo you have appropriately been praised for your reputation as a federal prosecutor and somebody whose integrity is beyond reproach. But my colleagues ask whether you can keep those responsibilities without the evidence. Once you are confirmed as yet some of my colleagues talking about the importance of getting the Justice Department on tracke because of their concern about some other collateral matters. You pointed this out earlier but it bears repeating you were appointed by the Obama Administration of the classified information is that correct . What you briefly describe what that investigation entailed . We dont discuss matters beyond the public record. The outcome of that investigation is general James Cartwright pleaded guilty in the investigation into the alleged unlawful disclosures. I believe you are eminently qualified in this position that you will conduct ourselves with a similar professionalism and integrity. Onduct y as i said earlier,sm and congratulations on yourur appointment and of course youve been before the committee several times in differentappoim capacities. But i wanted to ask you in particular about your role on the privacy and Civil Liberties oversight. As you know, congress will have the responsibility of looking at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act reauthorization for section 702. We have a number of other sensitive lawenforcement tools and intelligence gathering toolm with which will be consideredber this year and certainly when confirmed you will be playing a role in that. What sort of oversight protections are part and parcel of these Law Enforcement gathering tools because i think sometimes people lose that and its important to understand that there are oversight from all three branches of government, judicial, executive and legislative and the concern we all have about privacy rights is protected by this sort of oversight. Oversi ive thought about this and have written about this in my individual capacity. Ll there is extensive work done by the executive branch and there is oversight and oversight by the committee that he said on. Theres oversight by the Justice Department of the intelligence agencies. Theres an involvement by the Inspector Generals in some cases and by the circumstances there could be quite a bit of oversight on the action. E i think that is appropriate. The complexity of talking about it from the 30,000foot level and with large, but i think that it is important for the public to understand that there are a number of Legal Protections andu oversight responsibilities that do protect privacy rights while at the same time preserving essential Law Enforcement gathering tools. I believe the director called section 702 crown jewels of the Intelligence Community. It strikes me that it would be a travesty and i and it would be dangerous if for some Reason Congress failed in its responsibility to reauthorize cs such an important Law Enforcement gathering tool because of the concerns of the lack of adequate oversight and protections for privacy rights. So that is going to be an important part of the a discussions. We look forward to your contribution as we strike the balance along with yours. Thank you both for your service and we look forward toto supporting the nominations. A there is a delay in filling the positions. They were held up for 400 days before he was confirmed. But we ask a couple questions about the russian involvementcoe and mr. Rosenstein, i appreciate the fact you havent read this report is 15 pages long on the internet and it isnt classified. I want to read several paragraphs to put in perspective why we are asking these questions today because what we have learned from this Intelligence Report two months ago is historical. Its a cyber attack on the United States of america like none we have ever seen before. I would quote from our intelligence the influence for the president ial elections represent the most recent expression of moscows longstanding desire to undermine the liberal democratic order. But these activities demonstrated a significant escalation and direct level of activity, scope of effort compared to previous observations. Operations. The intelligence agencies say we assess the russian president Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 game that the president ial election. The goals were to undermine the faith in the u. S. Democratic prt process and denigrates secretary clinton and the potential presidency. We further assess putin and the russian government developed the clear preference for the president elect trump. President elect trump. This wasnt put out by the Democratic National committee. This was published by our intelligence agencies as theel reason that many of us believe this isnt like an ordinary investigation by the department of justice. This is historic. Its always critical when it comes to filling theseca appointments but this is a historic constitutional moment in history. The russian influence in the president ial election. I will certainly support the investigation related to interference by the russians or by anybody else in the elections. I might say for the record of the attorney general sessions was asked the same question in his confirmation hearing and he wouldnt make the same commitment. What you commit to inform the American People that the justice closes, terminates or to further pursue an investigation into the interference in the 2016 u. S. Dee president ial inform the people that the department of justice closes, terminates or declines to further pursue an investigation into the interference in the 2016. Ive been a prosecutor for 26 years and the primary responsibility is to collect the evidence and prove a case in court. Theres other concerns that arise and in this one i would need to consult. If the outcome is closing or terminating or declining what you report bac that to the amern people . Without knowing the details of the investigation, i can assure you that its appropriath to report it to the public. Do you have any ongoing investigations by the Justice Department and the russianan interference in the 2016 election or any other attempts to undermine the United States or the political system or position in the world . If there is an ongoingio investigation to interfere with russia or anybody else and it ih probably predicated as a basis for the investigation absolutely i would support it. Another question that senator sessions refuses to answer. I would like to ask about the scope of the refusal. Im not sure where we stand today. Have you had an opportunity to read the wording and every cue s a land of the letter that he sent to the committee . Im familiar with it from media accounts and i was busy with colleagues i know i didnt read the letter yesterday but im familiar with it. Ive now decided to recuse myself from any existing investigations. This is a partial recusal when it comes to the investigation into the russian influence ors President Trump and the circle of advisers and associates. Associates. This does not extend with theiss Transition Team and Administration Like the meetinga with Michael Flynn on his face but if it said in the final paragraph the march 3, 2017 letter which many of us send to Jeff Sessions, why i havent reduced myself from russian context in the Transition Team the attorney general says i understand the scope of the recusal in the press release would include any such matters. H so do you believe that this recusal now would affect any context with the Transition Team or administration . Im familiar with the departments regulations and they are actually more complicated than you might think because we are governed by the provisions. We are governed so theres a lot of policies that apply and its important to consult with official professionals and important also to understand what we tell our people is when you recuse there is no presumption that you done anything wrong because the issue justifies the recusal and i dont know the details. If i were confirmed i would make sure if the attorney general were recused i wouldnt discuss the matter and i havent discussed the matter. Thank you but that is not my question. What im asking you to do and i want to give you the time to do it properly because this is an important matter and i know youu want to get this done right ii want to give you the official recusal by the attorney general sessions of last weekend the letter he sent to the committee and asking for clarity as to the scope of the refusal. I think the attorney general left a wide gap about the s context between the russians and the Transition Teams and annie issues in the administration and i want to know how you rated. I dont know how i would have ar basis without access to information. I woulthe information. I would presume that they consulted with those that knew what the facts and if i became the Deputy Attorney general ando i knew that was not a sufficient recusal i would consult with them, but if i were to read it today i wouldnt know what was the nature of the investigation that he may or may not need to re queues from so i wouldnt be in a positio the position to cot whether it is adequate. I know the people in the department of the decisions are not career folks and they would have made a goodfaith effort. I am not questioning the process. Im asking for clarity as to the recusal of the general in his own words, not for the entire process that led up to that conclusion. Es im asking how you rate his own words. Thanks to both of you for being here. Its one of the reasons we are strong because we have Public Servants that are willing to offer their service and in difficult jobs. You had a memorandum published by the foundation and you approached the topic of federalization of the federal law. One of the things you wrote is the consensus that should be investigated and prosecuted by the states that have long bee ha goal of policy experts and government advocates. They are neither liberal or considered hi in a crowd or republican. Would you agree with me if i take what you wrote and said that could be applied to basically every instance not just in the criminal law. The department of justice should be governed by the principles and i would consider myself governed by them and the constitution i think brilliantly divided the individual liberties so yes i would agree with you. Given that he will beb overseeing the civil litigator components i also wanted to ask you when is it appropriate for the department decided not to offend a particular law, what is the standard that ought to be applied i think the departments obligation is to defend the act of congress when theres an available argument to be made. The mac and that itself has its roots in the separation of power does it not giving that we make the law and if the executive branch isnt doing its job no one is as accountable as they should be. One hot button topic that has come up again and again that involves prosecutorial discretion this is a topic thatn i discussed with attorneyes general lynch and also a topic i discussed with attorney general sessions when each of them came through the committee. Do you think the government should exercise prosecutorial discretion on a casebycase basis or is this something the government can decide to apply to a general matter based on policy considerations . I think that the answer is a little bit of both where we have general guidelines the department of justice is currently governed by the prosecution guideline that is developed during their tenure in the carter administration. Its whether to bring a particular case and one of the factors is at a higher levella that determination needs to be made into a lower level given that a case. Fullstop in the priority what are the factors that determine whether or not to prosecute that case. So the answer to the question is it is a combination of both about where to focus their resources and then it needs to c be in the individual determination about whether the facts of this case justified prosecutions. That case justified prosecutions. Thank you. With respect to the minimum mandatory sentences we talked a little bit in my office about the fact in the u. S. Attorneys office you have been fairly conservative or cautious about how you charge the sentences. H we didnt have enough time to go into a lot of the details there. Can you talk about your office as part is with regards to the minimum mandatory is and how those might reflect the approach will take in the department ofow justice. There are many cases of extraordinarily dangerous people who deserve to be. If they are able to do that but its one of the ways we are able to help the local colleagues in baltimore and other cities. We are able to break this code is such a problem in many of the cities we are able to break that by catching a defendant did commit a serious crime Holding Accountable under the penalties established and offered the offe opportunity to truthfully provide information using that power, senator, we are able to break the back of some of the violent gangs in the community so i think its important that we have those available in the use cases but as you said, ween also need to take into consideration whether in a particular case it would be excessive and in some cases we have discretion under the policies and we apply the policies and use them when they are justified. They suspended in 2017 a lot ofm budget cuts. With the equitable sharing in the forfeiture context it is used to circumvent state and local laws restricting the civil Asset Forfeiture by the officials. I would certainly consider changing the policies and would be reluctant to terminate the policy if it is a tool that is available in the case we nee thd to use the tools available to us. Many attorneys general defended the department of justice from the political interference by restricting compacts between the doj. It is the policy when i worked for the Deputy Attorney general in 1993 and i think it is important that everybody understand that there needs to be a point of contact. P could anybody at the white house called you about the cases . Anybody can call that they are not going to get an answer. Is it the rule that theyy shouldnt call . Se communication should be between the white house or the deputy counsel and attorney general. Precisely. You are prepared to enforce this. We need to know the rules. I Robert Jackson the attorney ofy the United States gave a speech that still stand us i as the bet articulation of the federal s prosecutors and that is the most significant power subject to abuse that we need to refrain from disparaging people unless it is necessary and justified in the case. If we dont charge them with a crime we have the responsibilit not to disparage a character. Rt you dont divulge the drug took investigative information beyond what is charged in the information or the indictment, correct . It might be in the hearing for example. In 2010 the department of justice suggested the office of Legal Counsel attorneys do not go a duty of candor to their clients that is the equivalent to the duty of candor that theei attorneys are held in the court proceedings. I understand the department of justice has corrected that and the attorneys are treated as being held in the equivalent of that word today for the attorneys in court. What candor would you hold the attorneys to in the performance of their functions flex im not familiar. It is an ethical rule governing the lawyers and i would simply enforce this rule. We will follow up with a more wholesome response. Did departments civil case against the Tobacco Industry years ago have merit and was it an appropriate use of the departments authority . I do not know the answer to that question. I apologize. Im just not familiar with the details. If i get the job, a lot of areas im an expert and others im not. I regret im just not familiar with the details and cant comment if it was or was not in the authority. They do not have to rights to the fraudulent speech. I believe that is correct as a matter of law. Ay in the event because there was such an investigation what the contenwould thecontent of the cs between russian officials and the surrogates be relevant to such an investigation. We conduct investigations. We can get that information. You would understand that those answers make the attorney general a likely witness in many such investigations. With respect to discussing ongoing investigations do you agree that if the shop windows are broken on main street its for the police chief to announce that he intends to get to the bottom of it and to assure the public that Law Enforcement will respond. Circumstantial evidence unless there were a hurricane, yes. When there is Public Awareness tawareness that crimes occurred its not only appropriate but its incumbent upon the wall enforcement that they will go about their duties and take the steps necessary and people do that all the time. There is a very significant piece of damage done to the process by the foreign government. And it is appropriate for you when you have that information to assure the American Public that it will be appropriately investigated and there is an investigation taking place. I dont seem to be difficult. I am trying to be as helpful as i can there have been intelligence. This is an issue i know outside of the context of the case we need to figure out who is responsible for it, is it a an intelligenca. Anintelligence isw enforcement and tv for whether the department of justice is conducting an investigation is one that is appropriate for the department of justice to answer, correct . Absolutely. It is in the context of the order to carry out any sort of investigation and the job. If there was a warrant in the Trump Campaign activities and russian context would you know about that request and whether or not it was issued. I dont know the extent something were done in the past if it were appropriate for me to review as the Deputy Attorney general you wouldnt know if the department of justice applied for a warrant . I hope i would. I would hope you would, too. If there is a warrant or aha criminal warrant and there is the courtwould you be able to help us as the Deputy Attorney general if you are confirmed whether or not the request was made at the court to monitor the Campaign Activity . Whether it would be appropriate for me to do so would be another question. I just dont know, senator. In my capacity, ive dealt with issues relevant to criminal cases but im not an expert on the statute. I need to consult with them before i make any other decision. There are three ways this could have been done. There could be the warrant andh the National Criminal process that would be lawful if the judge granted it. Hypothetically, we do that all the time. Number two, the court is a little bit different but still the Court Overseeing someones request, right . Third would be if president obama on his own decided to wiretap the campaign, do you know of any basis he would have the ability to do that without a warrant or without a federal judge in the investigation . As a matter of fact he could not. No president can just say wiretaps that citizen. N without court approval. I am a lawyer, senator. Heres the thing later on tell me how the president of thg unitepresident of theunited stay wiretapped an american citizen, American Company and American Campaign without court approval. My answer to that is i would hope and agree that would not g happen. Okay. Are you familiar with the executive order that a president obama issued . Only by virtue of reading about it in the paper. Do you know if it is constitutional . The executive order was to give legal status to kids that came here with small children and president obama gave them to the executive action legal status. Can you tell me whether or not t that falls in the prosecutorial discretion. Theres the legal conclusion and i would not offer an opinion to be judged a case like that prior to or apart from having litigated as the Deputy Attorney general. Now, if there is an investigation regarding the campaign and the russian context, there would be two stages. One, the gathering of the evidence and the decision whether or not to proceed forward in a prosecution fashion is that correct . Any investigation. You would want an independent person advising the investigators while air gathering defense not just making the decision of disposition is that correct . You would want independent advice, yes. Can you assure the committee if there is such an investigation that you would make sure the investigators are advised by professional lawyers and the department of justice whose independent even during the gathering of the facts. I hope i made that very clear cleaake sure every case isis investigated. Is it true that the current general could appoint a special counsel if they believed that was appropriate . And that person was appointed by president obama . Is if you take over and get confirmed would it be your job since the attorney general refused himself . The acting attorney general woulgeneralwould have that auth. Generally speaking when the subject of the investigation has a political bent to it, do you believe you could do that job even though youve been appointed by this president . Absolutely, senator. We also have a proud tradition in fact my office in maryland in 1972, the republican u. S. Policis attorney appointed prosecuted u. The Vice President of the United States, so i believe that, i certainly do. Since you believe all of your time before taking this job has prepared you for that moment if that moment ever comes . I certainly hope so. Sentencing reform, are you familiar with the efforts by this committee and others to ask for sentencing reform . Do you have a general opinion as to whether or not we need sentencing reform . Is always appropriate to evaluate tools available to prosecutors and assure your self they are being used appropriately and number two, whether there are additional tools they need what youve provided them that you should take away so i think it is appropriate for that to be an ongoing process. Thinking. Thank you very much mr. Chairman. I will start with you. You have a good choice of colleges in minnesota so thank you for that. I wanted to start with something pretty important to me becausees my dad was a journalist for many years and that is freedom of the press. I raised this issue with the attorney general and he said he was still reviewing the regulations get in 2015 the attorney general revised the then attorney general revised the departments rules for when the federal prosecutors can subpoena a journalist or their records and committed to releasing an annual report on the subpoena issued and charged against journalists. The previous attorney generals committecommitted octopus reporn jail for doing their jobs. First of all what are your views on the standards that attorney general holder put forward and were upheld during the tenure . Thank you, senator klobuchar. There is an important issue. The freedom of the press is ones of the freedoms enshrined in the First Amendment to the constitution. I am aware of the guidelines that i must confess since i havent been in the department in about ten years i havent studied them. I understand they have heightened the standards that were already relatively strict in terms of the circumstancesd the department could subpoena ay journalist and they require highlevel approval. Would you uphold the standards . S . It wouldnt be in my authority to do that to be under the purview of the deputy a hate to throw him under the bus but its not going to be my decision. I apologize. I thought she was going to handle that question. [laughter] yes or no answer on the standards the attorney general put forth to protect the freedom of the press he revised the departments rules for when edible prosecutors can subpoena a journalist for their records. I am familiar with those rules and theyve been modified over time and i think it is important for the department deo be willing to revisit to make sure that we get it exactly right because sometimes we find out we didnt have it right the last time a. As a general proposition, i think those rules, you wanted a yes or no answer and ie apologize, but the rules reflect the balancing and its important for us to balance the First Amendment concerns. So where are you on the rules. I wouldnt rule it out if someone thought that it was appropriate to take a look. Look. But right now you would leave them in place . I do not have a plan to revisit them. Im going to follow up on senator grahams questions about what happened over the weekend where the news reports state that the fbi director called onn the Justice Department to reject the president s recent assertion that president obama ordered the wiretapping of the bones in the trump tower during last falls campaign. My question is in a situation where the president of the United States makes a factual statement about the status of an investigation and it is later determined not to be correct, this is on an investigation, what is the responsibility of the Justice Department to set the record straight . I cannot answer that in a hypothetical way. It was somewhat distracting this weekend with other information that i just cant certainly what i would do is commit in any situation like that to talk to the fbi director and certainly consider his views and make an independent determination about what to do in those circumstances. A dot it would be your call to make that decision and not the fbi director. Read i would anticipate the fbi reports to the deputy general so im sure that he appreciates the chain of command said it would be my responsibility, yes. Are you aware again at any time that the department of justice wiretapped a citizen without a proper warrant since you have been a u. S. Attorney clacks not on my watch. Are you aware of an instance in which the department saw the probable cause existed . In your statements at some point today i think if russia and it is a 17 page report that they are all referring. It is a public report that 17 agencies put out. It is short and i ask you to review it. Basically you are putting yourselves in the shoes of the attorney general when it comes to this, whatever investigation may come out of this. Thats why all of the media was there. I bet you have never had that many reporters here. Whenever investigation may come out of this. That is why the media wass there i bet you never had that many reporters here for the interpreted Deputy Attorney general because you are essentially putting yourself into tissues so i m asking that you read the report slacken as did the same question that i asked now attorney generalal sessions whether or not to he believed there was any reason to doubt that evidence and he said there was not. I should clarify as the lawyer may be m2 careful with my words. I have no reason to doubt the conclusion of the Intelligence Committee progress a lawyer or prosecutor from what i believe i have reason to doubt the Intelligence Communitys conclusionsich coul survey appreciate your Opening Statement you look at as a prosecutor said what can i do wish to do that the last thing is how do we explain things because way too much of this administration so far has been explaining things perk you dont have to comment but said of first asking what is the right thing to do and what can i legally do. That is where if then this matter or any other matterrtuniy to say that the scope of any special counsel investigation would be the acting attorney general had defined the scope of any investigation . So under the rules so when in fact, would he be willing to overrule quick. To ask the chairman to update that time to respond but the time has expired. Is a complete answer would take time spent a great deal care. We are fine. There was the independent counsel statute those whoir not accountable to the United States attorney general but under current law is under attorney general. But then the attorney general accused. This also was true as they were fired by the acting attorney general but it would be whatever is appropriate to make sure he or she had a full range of authority to conduct the appropriate investigation just like we do with allyes, other cases in the department. Senator kennedy. The afternoon. Good afternoon. D can we agreed there is a difference between and then to subsidize. I think in newspaper stories about this. Are you aware November November 1984 service tried to stop Ronald Reagan from being reelected question mark avenue personal knowledge of thatna. No. Argue aware that the service planted stories that president kennedy was killed greg. I am certainly aware of the cold war era senator but do not know the exact details. Can we agree that russias interference, if any of the election of november is not the first time it tried to do that greg. Ed on have any personal knowledge of that i have no reason to doubt that. Lets get down to it. I want you to look me in the eye to tell the will to right take it to its conclusion then report to the American People your results and believe they will support me in that with those appropriate conclusions i just dunno when that entails. Not just the department of justice. Some of those areas have to rely heavily on career officials so i had the value our responsibility to the extent that we can for thosent that is appropriate to provide publication so that would be my preference. I will rephrase the question. Would you do what i just asked in a climate of National Security greg. Within the parameters of National Security . I happen to believe the u. S. Attorney is the most powerful position in american government. Maybe the president. That is the enormous amount of power. But at the same time the u. S. Attorney can run somebodys life. Are you comfortable with the checks and balances. I also referred to the great Justice Department but we do have a significant power. And did is critical. Alaska a question talk to me of the intersection of National Security. That is a particularly important question i think it is hard to talk about it in the abstract anytime they undertake the Surveillance Program living is critical to do with then the balance of the law. Did in terms of privacy interest. But where that line is it depends. Spirit doesnt the power of governments gear you a little bit with privacy rights as a citizen greg. I dont know if it scares me but i consider those to be considerable in every area that is why this important to have checks and balances and oversight. So we have the proper checks to end balances right now could. It depends on the circumstances in many areas areas, yes but some areas work well in the areas i am familiar with. Thank you for your willingness to serve spirit congratulations to both of you a last the question youre free to speak out. [laughter] can make those claims about obama tapping the phones can a sitting president order a wiretap of surveillance . I cannot comment. Could you just answer my question grex canada president order a wiretap . A court order is required but any of those facts was say hypothetical beyond that is supposedly were a cat burglar he could have donedu it himself. Himsel so the Committee Held a confirmation hearing for the attorney general for my colleague Jeff Sessions but now were very confused about the purpose of theie confirmation hearing if not to resolve and purposes but to allow the American People to decide for themselves through the exchanges here on the committee but in order for them to truly serve the of purpose nominees must answer questions honestly that is why this radio. My question was not answered honestly. I asked senator sessions if there is any evidence in the course of this campaign what will you do . In the i didnt ask who communicated with the russian government but the man who becomes the top lawenforcement individual but the National Security advisor Advisory Committee would conductance of asna circumstances required as they investigate members of that same campaign. Bers here is what senator sessions said, i am not aware of any of those activities. En i have been called a circuit and i did not have communications with the russians. Let me repeat that. I did not have communications with the russians. That as we all know now, that was not true. Attorney general sessions met at least twice with the Russian Ambassador in 2016. Once in july at any event at a Republican National convention and once in september in a private meeting in his senate office. The attorneygeneral did notis involve knowledge of fact is testimony misrepresented the truth until the Washington Post with the Russian Ambassador. In those seven weeks between his appearance and the publication of the article attorneygeneral sessions had ample opportunity to correct the record. So after an embarrassing story then he has those that force the president s National Security advisor to resign attorney general sessions calls a press conference to announce he will recuse himself to oversee any Justice Department investigation into russian interference. Gation so now the attorney general has recused himself is a return to answer my question. Again, here is the question. Ioni if there is any evidence or anyone affiliated with the Trump Campaign coming communicating with their russian government what boy did you duplex. Was in violation of federal law. To understand you have the ongoing obligation to state your testimony and correct a mistakes that you discover after you left the hearing . But evidently the obligation was not known to the attorney general sessions. Yesterday, four days after the press conference, at 55 days off his hearing and the updated testimony the attorneygeneral the letter asks why i did not simply meant of record because i did not want to have my a grenade damaged other than the sponsor spencer river there was no need for the supplemented answer. Eric king he knows it to this Community Committee to come back and explain himself because he also says in his letter. Live would ask him what he would do as attorneygeneral if it was true from but then to send his letter as a response . Is insulting. Want but he has to comee back. Mr. Chairman and profile or any the retina newspapersrs at this point. Find it very disturb you that you did not read the declassified report on russias activities during the election. I find that very, very disturbing. I read the newspaper story. Im very sorry to hear that, senator. I would like to comment on what senator franken just said. And i dont expect senator franken to act like i would toward our witnesses. But as i remember, senator franken asking his question of senator sessions, he referred to something that there had just been something come on cnn that obviously and franken said that senator sessions wouldnt know what he was and he was going to take that into consideration, that it would have been all right for you to ask your question, and you probably should have given him a chance to get the information you had and reflect on it and give an answer in writing. Now, the way i tend to and both of you know that i said this to you when you were in the privacy of my office. If i was going to ask you a gotcha question, i was going to tell you about it ahead of time. And i consider what senator franken asked sessions at that late moment that that story had just come out as a gotcha question it was not a gotcha question, sir. It was. From the standpoint he didnt know you what you were asking congratulations to both of you being here and your family is. A couple of questions that i would like to ask of the nominee with the Obama Administration this question is for you the gao issued a report summer of 2014. What gear . December 2014. I am not particularly aware. E i would ask you in your capacity to look at that report there is no evidence or any passionate actions taken with the prosecutorial misconduct and issues are very clearly articulated there is a lot different thracian there can increase the accountability and also to think if theres anything you would. So with your permission lik but if i become attorneygeneral i will talk with the Inspector Generaleral w we need to commit to ig in the fight into hants the intermediate integrity. I have a question for you that what you advocated for your show but the area thatat we discussed in this committee with the immigration subcommittee kellogg are the repeated abuses of these worker programs for from on tranten to you figure out berry after 40 years of failures with the administrations of congresss bill one is awe misconception of these programs and the potential abuses. Day you have any insight how we can actually get the room then a tour identify a bullet in potentially mitt front that prevents us from a have intelligence discussion about reforming the basis of reports program. Was a litigator not into the policy but there are a number of agencies to printed and woven insecurity or if they are administered by the department of justice but many have somebody on the problem i appreciate the answer. Ethane in this but there aree more phantoms than reality weve mentioned to reduce those actions for business since but to someone who will identify these things who net of her period your thoughts. But my thoughts would be baby in the of perdue of these apartment so far was a deputy 11. N. But we have a tremendous. What credit du of oneminute offer me but i am for may with the issuee but if as attorney general in will be by perrys to move things as one but there are procedural changes we can make but both with civil and proven and. E you have anything to add but there was a is a terrific management challenges by giving that high recent rich tapestry bill where but locally with the corporation with the department would be the areas to look when state and local lawenforcement and and that must be the issue and on the for the most part it is a very Important Program but for those who participate but one of the way of the crime challenges. The federal governmentt a but the way theyre working together some pointed to make sure they use that authority is a performance and consistently. Mr. Chairman, and a bite to star on your nominationsng but that is also during this hearing. But i will agreed that ascender franklin franken has clarified the answers under previous question for from pet. But to contact the department of justice or hire him to conduct an air route for putin. With the Foreign Affairs issues . No. A only the deputy shin be in position with each individual of case one that we talk about preserving the public but they already put in with the Intelligence Committee in fact they have troubling evidence of factual context and even possible collusion between the Trump Campaign in russia. When you agree with the assurance and confidence them lawenforcement is here. Did anybody think airfare or free or thorough with politically independent . And as stated previously you would be willing to resign if he felt that was not the case. One of the things you would do even if inappropriately you felt you were pressured to shutdown and investigation that you would oppose that correct. And donald rice said that here. And the steps before resigning, what you commit he would share with the American People if compelled to resign that is the reason greg. I cannot answer that hypothetically it depends on the facts and circumstances. I would but as a prosecutor generally speaking i dont know what context so i can assure you but they have had the knowledge about that. D . Charity plan and using the resources to investigate but this is the way we have been doing it in his 12 years i have served. But what i came to the attention of office each is j. Trained but they consult with with the publicat integrity section and inappropriate to launch investigations. Re if you agree with the recent decision to withdraw for robert but friday it actually had a discriminatory impact que considering the evidencece whether taxes enacted the law with discriminatory intent. I read newspaper stories blair was not sure of the regional positions would do not know what is the legal basis for what determination was made but if i were wouldno make sure to consult with lawyers to understand thoseha issues and take a course of action. So the corruption is of the most sensitive and important and i hope you will continue with your m record of Public Service to ensure that public civil rights cases are timely bought. Than those overseas and then i was quite proud as a team of several owe. Could you support to have those current . Senator, camden that wasas then issue that is an issue that is very important but if they are a nonprofit but to achieve independence and. Mr. Rose and seeing, we spoke yesterday about the wife pursuing public hysteria cases and to use the as a tool for 40 30 seconds to be interesting to see how we Work Together with state and laugh all and from but with regard to the Police Agencies itll have all the tools suitcase certainly it can be and 2 7. Thank you mr. Chairman. I apologize of my but to cover time and talk about the effect of arizona but the purpose of the program is his and but there is a posture question if you were answering for the first time for him but for those prosecutions of i haveve passed many times but as to why the program had ended . But that but happened at those programs with alone supporter in no but then the burden falls to them so talk about to overstate the leadership but that has net into rooms and put more than any of their districts and another policy is but as a general matter we do have limited resources and we continue to make decisionsns but i dont think we should rule out anything because category if that is turned r by prosecuting at the cases with. But to have this streamlined but that also pushed for those educational crossings soil healthy movet h forward in regard to operation streamlined u. S. Attorney general about it the odyssey had committed to reform world the department will do so. Here is the subject over grants. The department aboard approximately 17 billion in grants concerned about the possibility are the findings that we could draw within a grand programs. And then over the last five years the recent question where those 23 million in grants and awards just like big brothers and big sisters of arizona but as the department Inspector General said before the house judiciary theres virtually no visibility and how they are used by the recipientsn how and continued unless there is no investigation of th agencys rededicate resources to analyze the information the government of the taxpayers are in the dark meat guarding how grant funds are actually used. This is a serious problem in my sons friend called disease they were. We need to take remedial action if we determine theil grant we also have criminals that brought has that is how i got expected and then to determine but then we have not just the ability to find ths findings with the enforcement component so well least for that brought in their agency to show that is done on the appropriate case. As the associated to richmond but then also the insensitive for kurds and have deal intended to do this crack. That is the important for office of i expected a would differ but ours reassure the his. He developed quiet day lawenforcement to rouge louisiana f chris and carpet the goals of an from but then she cannot back to force but then to find Common Ground so we can Work Together to reach your petur to combat the crime problems so for. But can you commit . Then do not wanted to confer an did is database cease but i have seen. We concluded that after these two witnesses. [inaudible] do you need a body . But of the videos is asking the questions. Estion, i am assuming we will have a second round as well. But those mentors that we share that both of us have heard as United Statest both attorneys and several u prosecutors. The savings bonds and hasou some taken them all to apply for this position but yet i will oppose your nomination but only you. Only you. Only you have the power to appoint the special prosecutor. We are in an extraordinary cons. With the intelligence agencies in complete agreement russians launched a massive attack campaign meddling in our electionai through sever attack and misinformation and propaganda. There was evidence there was a time between the other official, and ask each with potential collision inco during that time. Apparently statements through 2008 to this committee and the attorney general about his contacts with others in the trump including the National Security adviser Michael Flynn. I believe the special prosecutors absolutely necessary to assure the independence as well as the integrity of this investigation. And with med with syria and series m before even though i support to he is a special position. Bell lawbreaking a violent criminal law. None of those of their bodies so what me begin by asking you, if you presented witness to make grand jury. By give you the grand back. In the grand injury is not my job. But if you presented the two witnesses let me correct butr the witness to events on the circumstances. Of believe this committee has obligation to returnee with negative the with thee ongoing investigainvestiga won reno from newspapers but with Jeff Sessions whoever is impressive we have that with the attorney general and why dont. Addition clarify those fir this is published replacedinfort but no need to followup because i will feel that when well that. So my one question i dont expect you to disagree with me that but possibly even the president. Your body and how. But that is when i investigated the attorneygeneral of the United States but that investigation is a partial with the independent counsel and m1 to assure you that a careful with this spirit if you are named would do a bid to come before the committee to explain why quick. I appreciate your cantor your me yesterday and your 20 this minuscule do hope yo able to Work Together if i get the job. We have a tremendous amount in common. I have a Great Respect for your affection for the department. And i believe well have a constructive relationship. So thank you. Well, thank you. The senator from hawaii. Thank you, mr. Chairman. With the most recent unsubstantiated Early Morning tweet from President Trump accusing president obama of ordering a wiretap, thank you, mr. Rosenstein, for your clear no on the question of whether president obama on his own could order a wiretap. Maybe putin can do that, but the president of the United States cannot do that. And i know that ms. Brand would not answer the same question characterizing the question as a hypothetical. It is not a hypothetical question. It is a question of law. Mr. Rosenstein, do you agree that the office of the attorney general is not the president s personal law firm . Absolutely, senator. So that the a. G. Serves as americas chief Law Enforcement officer and head of the department of justice representing the people of the United States. Will you commit to providing your best independent justice in your prosecutorial discretion and duties at the department of justice . Yes, i will. So if the president indicates wouldnt want a special counsel in the investigation into russias interference in our elections and if you determined such counsel is warranted, will you be willing to deny the president his request . I believe i would, senator. It would depend on the context. Certainly if the president had a conflict in a particular matter i would not take any advice from the president. So you would make your own determination because youre a lawyer for the people of the United States. Let me clarify, senator. If youre talking your hypothetical, and again, its difficult for me to answer hypotheticals as a lawyer i accept your answer. Thank you. If the president has committed a crime and i believe the president s cull payable wouldnt follow the president s advice. That happened in the nixon era. There was a question about whether president s can wiretap without legal process. I believe its happened before. I dont have any reason to believe its happened recently and i certainly hope it hasnt. Miss brand, in our personal meeting you mentioned the need to preserve the integrity of elections. And to many that is doublespeak for Voter Suppression. The states have justified Voter Suppression laws by claiming rampant voter fraud. In fact President Trump continues to claim that 3 to 5 million votes were cast illegally during the general election. Do you agree with his assessment that 3 to 5 million votes were illegally cast . Well, senator, horan, i think when we met yesterday you asked me about the importance of the Voting Rights act as well as voter fraud, and i think what i said is that its important that both are important. Could you respond to my question, which is do you believe that 3 to 5 million votes were cast illegally in the recent general election . If i might just finish that point. I think its critically important for the department to do both, their work in enforcing the Voting Rights act and if cases arise as mr. Rosenstein described, if there are allegations, credible allegations of voter fraud, the Criminal Division would pursue those. Well, i know that mr. Rosenstein did not respond to that question saying he did not have the information. But in fact, a comprehensive 2014 study published in the Washington Post found 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud, in other words, voter fraud, from 2000 to 2014 out of more than 1 billion votes cast. So even this small number is likely inflated as the studys author count all credible claims regardless of whether or not they were found to be valid. So other studies done at the Arizona State university in 2012 and 2016 found similar negligible rates of impersonation fraud. So even given these facts, a dozen states have passed Voter Suppression laws. And id like to ask you, ms. Brand, will you commit to prioritizing doj resources to where the problems lie . The problems do not lie in voter fraud. The problems appear to lie in these Voter Suppression laws that states have been very busy passing after the shelby case. Id like to know whether you would prioritize doj resources going after the Voter Suppression laws or certainly looking at these laws. To see whether in fact they suppress votes. Well, senator hirano, i understand your concern with this, and i share concern for any anything that would violate the Voting Rights act and suppress votes. I view enforcement of that statute to be a core Law Enforcement function of the Civil Rights Division. I would approach that issue like i would approach any issue, which is that if an issue is raised, a particular case, i would look at the facts and i would look at the law. I would of course be consulting with the lawyers in the Civil Rights Division. They would be doing the work in the first instance of course. I dont intend to be micromanaging that work. But in my supervisory capacity i would talk with them, look at the facts, look at the law, exercise my best judgment. So mr. Rosenstein, i would hope that you would have that kind of approach. But ms. Brand, i think you said that protecting peoples right to vote and access to voting is a core function. And would you agree with that, mr. Rosenstein . Absolutely. Yes, senator. Thank you. Under the Obama Administration expiloted removal was used only when an immigrant was arrested within 100 miles of the border and had been in the country less than two weeks. Under new executive order issued by President Trump expedited removal will now include all those who have been in the country for up to two years, where a lot of things could happen. They could marry citizens. They could have citizens children. No matter where they are caught in the u. S. So mr. Rosenstein, how can the doj ensure that expedited removal doesnt threaten the Due Process Rights of those who are not brought before an immigration judge . Senator, ive had no direct involvement in immigration in my 27 years in the department. As u. S. Attorney we have occasionally civil case thats arise out of immigration disputes. I believe that issue that youve referred to is really a matter primarily in the jurisdiction of Homeland Security rather than justice. So i regret that im just not in position to comment on it. But wouldnt the doj be prosecuting these kinds of cases or not . Are you saying that because they dont come before a judge that thats not within your purview . Well, no. I meant to say i think what you have in mind is an administrative removal or a civil removal rather than a criminal prosecution. If it were a criminal prosecution, thats just the type of case ive prosecuted as u. S. Attorney. I havent been involved in civil removals. And the decision about which i believe the decision about which immigrants to remove is in the first instance to Homeland Security but if i become deputy im sure ill study up on that issue and consult with the experts in the department and ill be happy to consult certainly because the doj has the responsibility to protect everyones civil rights and Due Process Rights i would think. Thank you. Thank you, chairman. First let me say that i agree with mr. Rosenstein that he should have the chance to familiarize himself with the matter before he makes the call about a special counsel. But i would like to add to the record of these and i quote the appropriate response from the subject matter is public and arrives at a politically charged atmosphere for the attorney general to appoint a special counsel of great public stature and indisputable independence to assure the public that matter will be handled without partisanship as a matter on which senator sessions and i agree. I would also like to add if senator sessions in mr. Chairman answered a. Of the communications you had with the Russian Ambassador what were the circumstances that ledd to those meetings, what communications did you have with the Trump Campaign about those meetings if any and i think those are legitimate questions and the committee shouldnt beei deprived simply because we were deprived of the accurate and truthful manner so i join my jom colleagues. Mr. Rosenstein come is it correct that the act has precedence over an executive order that might direct agencies to the contrary . The that may be the case. I dont know the answer to that. Are they super gaming executive orders . Do they supervene executive orders . A rightwing commentator has compared and urged that they beo cleaned from the stables. The attorney general questioned whether they can fully understand the truth so how will you depend the debate could defend the department from the religious space or ideological practices we have a Great Department of state away from that stuff by and large in its o history. The discrimination on the base of religion and high gearing is illegal. With respect to the impact of re partisanship and i think its important that everyone is in the hiring capacity understandsm what the rules are so i think training is a big part of that and i believe every employee at the doj is supposed to be trained in a whole variety of laws that govern the conduct including the protection. Will this be a priority to assure the department doesnt fall back into the predicament that it fell under with attorney general gonzales . Yes, senator. Science denial and climate denial has been propagated by the industry for years through an array of front groups. The chamber of commerce which he worked for has been a relentless enemy of Climate Action and has traffic regularly in the climate denial. You have been the leader in environmental cases. Can we trust you on Climate Science as the issues come up in the Department Lacks to be co . If i am confirmed my goal will be to enable the officials in the department of justice to engage in the functions that include enforcing the clean air act, the clean water act, endangered species act and so w on. The judgments tend to be made by the epa or the department ofy interior or any number off agencies that deal with those questions. Doj doesnt make them in the first instance but the policy whatever it is, should be enforced in the department of justice and im ready to take that on. Working for the chamber you had a private client and you and the attorney were obligated to advocate for their private interest but that in Public Service is very Public Interest in addressing Climate Change . Juc there is a Public Interest is there a Public Interest in addressing Climate Change. Think asking for a personal judgment i dont think that is relevant to the way that i do my job my job is to reinforce the law whatever it is. Theris. There is a difference between somebody who doesnt think there is a Public Interest. Say it is a simple question relevant to the duties of. That would be my job. Theyve commented on the good working relationship with Law Enforcement. They have a lot of respect for you and ive seen firsthandt keeping the community safe. I read the bill to reauthorize the program along with republican senator Lisa Murkowski of alaska. I raised this dish you in thee confirmation hearing with the president of the fraternal order and he agreed its a very Important Program. I would like to hear your views on the program and its important that it provides as a state and local Law Enforcement with you support this program ai the Deputy Attorney general, and i would also like to hear your views since he will be involved in the grand. To the extent that theres something i want to make sure that its spent appropriately to achieve the objectives of the program, and i have seen t benefits in the programth obviously there are budgetary issues. Every decision has a tradeoff in terms of where the resources are going to go but as a generao proposition, i do think that that money has some instances and its been since effective aid to help drive reform and the Police Departments that are eager to do it and want to work collaboratively in the department to bring experts that can help them update the policies and procedures. Now h i have a lot of experience in the program and i couldnt add much to it but certainly in my capacity we oversee the office and it will be a priority they are putting that money to best sp use of going after the recruitment in the state we have a number of cases in the u. S. Attorneys office and can youth talk about how you would approach the issue i know that you will be devoted to that. But this issue you of trying to prevent people from being recruited into extremism and the Justice Department, your predecessors as well as the Homeland Security office that has been involved in this. I appreciate the opportunity to talk about this. We are all on the same site and with regards to this one, we are not in the prosecution dismissed because h we like to fill upp business, we are in the business because it is a necessary tool to deter crime so when you talk about the extremism and conduct that is damaging to Public Safety, we need to do everything we can. One of the things we can do is intervene and prevent people from being radicalized. And i think that is what youop have a min in mind and that is important. The Justice Department function perhaps and a lot of other, agencies that have a role in ensuring that we are raising good citizens who are not going to engage in that but the Justice Department is involved and i believe we do have something to add. Thank you. Either of you can answer this but i am the Ranking Member of the subcommittee. We have worked and headed up the committee for many years. Theres been a major wave of mergers in the last few years in the works for the department. The department has an Important Role to play in challenging the anticompetitive practices and referred to become reviewing mergers so they dont harm consumers and stopping pricefixing cartels. Will you commit to making a robust enforcement into a the priority . Yes. That is a good answer. Iority . Trafficking, this is my last question. In the domestic priorities weve been working on bills and the Justice Department released as required by that wall at the end of last year. Will you commit to prioritizing the implementation of the National Strategy if you are confirmed and if you want to add anything about these cases i would appreciate it. That thats been an explosion of Overdose Deaths attributed to opioid drugs throughout theerdoe entire society and its important for us to address that. Law enforcement is part of that but its a good example where its not just a lawenforcement problem and in the state of maryland we have an effort led by the governor of maryland to make that a top priority, so i thate, yes. The first round is seven minutes instead of the second round so good. Thank you mr. Chairman. E to i want to thank each of you fory your long records of service. Mr. Rosenstein, you served in the department of justice for a couple of decades now. You served under republican administrations and democratic c administrations and view developed a distinguished career marked by integrity and fairness. Ms. Brand, you and i have been friends a couple of decades now and we have been friends with you and your husband a long ti time. We focused a great deal on the aspersions cast. Jeff sessions is another good man of integrity. And it has been interesting to see a number of democratic of senators demanding that you you committed to appointing a special prosecutor. Those that are doubting your ability to be fair have a very, very different view of your record just a few years ago and hhed senator leahy described mr. Rosenstein as a tough hones. Prosecutor and the academy of professional prosecutors. Senator feinstein described himm as someone that was independent and further said that she had no reason to believe you cannot work with the fbi and assemble a very strong Prosecution Team where warranted. How do you believe the department of justice should approach any criminal investigation and what shouldd guide the principles for Going Forward . Im embarrassed to say they are not entirely justified, but i appreciate this is very easy for me because i have been in the department for 27 years and the folks i worked with trainedr me well in every investigation needs to be independent and it doesnt matter who wins theit dn defendant it needs to be conducted independently. We assemble resources we need and it includes federal agencies and the prosecutors for the trial in the department of justice to conduct investigations in every case it needs to be done independently. G any organization with significant signs is going to have occasional issues and im sure that we do but overall, senator, im proud to be associated in this institution and i have great confidence that they are just as honest and independent today as they were on january 19 and with an appreciation of the importance of their positions for Public Safety and enforcing the law and i agree with you that there are a great many career officials in the department of justice who are principled and have a fidelity to the law and who are eager to have a job mandate enforcing the law across the board. Ju if perhaps its not surprising that Democratic Senators to assume the same commoditization will continue but for eight years, we have seen political attorneys general and we have seen eric holder. It resulted in an illegal gun knowingly sold to traffickers are the agent. We saw the attorney general held in contempt of congress when he refused to cooperate with the investigation on the fast and furious. Us we saw them illegally targeting american citizens for exercising their First Amendment rights because they were perceived to be political opponents of the event and we saw the department of justice a fine in major democratic donor with over 6,000 to president obama and the democrats. When all of this was occurring one of them had any concern at all. Today they want a special all t prosecutor but when they were leading the investigation they saw no need whatsoever for a special prosecutor. They did not align with the president s political leanings. T we sold the department of justice continue to allow taxpayer funds to flow inities t releasing violent criminal aliens who were committing horrible crimes that we saw the administration refuse to enforce the law of the and department of justice signed off on the decision to pay a o 2 billiondollar ransom that flew in the middle of the night landing in an airport. That pattern of politicized administration of justice has been dismayed to the veterans of the department of justice because for decades they have had a tradition of being nonpolitical, nonpartisan, fairly and faithfully applying the law and that is true for the republican to back up until then last eight years. The question i would ask of each of you is willing to commit to the committee not to be a Political Department of justice in the same mode on the republican side that is most assuredly not your job butrepubn rather to uphold the law withous regard to politics. I will commit to a for the ae law without regard to politics. Thank you mr. Chairman. If the senator wants five minutes and then i will finish u just want to Say Something abou. The chairman to have respect and regard for the chairman there is an affection. The chair man has cosponsored by an legislatiomylegislation morer republican and [laughter] i dont think its fair toi characterize a. I dont think my question gotasa yours. Cnn published a story and im telling you this about a story that has just been published. Im not expecting you to know whether or not it is true but they published a story alleging the community provided documents last week that included information that russian week operatives claimed the personal and Financial Information about mr. Donald trump. O the document also allegedly said there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign. T if it is true it is obviously extremelyous and if there is any evidence. If it is in the course of the campaign, what would you do . That was a fair question and he. Didnt answer my question. Allegations give me all the time and have been made abouttions President Trump. This is wha time they virtually called a surrogate and i do not have communications with russians and i am able to comment on it. It cant be a gotcha question if he didnt answer a question. That wasnt even my question. My question was if this is a basic turns out to be the case that members of the campaign have met on this, this wasnt a gotcha question. Its been reported that once held the position you were looking to fill and was acting attorney general in the administration warned the white house that he could be honorable to blackmail because of his covered up. Knowing what we know now, and do you think he was right to be concerned . Ibb as a lawyer and a Justice Department official in the future it is important for me to limit my testimony to the matters of which i know both the facts and the mall where consulting with professionals engaged in handling the matters. So on issues like that one i appreciate the senators sharing his perspective but you need to know the facts and the relevant information. You cant prejudge matters. The Law Enforcement officers do and exemplary job in protecting other communities and safety, but thereve been specific cases with the use of force that sparked nationwide outrage and i know you are familiar with what has been entered into the degree to resolve the policing. During the sessions confirmation hearings i asked him whether he would honor the department of justice existing to send for Police Misconduct and has accountability and he did assure me as attorney general he would uphold the Peace Agreement and he left open the possibility that he would revisit these agreements so i would like to ask the same question will you commit to maintaining that they have negotiated . I can tell you my general perspective. Its appropriate to use this one. Is it appropriate to renegotiate or visit then i think sometimes it is but i dont know the details of any particular agreement. These are subject to the revision and circumstances change. It is a viable tool provided by the congress and an appropriate case to use them. And those that are in force there may be times but it is not pure intention to cast them aside. I dont know the details. There is one currently under review that hasnt been accepted by the court but i dont know the details of the others. During the confirmation they would uphold the ruling and will those of you commit to upholding for a gbp . Do you both agree aldine protections apply to the transgender students or persons . I do not know the answer to that. I do know it is a controversial issue of law and i am not familiar with the analysis one way or another but if that were to come up to my desk i know we have a lot of experience to help us discern into that would be my advice of the attorney general. It is basically there can be no discrimination on the basis of state said this. I am in the same position. Its not the issue of litigation but i had a chance myself. I would hope that it would be interpreted broadly. One more question, do you think that they would prevent constitutional problems . It would depend what you meant by that. As a general proposition i think any registry in america was predicated solely on somebodys religion would certainly present problems. A couple short statements i want to meet and then the third thing would be to tell everybody to record will be open for one week for questions in writing and then if nobody else comes, i will adjourn. In 1986 i got a bill passed amending the false claims act and now it is empowering whistleblowers since that time they have more than 53 billion more than 37 billion of that is because of the whistleblowers. Will you enforce a false claims act to recover taxpayer dollars lost broad . Our u. S. Attorneys have an Enforcement Program and we will continue to enforce that. I would imagine on the second point, whether it is whistleblowers would you commit to ensuring the department of justice worked collaboratively in regards to the false claims act . They are protected by the protection act and i support that. Its basically the record of independence from jamie and david ogden that served as a Deputy Attorney general for president clinton and obama. President trump raised a serious issue over the weekend that has been reported in the Mainstream Press as well. The New York Times reported on it on january the 19th based upon one anonymous source that it was related to the Campaign Officials and the white house. If that is true, then the public needs to know how they were obtained and number two, why they were provided to the white house and butter any of the information was used for political purposes. After President Trumps, they told the New York Times in january that the white house was involved. I dont remember any of my colleagues on the other side asking questions about the news report regarding the Previous White House involvement. But its very different when there were reports of such Trump White House officials asking the fbi director about this matter. Democrats started suggesting it was somehow a sign of improper political influence and they havent asked any questions about indications that the Obama White House was gathering information from intelligence sources and i will put a New York Times article on the record. Then the last thing would be in regards to charges of collusion between the Trump Campaign and russia. These have been raised several times and so i would note for the record on meet the press, the former director clapper under president obama said there was no evidence of collusion. Chuck todd of meet the press asked him, quote, does intelligence exist at any that can definitively answer the following questions, whether there was in proper context between the Trump Campaign and russian officials, enddoublequote, and then from mr. Clapper, we did not include any evidence in our report that anything that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump Campaign and the russians. There was no evidence of that included in the report. He asked, quote, i understand that, but does it exist . He said not to my knowledge. Without objection, a copious that transcript will be placed in the record. He was the director of national intelligencdirector of nationaly president obama to conduct a full review of the situation as the dni, he had access to all Source Intelligence and all sources of intelligence in quotation marks in other words, everything the government had. So if he is telling the truth and did his job properly there is no evidence at this point to suggest that the allegations. There is plenty of evidence about leaks by classified information out to get the Trump Administration you want to comment . I do. I just want to thank the nominees and we look forward to working with them and especially again, i know more about you just from colleagues, and i want to thank you and you are taking on a big job and i want to respond and part of why this is such a big job is because we have 17 u. S. Intelligence agencies who have said russia attempted to influence our election and we have the attorney general of the United States greek using himself and i just want to point out that this weekend, mr. Chairman raised the issue of the president s tweet. This weekend at the former director actually said he did not know of this kind of a wiretapping or that there had been any kind of a court order. He denies that and we also have reports now that the fbi director was trying to get this clarified that this was not occurring. So i have not seen any credible evidence to support the president s tweet from saturday morning and i think it is important that we clarified that on the record. I do thank you all for being here and serving. Go ahead into the well adjourned. I just want to say thank you. I appreciate your courtesy. It is a pleasure for me to be here. My family feels the same way and we look forward if i am confirmed to working with all of you. Thank you. We are adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] inaudible anyone working at any hedge fund who is involved in shortterm trading meaning every day they are trading in their stock, that is a common term in the industry they want the edge thats useful for the purpose there is a gray zone and then inside information. New york staff writer talks about the inside trading case against Hedge Fund Manager and his firm in the capital. Inside information, dirty money and the class to bring down the most wanted man on wall street. The central characters in my book are the former portfolio managers. Matthew was one and Michael Steinberg is the other. They are currently serving a prison sentence although the case is on appeal and mr. Steinberg was convicted of thbutthe conviction was later overturned after an Appeals Court made a ruling that made it harder to convict someone for insider trading. Next a discussion on the independent advisory board. The agency was created by the healthcare law to recommend costcutting measures for medicare. This is 50 minutes