Transcripts For CSPAN Deputy And Associate Attorneys General Testify At Confirmation Hearing 20170308

Good morning, everybody. I am pleased to hold the nomination hearing for two outstanding nominees. Rod rosenstein and rachel rink. They have been nominated for two very important senior positions in the department of justice. Deputy attorney general and associate attorney general. The Deputy Attorney general, who is the second in command at the department oversees the day to day operations. The associate attorney general overseas the departments civil litigation. It is critical that we fill so themportant positions department can operate at full capacity. We cannot have two better nominees for these positions, mr. Rosenstein shares a lot in common. They both are dedicated Civil Servants. They have both been confirmed by the senate before. Twice. Brands case, they both served during president obamas administration. Externallyth talented and fairminded lawyers, dedicated to the full and evenhanded enforcement of our laws and they will serve the department with distinction as to rosenstein had served with distention. Mr. Rosenstein has observed the president for obamas entire two terms in office. I am sure senator cardin will speak to his accomplishments in these roles. And i would also like to submit for the record a letter from our former colleague and friend, senator mikulski, supporting his nomination and without objection, that letter will be entered. Now, with respect to mr. Rosensteins nomination, i have a few things to say about the attorney generals announcement last week and the supplemental testimony he said yesterday. During his confirmation, attorney general sessions told this committee that he would do what he would do if the civic matters arose where he believed his impartiality might be questioned. He said he would consult with the Justice Departments professionals and listen to their advice. And to those who question his independence from the president , general sessions proved them wrong already by recusing himself. Last week he kept his word, unlike attorney general lynch. Attorney general sessions recused himself. His recusal means that if there is any ongoing matter that deals with the Trump Campaign, it will be handled by the Deputy Attorney general. So, if mr. Rosenstein is confirmed, and i surely expect them to be, the responsibility for any decisions will fall on him. Already i have heard some calls from the other side that a special consul should be appointed to take over. Any talk of a special consult is premature at best. Anysituation insinuation that mr. Rosenstein lacks the impartiality to handle these matters is out of line. He is a career Civil Servant that has served with distinction obamah of the bush and administrations. In 2012, there was a series of high level leaks to the media of highly classified information. The leaks looks like they were designed to make the Previous Administration look good. Rather than provide a special consul, mr. Rosenstein was placed, and another attorney general, in charge of the investigations. At the time, the chairman said attorney general made a good choice when he put mr. Rosenstein in charge. He described him as a tough, honest prosecutor and the academepitome of a professional prosecutor. Another senior democrat said she lpposed the special counsu because it takes a long time. The Ranking Member also had this to say about mr. Rosenstein and other u. S. Attorneys assigned to the matter. These are two scrupulous men who are independent and i have no to believe they cannot work with the fbi and assemble a strong Prosecution Team where warranted. Presumably, my democratic colleagues have not changed their minds about mr. Rosenstein because because the president is now a republican, instead of a democrat. Please her member please remember, a special consul requires under the current regulation that my colleagues have called for. There is no mandatory public report or other finding at the end of the investigation if no charges are filed. The investigations can just disappear into a black hole without the public ever understanding what the facts were. The Intelligence Committees are investigating these matters. The other side has asked the Inspector General to investigate as well. Unsels,special co they can get the facts and present them to the public. So, the notion that a special counsel will bring facts to light is not true. I cant help but notice the selective nature of the latest calls for a special counsel. Where were these calls from the other side when attorney general lynch was overseeing the clinton investigation . Attorney general lynch had been appointed by president clinton to be our u. S. Attorney. Her law firm represented the clintons. Her ability to continue in her job as attorney general defended on a clinton victory in the election. She had a private meeting with president bill clinton on her government airplane 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 a special counsel when congress referred a criminal citation to the department of justice against attorney general holder for withholding documents . He misled congress about when he learned about this. Where were the calls from the other side to have hearings on that . The u. S. Attorney was simply order to ignore the criminal contempt citation and my friends on the other side of the aisle were fine with that. And unfortunately so. It would be easier to credit unselsfor special co if they were made with some consistency and they had intellectual honesty. There were times when special counsels are appropriate, but it is far too soon to tell at this time. And even if there were evidence to a crime related to any of these matters, once confirmed, mr. Rosenstein can decide how to handle that matter. I know of no reason to place his judgment, integrity, or impartiality in question. I will have to say more on ms. Bran when i introducerd, but she is also a dedicated public servant. Her nomination is supported by former attorneys general and deputies attorneys general. A letter from them in the record without objection, it will be entered. Before i turn to senator feinstein for the opening statement, let me say how we will conduct the hearing today. After senator feinsteins opening statement, we have the introduction of the nominees. Senator ernst and i will introduce ms. Brand, but i will introduce after my three colleagues have spoken. It will save time for them. But she is after them. The senators will introduce mr. Rosenstein in the nominees will give opening statements. We will have seven minute rounds of questions. I know there are a number of issues the senators would like to cover. 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 questions and if we do, that will be five additional minutes. Ii am prepared i am prepared to work through the noon hour, unless the nominees need time off. Senator feinstein . Senator feinstein thank you, mr. Chairman. As you have said, today we begin our consideration of the nominees to fill two really important positions. The Deputy Attorney general essentially leads the daytoday operations of the Justice Department and also, directly overseas the solicitor generals office, the office of Legal Counsel, and the Law Enforcement component, 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. They oversee 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 today, Rod Rosenstein and rachel brand, and congratulate them for having been nominated to such major posts in the Justice Department. I had the pleasure of meeting with them yesterday and both appear wellqualified. 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 they will help determine the direction of the Justice Department over the next four years. Unfortunately, at this early stage in the new administration, there have already been concerning developments. First, the acting attorney general, sally yates, was abruptly fired by the president for taking a principled stand on the executive order banning individuals from certain majority muslim countries. Her stance was then vindicated by the ninth circuit. Second, instead of taking a strong stance to protect the Voting Rights and civil rights of all, the department has taken steps to further erode those rights. Specifically, we already see the Civil Rights Division switching ,ositions in important cases like the texas voter identification law, or withdrawing its guidance relating to transgender students. Reverseersal of course, away from policies that uphold and protect civil rights for all americans. It is unfortunate. It it will may reveal b but it will may reveal the past of the future. I support the appointment of a special prosecutor to the the investigation into russian influence in the election. I believe we need an independent criminal investigation into russian influence. That theortant American People have trust in this investigation and that there is not even the appearance of a conflict of interest or political influence. I continue to support the appointment of a special prosecutor to lead the investigation. This clear, i do not says i do not say this because i question the integrity or ability of mr. Rosenstein. I do not. This is about more than just one individual. This is about the integrity of the process. Public faith in the institutions of justice. Justice Department Regulations clearly provide for the appointment of a special counsel when there is a conflict of interest for the department or other extraordinary circumstances. The appointment of a special counsel would be in the Public Interest. General sessions was a surrogate for the Trump Campaign. He admitted that he met with the Russian Ambassador on two locations and on friday attorney general announced he believes he should recuse himself investigation could very well involve officials in the trunk administration. Demonstrate factors 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 recused himself from the Valerie Plame case, that very same day thenDeputy Attorney general comey appointed a special prosecutor. He said he did so out of an abundance of caution and to avoid any appearance of 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 political background, someone who has a reputation for integrity and impartial decisionmaking, and who is independently selected, not by the attorney general. From the outset we need a respected prosecutor who is 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 congressional appeals, President Trump and his allies are taking unprecedented steps to help big business but harm average americans. I have had an opportunity to meet with both mr. Rosenstein and ms. Brand, as i said. They both have impressive credentials and i enjoyed meeting with them. But as we all know, the test of leadership and suitability for a job is not how nice you are, or how well you get along. It is whether the Justice Department or a court, whether in those departments we need independent, fairminded Public Servants who look out for everyone in this country, not just the powerful and well connected. We need steel spines, not weak knees, when it comes to political independence in the department of justice. And there is a real danger, i believe, that the Justice Department could become politicized. I hope to hear today from these nominees what they will do to guard against just that. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. And there is a real dai believe, that the Justice Department could become politicized. I hope to hear today from these nominees what they will do to guard against just that. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Sen. Grassley thank you, senator feinstein. Now senator ernst and then senator cardin and then senator van hollen. Sen. Ernst thank you, chairman grassley. It is my privilege to be here today to introduce a native iowan, rachel brand. After graduating in pella, iowa, and the university of minnesota, ms. Brand went on to receive her law degree from Harvard Law School. After law school, ms. Brand embarked on impressive legal career in both private practice and public practice. In fact, she had at one time or another served in all three branches of government. She was previously confirmed by the senate as assistant attorney general for legal policy at the department of justice, and before that she clerked for Justice Kennedy on the Supreme Court of the United States. And perhaps the most prestigious of all, she worked as an intern for senator grassley. In addition to her Public Service, ms. Brand has had a distinguished career in private practice, has taught as an adjunct law professor, and serves as a board member for doorways for women and families, an organization dedicated to creating pathways out of homelessness, domestic violence, and sexual assault. Ms. Brand has shown time and time again a commitment to Public Service, and if she is confirmed, it is my understanding that 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, and i look forward to what i hope will be a speedy approval of her nomination. Thank you, chairman grassley. Sen. Grassley thank you, senator ernst. Now senator cardin. Senator cardin it is a pleasure to be back before the Judiciary Committee. I want to thank both of our nominees for being willing to serve their country and thank families, because this is a family sacrifice to serve in government, and we thank them for being willing to do this. I am pleased to be here with senator van hollen to introduce and support Rod Rosenstein to be the Deputy Attorney general. This was a welcomed nomination by President Trump. Rod rosenstein has demonstrated throughout his long career of the highest standards of professionalism. He has dedicated his entire professional crew to Public Service. He is an experienced prosecutor and administrator. Very impressive credentials, graduating from the university of pennsylvania wharton school, from Harvard Law School, or he was editor of the harvard law journal, clerked for judge ginsburg on the District Court court of appeals. He has been u. S. Attorney since 2005. He has served in many leadership positions among u. S. Attorneys, and as chairman grassley pointed out, he has been given very 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 has let major criminal investigations and prosecutions in regards to contraband smuggling with gang members, inmates, and correctional officers. He has personally supervised the coordination of our antiterrorism efforts recognizing that each stakeholder can add to the strength of marylands efforts to fight terrorism. He has done that without regard to turf issues, providing coordinated strategy in our state of maryland. He has handled corruption cases, sensitive corruption cases, from Police Officers to elected officials, and he has protected marylands citizens through his commitment on consumer issues and on environmental issues. What impresses me the most is the fact that he has done this in a totally nonpartisan, professional manner. When i was elected in 2006 to the United States senate, Rod Rosenstein was already the u. S. Attorney. He had been appointed there by president bush. So i first met mr. Rosenstein when he was u. S. Attorney for our state. When i was elected, i was approached by many elected officials as to what was going to happen with u. S. Attorney. I was impressed with the first phone calls i received Law Enforcement individuals in Baltimore City responsible for the protection of our city all urging me to encourage president obama to retain Rod Rosenstein as u. S. Attorney. That was not the only call i received. 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, strongly supported his work as u. S. Attorney. So when senator mikulski and i had to make a decision, we recommended to president obama that he retain Rod Rosenstein as u. S. Attorney for maryland, and we are pleased that president obama did in fact retain mr. Rosenstein has our u. S. Attorney. He has the support of state and local officials. The attorney general of maryland supports this nomination. Doug gansler, former attorney general of maryland, supports the nomination. Peter franchot, comptroller of our state. All support mr. Rosenstein because of his record of professionalism. He is supported by our local police, the chief of police for Baltimore City supports his nomination. And as you may know, baltimore is under a Consent Decree as a result of a practice investigation in baltimore. Maryland state Bar Association supports his nomination. Former assistant u. S. Attorneys support his 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 numbers of his 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 Generals Office must follow facts, including the standards for the use of a special prosecutor. Based on mr. Rosensteins prior record, im confident of his judgment on these issues. Sen. Grassley thank you, senator cardin. Senator van hollen. Senator van hollen thank you, chairman grassley, Ranking Member feinstein, for supporting rosensteins nomination to become Deputy Attorney general. As you have heard, he has had an illustrious and a long career, and during his 27year career he has earned a reputation as a fair and focused administrator of justice. As a result, he has served in both republican and democratic administrations and earned the distinction of being the longestserving u. S. Attorney in the country today. Rod has not only aggressively prosecuted dangerous gangs and criminals in maryland, but also elected officials who violated the publics trust. He has a show impartiality in these investigations, and his successful prosecutions have led to ethics reforms that increase transparency and Public Confidence in maryland. In addition to being a topnotch lawyer, he is known for the professional manner in which he runs his current office. In his letter of support, marylands attorney general notes that rod inherited an office in turmoil, but with a steady hand and superb management, created a department that is universally respected. Those skills will be put to test in the coming months. It is no secret that mr. Rosenstein is before this committee at the tumultuous time for the department of justice, and his job will be to serve justice and political 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 nominated to be Deputy Attorney general people will ask you to do things you just need to say no about, and went on to ask, do you think the attorney general has the responsibility to say no to the president if he asks for something improper . Like sally yates, Rod Rosenstein said he would be willing to put his job on the line to uphold the integrity of the department of justice. I share the views expressed by senator feinstein and senator cardin as to the investigation into any ties between the Trump Administration and russian interference in elections. I believe they will require the appointment of a special prosecutor and i call for a nonpartisan independent commission. I also made it clear in my conversations with mr. Rosenstein that if the fbi director has in fact requested that the Justice Department deny President Trumps unsubstantiated claims about the 202 6280205 Obama Administration wiretapping of trump tower, the Justice Department has a duty to let the public know the truth. Mr. Chairman, i think we all agree that it is vitally important that the American Public has faith that the laws will apply equally to all americans regardless of rank and position. Rod rosenstein has applied the principle faithfully during his time as u. S. Attorney in maryland. It is essential that the same principle apply at the department of justice. Members of the committee, i do not know what the future holds on these issues of great importance to our democracy. I do know that Rod Rosenstein has a record and reputation of serving justice, and i support his nomination. I also want to join senator cardin expressing our gratitude to his wife, lisa, his daughters, julie and allison, for joining us today, and for their familys commitment to Public Service. Sen. Grassley thanks to both my colleagues, and unless any of my colleagues have questions, you are free to go. Thank you very much. Oh, i got to introduce her first. I will take my time now to introduce rachel brand, and you have already been told she is a native iowan. She may not have lived in iowa for years now but i know she loved going to the iowa state fair and goes home fairly regularly to visit her grandmother and both sets of grandparents, who are dairy farmers. Ms. Brand is familiar to this committee. She appeared before us many times, both as a nominee and as expert witness. She has already served the country well, im glad to see she has been nominated once again, this time as associate attorney general. I will note that this is the third time she has been nominated for a senateconfirmed position. Both president bush and obama also nominated her for roles in their respective departments 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. She clerked for the justice of the Supreme Court of massachusetts, as well as for Justice Kennedy on the u. S. Supreme court. She served as counsel to both president bush and as assistant attorney general, office of legal policy, in that role, she prepared nominees to be sitting at the very place she is at this time. She also specialized in counterterrorism and National Security issues. In 2011, she became chief counsel for regulatory litigation of the u. S. Chamber of commerce. Most recently, she was a member of the private Civil Liberties oversight board. That board oversees federal agencies counterterrorism activities to ensure that privacy and Civil Liberties are balanced with the National Security interest. In addition to her vast career accomplishments, ms. Brand is on the board of an organization that helps women and children who find themselves in abusive situations. They have 24hour hotline that provides shelter and support services for these people. I am pleased to support someone who is so wellqualified with her previous positions of Legal Counsel, privacy and Civil Liberties oversight board. She has experience that touches almost every part of the federal government. As the assistant attorney general for the office of legal policy, she was a member of the Senior Management team of the department of justice, working with Law Enforcement agencies across the department. Similarly, at the privacy and Civil Liberties oversight board, she worked with diverse agencies to ensure that privacy and Civil Liberties are taken into account while carrying out the Important Mission of protecting the nation from terrorism. During ms. Brands tenure in the private sector, she gained extensive experience that will serve her well overseeing civil litigant campaigns. Congratulations. I think you will do a very fantastic job. Will you both now 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, nothing but the truth, so help you god . And now it is up to you, mr. Rosenstein, to give your statement, but before you do that, you may want to introduce your family and anybody else you want to introduce that is here to urge you on. Mr. Rosenstein thank you, chairman grassley, ranking number feinstein, and members of the committee, for scheduling this hearing and taking the time to meet with me in your offices in the past two weeks. Im very grateful to senators cardin and van hollen for their generous introductions. I would like to introduce my wife of 22 years, lisa. Lisa is a former assistant u. S. Attorney who shares my affection for the department of justice. She now devotes much of her time to our daughters, julia and allison. This hearing, im sorry to say, required ally to break her perfect attendance record. My older daughter julie writes for the School Newspaper but journalistic ethics precludes her from covering this hearing today. They are superb athletes and fundamentally good people. Im also proud, senators, that my parents, robert and gerry, are here today. My mom worked as a bookkeeper and served on the school board. My dad ran a Small Business in philadelphia with his partner, who is also here. My parents encouraged their children to take full advantage of the promise of america, even when that required us to move far from our small hometown in pennsylvania. My sister also has spent her entire career in Public Service. She traveled from georgia, where she is a Center Director at the centers for disease control. She is also uniformed officer, captain of the Public Health service. I disappointed she was not able to wear her uniform here today, but we are proud of her. My mother a lot flew in from california with lisas aunt. They are immigrants and they are quite proud to be here today. And many other relatives, friends, and colleagues are in his room or watching the broadcast. Senators, im so fortunate to be part of one of our nations crown jewels. The United States 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 of placing their trust in me to help manage the department and to enforce that principle. The Justice Department has been my professional home from a three decade. I served under 5 president s, and under 9 attorneys general. I want to assure you, senators, based on my personal experience, that our department is filled with exemplary professionals, devoted Public Servants who conduct independent investigations 365 days a year. I was fortunate to join them in 1990, and during the Clinton Administration i had a privilege of working directly for the Deputy Attorney general at that time. I served in several other positions around the Justice Department, and then in 2005, when i became u. S. Attorney, i expected to serve for four years under president bush. Im so grateful to president obama for demonstrating his 202 6280205 his confidence in me and allowing me to serve for eight years in his administration with the support of our home state senior senators cardin, mikulski, and sarbanes. Political affiliation is irrelevant to my work. Our goals of preventing crime and protecting National Security require us to work cooperatively with all partners, to be vigilant and proactive. We also need to be role models, because contacts with the police create indelible memories for citizens. As Deputy Attorney general, i will draw on my personal experience with thousands of our lawenforcement officers all around this country, as i seek to implement change and build public trust. Justice is our name, and justice is our mission. Attorney general Robert Jackson famously said that the citizen safety lies in a prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, seeks the truth, serves the law, and approaches the task with humility. For me, the grand hallways of justice echo with the voices of mentors and friends. They taught me to ask the right questions. First, what can we do . Second, what should we do . Third, how will we explain it . Before taking on a position of this solemn responsibility, it is important to know who you are and what you stand for. My oath is an obligation. It requires me to support and defend the constitution of the United States, to bear full faith and allegiance to the constitution, and you well and faithfully discharge the duties of my office. As you know, ive taken the oath a few times, ive administered the oath many times,. I know it by heart, i understand what it means, and i intended to honor it. If you can for my nomination, i will work to defend the integrity of the Justice Department, to protect Public Safety, to reserve civil rights, to pursue justice, to advance the rule of law, and to promote Public Confidence. The members of this committee are indispensable partners in achieving those goals, and i know ms. Brand shares those fears. Im proud to be here with one of the finest lawyers of my generation, would be the first female associate attorney general and history of that office. I want to thank you for allowing me to speak and thank you for considering my nomination. Sen. Grassley thank you, mr. Rosenstein. Now, ms. Brand. You can give your statement as well as produce anybody who is here to support you and urge you on. Ms. Brand thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member feinstein, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear today as you consider my nomination. I would like to thank the president and the attorney general for the opportunity to be considered for this position. Im grateful to you, mr. Chairman, and senator ernst, for your kind introductions today. Although i have not lived in iowa for some time, as you mentioned, i will always consider myself an iowan. With me today is my husband, who i met at Harvard Law School and he was one of the smartest lawyers ive ever known. He also served in the department of justice. He was born and raised in manhattan, and so he was a bit of a novelty the first time i brought him home to pella, iowa. We had some sport with him, taking him around to meet the cows at my uncles farm, but he took it in stride and how he enjoys going back. Sitting with him are our sons, age 7 and age 9. They are not looking too happy to be here. [laughter] ms. Brand this is the second confirmation hearing that willem attended. Five years ago, willem was 4 and he sat still as long as could be expected from a fouryearold and that he got fidgety and he was given something to play with. We didnt think he was wise to bring garrett, who was then 2, but he was excited to eat cookies and drink juice in Justice Kennedys chambers. This is the first time he has worn a blazer. Not sure how happy he is about that, either. My parents were planning to be here but their flights were canceled but they may be watching a live stream on the website. My motherinlaw traveled down from new york. She emigrated to the u. S. From the netherlands many years ago. I am also grateful to the friends who have taken the time to be here today to support me. I have been blessed with opportunities in both Public Service and the private sector to work in a wide range of areas of the law and policy. Working with topnotch lawyers in law and practice, i learned about law and lawyering. I had the opportunity to manage litigation concerning a Broad Spectrum of legal issues. My heart has always been in Public Service, where i spent the majority of my career. My love of Public Service dates back to my College Years when i Political Science at the university of minnesota. At college and law school i took every opportunity i could get to get government experience including my internship with senator grassley. My experience with the Justice Department was during the summer when i worked as an honors intern. Chairman grassley and senator ernst have discussed my professional biography, so i will not take up the committees time repeating it. It was an honor working with components across the department to craft policy solutions to the challenges they were facing. I am honored to be nominated as associate attorney general and im humbled by the opportunity to take on such a serious responsibility. I have deep admiration and respect for the department of justice, critical work, its tradition of independence, and for the dedicated Public Servants, lawyers, Law Enforcement officers, and many others who work across administrations. If confirmed, i will undertake my role with integrity, independence, and fidelity to constitutional principles. I will serve the department of justice, his client, the United States, and the Public Interest if im confirmed. I look forward to working with mr. Rosenstein if we are confirmed. Thank you for the opportunity to appear today, and i look forward to taking your questions. Sen. Grassley i will start the questioning. For the benefit of both republicans and democrats on the committee, we will take you in the order you were here when the gavel falls, and that for people who came later on, it will be according to how they arrived. I would also ask, including this chairman, not to take more than the seven minutes. If you have one second left when you can answer, start the last question you are going to ask, go ahead and ask the question at that point. I hope it that point the nominees will give a shorter answer. I hope that 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 weve got a lot of work to do today. I am going to start with mr. Rosenstein, but before i asked the three or four questions on this first point, the attorney general has announced that he will recuse from any existing or future investigations of any matter relating in any way to the campaigns for president of the United States. That would include any investigation into campaigns for president , and any communications with representatives of the russian government. The attorney general made clear that his announcement did not confirm the existence of any such investigation in accordance with department practice. In the event such an investigation were to take place, however, it would fall to the position you have been nominated for as Deputy Attorney general in light of the recusal. So 4 questions, you can take as long to answer, or short answers. I will do one at a time. Have you ever met with representatives of the russian government . [indiscernible] sen. Grassley push the button. Mr. Rosenstein over the course of my career from time to time ive spoken to lawyers from Foreign Countries and certainly there may have been russian officials there. I dont recall any such meetings, no. Sen. Grassley when were you first in contact with the attorney general about your nomination . Have you ever spoken to the attorney general on the question of russian contacts with president ial campaigns . Mr. Rosenstein my First Contact with attorney general sessions i believe was proximally november 28, when i received a phone call from him. I dont believe i had any direct contact with sen. Sessions prior to that date. And i had no conversations with attorney general sessions about that matter. Sen. Grassley about the russian contacts . Mr. Rosenstein correct. Sen. Grassley is there any basis on which you would not be able to handle such these investigations, given that the attorney general sessions has announced his intention to recuse . Mr. Rosenstein senator, im not aware of any. I should tell you, since im not involved in a matter, i dont know what, if any investigation is currently ongoing in the department. If i were confirmed, i would need to familiarize myself with the facts, i would need to consult with experts in the department. We a context set of rules and statutes that govern recusals. So im not aware of any requirement to recuse at this time, but as a lawyer, senator, i would have to know what it is im refusing from, and as a department of justice official i would have to rely on the advice i got from career staff. We have got folks who are trained to do just that. Sen. Grassley i hope this next question is not an impossible one. How would you handle such an investigation . Have you ever discussed with the attorney general appointment of a special prosecutor to handle such an investigation . Mr. Rosenstein well, how i would handle manifestation is the way i would handle any investigation. As far as im concerned, every investigation conducted by the department of justice is an independent investigation. We prosecute tens of thousands of people every year and every one of those defendants deserves an independent prosecutor. I would be certain that we have independent investigators to conduct those investigations along with Law Enforcement agents who are trained to conduct investigations in an appropriate way and comply with the statutes, the regulations, constitutions, policies of Law Enforcement agencies. That is the way i would do that with regard to the special counsel and other cases. This is the issue du jour on capitol hill but i anticipate we will have a lot of matters over time and i would approach them the same way. I would evaluate the facts and the law and consider the applicable regulations, consult with career professionals, and that exercise might just judgment if i were acting attorney general, if i were providing my best advice to the attorney general if you are not recused as to the right course of action. Sen. Grassley i would like to go to ms. Brand and your work at the chamber of commerce. When you worked there, your client was that chamber. In that capacity you sign 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 . Ms. Brand sure, senator grassley, i would be happy to. As you say, as a lawyer, i spent my career in public practice representing clients and more of my career in Public Service of one type or another. Just as when i was at a law firm from when i was at the chamber of commerce, i had a client, the chamber of commerce. As a litigator there, my job was to file a lawsuit on behalf of the client. If im confirmed to this position, i will have a very different role, a different client. My client will be the United States and my goal will be to serve the Public Interest of the department of justice, representing that client as best i can. That is a rule im very comfortable with. I spent more of my career in Public Service that private practice and i would be honored to take on that role if im confirmed. Sen. Grassley back to mr. Rosenstein. You served as associate counsel and you referred to your experience in the department. You are familiar with the role of independent counsels and special prosecutors and federal investigations. Appointment of a special counsel requires both that there is evidence of a crime or wrongdoing, and that the department is unable to handle the matter fairly. Is that right, as you see it . Mr. Rosenstein generally that is correct. I believe what you are referred to is the regulation of special counsels as opposed to the independent counsel statute, which sunsetted in 1999. It would require a determination by the attorney general or acting attorney general whether pursuit of a criminal matter is warranted, and that the Public Interest justifies the appointment of a special counsel. Sen. Grassley ok, let me ask the question but i think you just 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 . Mr. Rosenstein whatever it is, senator, and there are various formulations of this, as mentioned in the introduction, i was specially designated by attorney general holder to conduct a special investigation. I was not technically special counsel in that. The bottom line is that it is my job to make sure that all investigations are conducted independently, and whether it is a law or statute or some other mechanism, i would ensure that every investigation is conducted independently. Sen. Grassley my time is up. I have 2 more points on that but i will do that in the second round. Senator feinstein. Sen. Feinstein mr. Rosenstein, earlier this year the entire United States Intelligence Community made public its assessment that Vladimir 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 the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, on it for 16 years. I have followed this closely, i had the gang of 8 briefings, and i feel very certain that the reports of the Intelligence Community 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 . Mr. Rosenstein im certainly familiar with the issue from media accounts. Ive not read any classified report concerning it because it is not within my responsibility as u. S. Attorney for maryland. I dont believe ive read the unclassified report. I believe ive read summaries in the media. Sen. Feinstein well, im going to ask that you do that before your nomination comes up, if it does come on the floor. We read those reports . Mr. Rosenstein i think, senator, if i were to become Deputy Attorney general would be essential for me to read those reports, probably the classified as well. If there is such a report i dont think im authorized to do that sen. Feinstein well, what dont you find out . You are number two now you will be number two. Mr. Rosenstein it is important and im glad you are raising it because the media reports have created confusion about that. Im attorney for maryland and i have no role sen. Feinstein i understand. It is my fault. I misspoke. Thank you. Let me go to the question of special counsel. I mentioned in my opening remarks that when Valerie Plames covert identity was revealed by someone in the bush white house, attorney general ashcroft recused himself, and thenDeputy Attorney general comey promptly assigned Patrick Fitzgerald to be prosecutor. Now, given the refusal by the attorney general, and the intense political interest in this matter, and the strong potential that the investigation will in fact involved individuals associated with the white house, it would seem that this situation also rises to the level of extraordinary circumstances that warrant a special counsel under the regulations. Given all of this, and the heightened level of distrust on all sides, do you support the appointment of an independent special counsel to look into these matters . Mr. Rosenstein my understanding of this, again, based solely on media accounts, is that at least one of your colleagues called for a special counsel for something related to this matter while attorney general lynch was an office in early january, and she rejected the request, and based on the media accounts, i believe she said exactly what i said, that she had confidence in the career professionals of the department. She had an additional piece of information. She presumably knows the facts, and i didnt come and she rejected the request. We currently have an acting attorney general for this matter, dana boente, appointed by president obama. If there were need for a special counsel, he currently has full authority to appoint one. I dont know what this point if attorney general lynch or acting Deputy Attorney general boente are right or wrong, but i wouldnt be in a position to overrule them without having access to the facts that are the basis of their decisions. Sen. Feinstein so im trying to figure out what your bottom line is. I interpret that as a no. Is that fair . Mr. Rosenstein well, i dont know, senator. I am not in a position to answer the question because i dont know the answer that they know, the folks who are in the position to make that decision, and when i am in that position i dont presume that attorney general lynch and acting Deputy Attorney general boente are correct. I have a lot of respect for them, but if im determined they are mistaken, i would overrule them. Sen. Feinstein thank you. Ms. Brand, if i may, while at the National Chamber litigation center, you lead litigation directed against regulations to protect workers rights and the environment. The president has now issued 2 executive orders aimed squarely at eliminating regulations. The first requires the 2 federal regulations be identified for elimination for every new regulation. The second requires regulatory taskforces in each agency to make recommendations on repealing, replacing, and modifying existing regulations. As you may know, not all of the rules required by doddfrank has been finalized, or fully implemented, despite the fact that it has been nearly seven years since it became law. By one measurement, over 100 rules still remain to be finalized. Nearly one third of all the rules required by doddfrank. It is concerning to me that these rules may not be proposer finalized at all under the regulatory position of this administration, simply because there arent hundreds of others found to offset. What is the legal justification for arbitrarily failing to issue a regulation called for under law simply because there arent 2 regulations on the books to eliminate . Ms. Brand thank you, senator feinstein. I am aware of these executive orders generally. I have not studied them as i am not yet in the department. With respect to the executive order ordering a review of regulations on the books, my recollection is that president obama issued something similar during his term in office. Ive not study the results of that study. I have not studied it but i any of regulatory action taken by any agency of the requirements of the asinistrative procedure act to the interplay between the apa thosee executive order, decisions fall in the first instance to the regulatory agencies themselves. Thank you very much. Senator hatch let me first say that i agree with you that there is no legitimate basis for asking the attorney general to appear before this committee. Skipping that stuff of fairness makes it look like this is more about publicity and partisan fostering than anything else. At least it looks that way. Responding to written questions after his hearing the attorney herral stated if he met rows where he believed his impartiality was being questioned he would consult with the Department Ethics officials regarding the most appropriate way to proceed. That is exactly what he did. I wish i could say the same thing about his predecessor. My democratic friends have nothing to say about that. This double standard makes it at least look like arts and politics. The politicizing the Justice Department. Direct employers, have Great Respect for each of you. Rosenstein is familiar to us and i think he is wellqualified. Let me ask you this question, i am the sponsor of the dna acts. It will allow the use of rapid Dna Technology to help analyze crimes, exonerate the interest, if you support the effort to allow dna samples collected and analyzed with use of rapid Dna Technology to be included in the national dna database as you describe it sounds like it would be a valuable tool. Their best able to do their job keeping us safe. Dna has been used effectively to catch dangerous criminals, rapists in particular. Innocent persons. Im concerned about the lack of transparency and federally funded relief programs. Individuals are released without paying any [video clip] bail on a promise to return to court and to meet these conditions of a pretrial program. Return, theyd to become fugitives and the taxpayers have to pay the price [video clip] for billions in unpaid bills. Rightoduced the citizens to know act. What is your assessment of the program . Im not familiar with those challenges. In the cases ive supervised we make every effort if something makes a significant effort. Some is available for pretrial release. It is important to make sure in either case of cap them available for court when the court date comes. Your here is part of the constitutionally prescribed process. Nominates that it cannot point a point without the advice of the senate. A student a few years ago when the previous president attempted to appoint officials without senate consent. When we were in session and recess we he wanted to bypass the requirements. In your capacity with u. S. Chamber litigation center, you finally brief arguing he exceeded his power under the constitution. The Supreme Court and immensely helped that those were unconstitutional. Yes. Abide by the limits of the constitution. But the limits of the constitution, i think it is important for every officer in the united or Regulatory Agency to stay within the bounds of the authority granted to them by the constitution. I think that divided orernmental power should ly 2008 you advocated against over federalizing justices. They are also questioning against over criminalized behavior. Ive long been a proponent where criminal intent requirement is a threat of criminal code. What are your thoughts about a default criminal intent requirement . Attend legislation has been , i certainly do think that it is important to have a thank you. Thats all i have today. You has given to the federal government in the citizens of this country, thank you. Recall there was a place to be more interested into your testimony especially i you said you dont feel the need to invite the attorney general. Did not even attempt to mislead response to my question. Concerning what the russians appeared to be doing to us i do feel you should bring him back. Ining mention this watched you both being sworn in and over my years i have watched hundreds of people being sworn in. You memorize it, i am sure you have. Many of the people have testified so far this year, they have fallen short of this in their misleading testimony and it only came to light after the press reported on. Will you commit to me that in the event you find a need to clarify your answers before this committee, you do so immediately and not wait until the press calls you on it . If you have my opportunity to be on the side of the table, we make every effort to answer your questions fully. , and you were to go back witnesses have, they found something and they let us know. Youommit to do that before have to be forced to do it . Yes. Yes. I recall i was not in it the as a young prosecutor when Elliot Richardson was asked the same questions before this Committee Area the nominee for attorney general in 1973. Appointsed he would independent prosecutors if saying it was necessary to create enough to create the maximum degree you need. He did that before the committee finished hearing. The Democratic National committee, their efforts to influence our election. Continuing efforts in this country. Just as serious as watergate. Agreed that you agree that accessing a Computer Network without authorization and obtaining and disseminating documents illegal under federal law . Thank you. I agree with senator feinstein. Read it full report, the public the public one and see with russian interference in the election. Undermine. Nded to q agree that investigating what russia has done is a matter of extraordinary import . Importance . Details of anyhe investigations but i can assure you that it is america against russia or america against every other country everyone in this room knows which side i am on. Would you also agree that the have to havele confidence in it . It is critical for them to have confidence in the integrity of our concert in the integrity. Suppose your conducting an investigation and you find it leads to medications under your own boss. Ragesyou agree that that challenges . Es isuestion of interference one of the worst things i have seen in my years in the senate. I spent a lot of time about this. The attorney general, he has refused himself. The white house seems to be meddling in investigations. Discuss with anyone from the administration or connected to the president whether you were confirmed . I have had new condition with the white house at all about that issue nor vacation with the attorney general. Nor with the attorney general. Are you willing to appoint a special counsel to investigate russian interference . Im willing to appoint a special counsel whenever i determine it is appropriate. I would ask you to go back what elegant richardson said. Thank you. Said thatent has president Obama Wiretapped his phones. The trump tower phones. Does the president have that authority . Ive no information about that other than what i have read in the newspaper. If i were the attorney general my office does the president s have the unilateral authority to wiretap phones . I dont know the details and im reluctant as a lawyer to comment on that in a criminal investigation. Answer would certainly be no. Reason i ask, i would assume that if the president is not telling the truth congratulations on your nomination. I think you are both exactly the answer to the chaotic times we are living in. Im a little confused by my colleagues statements today. Investigationn there is an investigation ongoing by the Senate Intelligence committee. A bipartisan investigation that chairman of birth and vice chairman warner have authorized. I think that is the appropriate place for that investigation. A select committee or some sort of media circus. I also am puzzled that mr. Rosenstein has appropriately been praised for his reputation as as a professional prosecutor and somebody whose integrity is beyond reproach, but my colleagues asked if you will advocate those responsibilities without knowing the evidence, and appoint a special counsel. I think you have answered the questions appropriately, and i have confidence that you will apply the proper standards once you actually are confirmed. And then i hear some of my colleagues talking about the importance of getting the Justice Department on track, and yet then claiming they are going to block your nomination because of their concern about some other collateral matters. I just want to ask you, this mr. Rosenstein, you pointed out earlier and it bears repeating that you were appointed by the Obama Administrations attorney general holder to oversee an investigation of leaks of classified information. Is that correct . Mr. Rosenstein yes, that is correct. The only thing i can describe is the of, the investigation because we do not discuss matters beyond what is in the public record. The outcome of that investigation was that general James Cartwright admitted he had made false statements in an investigation into alleged unlawful disclosures. Senator i was just that if you have the sensitivity to conduct the investigation i believe you are eminently qualified for this position and you will conduct yourself with a similar professionalism and integrity. Ms. Brand, congratulations on your appointment, and you have been before the committee himbeen before the committee him several times in different capacities. I wanted to ask you in particular about your role on the privacy and Civil Liberties oversight board. As you know, congress will have the responsibility of looking at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act reauthorization for section 702. We have got another set of intelligence gathering tools which will be considered this year, and when you are confirmed you will be playing a role in that. Could you just described for the public generally what sort of oversight and protections that are part and parcel of these Law Enforcement and intelligencegathering tools . Because sometimes i think people lose that, and it is important for people to understand that there are oversight from all three branches of government, and a concern that we all have about privacy rights is protected by that sort of oversight. Ms. Brand thank you, senator cornyn. I thought about this and i have written about this in my individual capacity. Which oversight mechanisms apply depend on which authority youre talking about, and these are complex matters, and i hesitate to brush with Broad Strokes on something so complex, but as a general matter, take fisa, there is oversight by all three branches, at a typical application, there is extensive work done inside the executive branch. And there is judicial oversight and oversight by the committee that you sit on. For certain programs, theres oversight of intelligence agencies. There is involvement by the Inspector General in some cases. There is involvement by the board i formerly sat on, the pclob. If any on circumstances, there could be levels of oversight. I think that is appropriate. Senator cornyn i appreciate the complexity of talking about it from a 30,000foot level, but it is important for the public to understand there are a number of Legal Protections and oversight responsibilities that protect privacy rights, while at the same time preserving essential Law Enforcement and intelligencegathering tools. I believe director comey has called section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act the crowns jewels of the Intelligence Community. It strikes me it would be a travesty and it would be dangerous if for some Reason Congress failed in its responsibility to reauthorize such an important lawenforcement and intelligencegathering tool because of misguided concerns unsupported concerns about lack of adequate oversight and protection. So that is going to be an important part of the discussions. I think the House Judiciary Committee is having a hearing on that today, or certainly this week. We look forward to your contribution as we try to strike right balance. Thank you both for your service, and i look forward to supporting her nominations. Mr. Rosenstein thank you. Senator durbin my friend from texas raises the question about delay in filling these positions. Jim cole was held up 400 days before he was confirmed. Another nominee to be associate attorney general was held up for almost a year. He never received a floor vote and ultimately withdrew his nomination. I trust you will be treated more professionally by this committee. Let me ask questions about this issue of the russian involvement. Mr. Rosenstein, i respect the fact that you have not read this report, but it is 15 pages long and on the internet and not classified. I want to read several paragraphs and put in perspective why we are asking these questions today, because what you have learned from this report two months ago is historic. It is a cyber attack on the United States of america like none we have ever seen before. I quote from our agencies russian interference represents the most recent expression to undermine democratic order, but these activities demonstrate an escalation in the level of activity compared to previous operations. Intelligence agency say we assess russian president Vladimir Putin ordered and influenced the campaign in 2016 and at the u. S. President ial election. Russian goals were to undermine public faith. Also to denigrate secretary clinton. Putin and the government developed a preference for President Trump. This was not put out by the Democratic National committee. This was published by our intelligence agencies. It is the reason many of us believe this is not like an ordinary investigation by the department of justice. This is historic. It is always critical when it comes to filling these appointments, but this is an historic constitutional moment in our history. I would like ask you, mr. Rosenstein, will you commit that if you are confirmed you will not impede any justice appointments, but this is an Department Investigation into russian efforts to influence the 2016 u. S. President ial election . Mr. Rosenstein i can assure you that you and i are on the same side. I will support any properly predicated investigation related to interference by anybody else or the russians in American Elections. Senator durbin attorney general sessions was asked the same question at his hearing and he would not make that same commitment. Second question will you inform theromptly American People if the department of justice closes or declines to pursue an investigation into russian interference in the American Election . Mr. Rosenstein i have been a prosecutor for 27 years, and our response ability is to collect the responsibility is to collect the information and pursue the case in court. In this particular one i would need to consult with the director of the fbi and the Intelligence Community for i would make commit its about what would be the outcome of such an investigation. Senator durbin im asking if you would report that to the American People . Mr. Rosenstein i do not want to make any commitment at the conclusion of an investigation without knowing the details. Talking with the director of the fbi. I can assure you that if it is appropriate to release it to the public i would. Senator durbin you pledged to continue to pursue an investigation into russian interference in the 2016 election or any other potential russia has made to undermine our political system . Mr. Rosenstein if there is an investigation and it is properly predicated and is a basis for an investigation, i would support it. Senator durbin that is another question that senator sessions refused to answer. I would like to ask a question have you had an opportunity to read the wording in his recusal in his letter he sent to this committee . Mr. Rosenstein i am familiar with it from media accounts. I was busy with your colleagues yesterday. I know i did not read it yesterday, but i am generally familiar with it. Senator durbin what he said thursday, i have now decided to recuse myself from any existence existing or future investigations relating to the president of the United States. This is a partial recusal. When it comes to you into russian influence when it comes to President Trump and his associates. This does not extend to postelection russian contacts with the truck transition team. But yet, the letter which the committee sent says in its final paragraph and i read, the march 3 2017 letter, which many of us sent to said,ey general sessions i had not recuse myself from russian context contact with the russian with the Trump Administration. I understand the recusal would rate recusal and include any such matter. Do you believe this recusal now would affect any russian contacts with the Trump Transition Team or administration . Mr. Rosenstein i am familiar with the policies and regulations, and they are more complicated than you might think because we are governed by the general governmentwhite conflict of interest revisions in title v, the code of federal regulations. Were also governed by a statute in title 28 that applied to the department of justice under the code of federal regulations. As lawyers, we are governed by bars. It is important for us to consult with your professionals, and it is important to understand what we tell our people is when you refuse there is the perception you have done anything wrong, but you refuse because the issue justifies your recusal. If i were confirmed, i would certainly make sure that if the attorney general were recruits recused, i would not discuss the matter with them and i would not have discussed the matter with him. Senator durbin thank you, but that is not my question. I want to give you the time to do it properly, because this is an important matter and i know you are an excellent attorney. I want to give you the official recusal by attorney general sessions of last week in his letter which he sent to this committee and ask you for clearly as to the scope of the recusal. I want to know how you read it in light of these and i want you to do it properly and professionally. Mr. Rosenstein i do not know how i would have a basis for evaluating that without having access to the information. I presume the attorney general consulted with professionals who knew the facts, and if i become the Deputy Attorney general and i believe that is not a recusal, i will consult with him. If i were to read it today, i would only know what you knew. I would not know what is the nature of the investigation. I would not be the position to comment on whether it is adequate. But i do know the people in the department who make these decisions. These are nonpartisan career fowlkes. I believe they would have made a good effort to appropriate mr. Rosenstein senator durbin i am not asking about the process. I am asking you how you read his own words. Mr. Chairman, i yield. Senator leahy. Senator lee thank you for being here. We have got strong Public Servants who are willing to offer their service even in difficult jobs. Ms. Brand, in 2008 you wrote a memorandum that was published by the heritage foundation. You approach the topic of the overfederalization of criminal law. One of the things you wrote was trimming back the federal criminal code by eliminating defenses that should be investigated and prosecution by the state has been a goal of policy experts and Good Government advocates. This exercise and federalism is worthwhile for its constitutional merits and its effect on government accountability. This coupled with the fact that in one answer a few minutes ago you managed to put in a plug for restoring federalism and separation of powers won me ove because ir and separation of powers has caused problems, that by their nature, they are law and order kinds of concerns. They are constitutional concerns, and they get to this point of accountability. Would you agree with me if i took what you wrote in there and said that could be applied to basically every instance, not just in criminal law, but given that the position you will be involved in will be dealing primarily with several issues . Federalism and separation of powers are important, and every time we drift away from them, weather in the context of criminal law or a civil matter, we are limiting accountability in government. Ms. Brand i think the department of justice should be governed by them. I think the constitutionally radiantly divided government for the protection of individual liberties. So yes, i absolutely agree with you. Senator lee given that you will be overseeing the civil dedicating components of the department, when is it appropriate for the department to decide not to defend a particular federal law . What is the standard you think ought to be applied there . If you are talking about ms. Arebrand well, if you congress, itact of is appropriate to defend that when a reasonable argument can be made. Senator lee and that has its roots in the separation of powers. Ms. Brand yes. Senator lee mr. Rosenstein, one topic that has, involves prosecutor euro that prosecutorial discretion. This is a discussion that i discussed with attorney general lynch and with attorney general sessions when each of them came through this committee. Do you think the government should exercise prosecutorial discretion on a casebycase basis, or is this something that the government can decide to apply as a more general matter based on policy considerations . Mr. Rosenstein that is a difficult question. The answer is a little bit of both. Where we have general guidelines, the department of justice is currently governed by the attorney generals prosecution guidelines they are in the manual. And they establish a general criteria in all cases that prosecutors ought to look to in determining whether to bring a particular case, and one of the factors is federal Law Enforcement priors. On a high level, a determination needs to be made what are our priorities, what are the factors whether to prosecute that case . It is a combination of policy judgments about where to focus resources and ultimately in every case needs to be an individualized determination about whether the facts in that case justify prosecution. Senator lee thank you. With respect to admitte minimum mandatory sentences, you have been fairly conservative or cautious about how you charge involving minimum mandatory sentences. We do not have enough time to go into detail there. Can you talk about your offices practices regarding these mandatories . Mr. Rosenstein we comply with the policies concerning when to use mandatory minimum sentences, and there are many cases we deal with that involve extraordinarily dangerous people who deserve to be sent to prison for lengthy periods of time. In those cases, we apply the mandatory penalties that are available to us. Using a mandatory minimum penalty results in cooperation from that defendant, and if we do that, that is one of the ways we are able to help our local colleagues. In baltimore and other cities, we were able to break this noswitching code that is such a problem with violent gangs in many of our cities. We are able to break that by catching a defendant who has committed a serious crime, holding them accountable, and offering them the opportunity to provide information about other crimes he knows. And using that power were able to break the backs of sundays final gangs. Violentme of these gangs. It is important we have this penalties available to us in appropriate cases. We need to take into consideration whether any particular case it would be excessive, and there are cases we have discretion under part under department policies, and we use the mandatory penalties only when they are justified. Senator lee thank you. I want to talk about civil Asset Forfeiture. Equitable sharing is a program that the department suspended in december 2015. That program was resuscitated a few months later in 2016. Will you consider making changes to or possibly even andy equitable sharing where equitable sharing in the civil Asset Forfeiture context is used to circumvent laws used to restrict forfeiture by officials . Mr. Rosenstein i would consider changing the policies. I would be reluctant to commit to terminating the policy. It is a tool available to us, and inappropriate cases we need to use the tools available to us. Senator many attorneys general have defended department of justice from political interference restricting contacts between doj and the white house to a select few officials. What will be the policy in this administration . Mr. Rosenstein i believe the policy is and will be that communications with the white house concerning cases, that is the most sensitive matter, need to be cleared through the office of the deputy. That was the policy when i worked for in deputy in 1993, and that is important that it is important to understand it is a single point of contact senator and the white house . Mr. Rosenstein anybody could call. They are not going to get an answer. Senator isnt the role that they should not even call . Mr. Rosenstein the rule is the call should be between the white house that he council and the Deputy Attorney general. Recited. And you are prepared to enforce this as Deputy Attorney general . Mr. Rosenstein usually it is a congressional staffer who does not know the rules. It is important we circulate that. We need to know the rules. And the white house needs to know the rules. Mr. Rosenstein of course. Why is it that prosecutors not reveal information about individuals who have not been charged with an offense . Mr. Rosenstein that speaks for itself. Senator i would like to hear you say it. Mr. Rosenstein my kind is Robert Jackson, the attorney general of the United States, who gave a speech that still stands as the best circulation of the principles of the federal prosecutor, on april 1, 1940, and he explained that is the most significant power of the prosecutor and subject to abuse, that we need to refrain from disparaging people unless it is justified. We charge somebody with a crime we charge somebody with a crime and it is a program to introduce evidence against them in court, we do it. If we do not charge them with a crime, we have a responsibility not to disparage them. Senator and even if you do charge, you do not divulge derogatory information . Mr. Rosenstein we do, senator. Senator in 2010 it was just to the office of Legal Counsel attorneys do not owe a duty of candor to their clients, that is equivalent to the duty of candor that workaday attorneys are held to in court proceedings. I understand that the department of justice has since corrected that and that olc attorneys are treated as being held to a duty of candor equivalent to that of workaday attorneys in court. What duty of candor will you hold olc attorneys to in their performance of their functions . Ms. Derosas theme senator, i am not familiar with that issue. Rosenstein senator, i am not familiar with that issue. It is an ethical rule governing lawyers. I would certainly enforce that. Senator whitehouse we will follow that up in the record. Did the departments civil case against the Tobacco Industry years ago have merit, and was it an appropriate use of the departments authority . Mr. Rosenstein i do not know the answer to that question. I apologize. Im not familiar with it. It may or may not be. I certainly recall reading about it. If i get the job, a lot of areas i am in a next for him areas i am not, and i regret i am not familiar with the details of that. I cannot comment on whether or whether or not it was an appropriate use of authority. Senator whitehouse the holding is that corporations do not have the right to fraudulent speech . Mr. Rosenstein that is a matter of law. Senator whitehouse do you know if the department of justice is looking into connections between russia and the Trump Campaign . Mr. Rosenstein i do not. Many of you may know more than i do. I do not know the answer to that. Senator whitehouse if there were, if the content between the content of the communications between russian officials and trump surrogates be relevant to such an investigation . Rosenstein it may be. I do not know the details. Im not in a position to comment. Senator whitehouse it would be relevant, what is not . Mr. Rosenstein yes. Senator whitehouse and communications between russia and the Trump Campaign be relevant . Mr. Rosenstein we conduct thorough criminal investigations. So, i can assure you of our investigators and prosecutors determined that information was relevant to an investigation, we would get that information. Senator whitehouse you understand those answers make attorney general sessions a likely witness in any such investigation . Mr. Rosenstein i do not, senator, but i understand the attorney general has recused, and i will not discuss it with him. Senator whitehouse with respect to discussing ongoing investigations, do you agree if all the shop windows are broken on main street, it is appropriate for the police chief to announce that he has to get to the bottom of it and to assure the public that Law Enforcement will respond . Mr. Rosenstein circumstantial evidence, unless there were a hurricane, yes. Senator whitehouse and if there were public awareness, it is incumbent upon Law Enforcement to ensure the public that it will go about its duties and take what steps are necessary to enforce the law, and people do that all the time . Mr. Rosenstein yes, yes we do. Senator whitehouse is not the public report on Russian Election manipulation the equivalent of broken windows on main street . Doesnt the American Public now understand there has been a very significant piece of damage done to our election process by a Foreign Government as a result of that report . Mr. Rosenstein i believe you and i are on the same side. If the russians interfered with American Elections, then i am on the american side. Senator whitehouse and it is appropriate for you when you have that information to assure the American Public that it will be appropriately investigated and that there is in fact investigations taking place . Mr. Rosenstein the complication here senator is that there has been repeated reference to i do not knowat anything about. One of the challenges we face with foreign hacking is we need to figure out who is responsible for it. Governmenteign issue, a Law Enforcement issue . Senator whitehouse the question whether the department of justice is conducting an investigation is one that is appropriate for the justice to answer, correct . Mr. Rosenstein yes, absolutely. Senator i want to thank senator kennedy for letting me cut the line. Did you read about President Trumps tweets regarding his assertion that president obama was involved in monitoring his campaign at trump tower . Mr. Rosenstein i read about the tweets of the weekend. What was your reaction . I do not think it is appropriate for me to share that. It has no bearing on my work to comment. If the president gives me that, it is my job. If the president is exercising his First Amendment rights, that is on my issue. Senator do you think that is an appropriate thing to do . Let me just say, yes, and we will. If there was a warrant issued regarding Trump Campaign manager and russian context, would you in your job know about that werent request and whether or ot it was issued . Mr. Rosenstein i would hope prospectively it would. I do not know if it would be appropriate for me to review senator are you telling me that as the deputy you would not know if the department of justice of applied for a warrant . Mr. Rosenstein i hope i would. Senator graham i hope you would, too. Are you familiar with the fisa court . Would you tell us if you it request was made to the fisa court to monitor Trump Campaign activity with the russians . Mr. Rosenstein i presume i would be able to. Whether it would be appropriate for me to do so would be another question. Senator graham why would it not be appropriate . Mr. Rosenstein i do not know, senator. I am not familiar with the statute. I would need to consult with other entities. Senator graham there are three ways this could have been done. You have gotten a warrant to the normal process. Ift would have been lawful the judge granted it, right . Mr. Rosenstein we do that all the time. Senator graham you have a fisa court which is different, but it is the same . Mr. Rosenstein correct. Senator graham the third would be president obama wiretapping the Trump Campaign do you know if he would have the ability to do that without a fisa warrant or without a warrant from a federal judge in a criminal investigation . Mr. Rosenstein no, i do not. Senator graham in fact, he could not. No president can just say unilaterally, go wiretap that u. S. Citizen. Right . Without Court Approval. Youre not just a lawyer. You are going to be the Deputy Attorney general of the United States. Mr. Rosenstein i am a lawyer, but if somebody senator graham tell me how the president of the United States could unilaterally wiretap an american citizen, an american company, and American Campaign for president without some Court Approval . Mr. Rosenstein my answer is i would hope and agree that that would not happen. Senator graham yeah. Ok. Are you familiar with these executive orders regarding the daca kids that president obama issued . Mr. Rosenstein only by reading it in the newspaper. Senator graham do you know if it was constitutional or not. Mr. Rosenstein i do not. Senator graham all right, the executive order was to give legal status to these kids. Can you give us any idea whether or not you think that falls within the president s prosecutor neil discretion prosecutorial discretion . Mr. Rosenstein it would not be appropriate for me to comment that might be litigated, and i would have to consult with the appropriate experts in the department and reach a legal conclusion about what judgment to take. I would not prejudge a case like that prior to or apart from the context of a in my capacity as Deputy Attorney general. Senator graham if there is an investigation there would be two stages. Mr. Rosenstein yes. Senator graham you would want the person not making the decision of this position. Is that correct . Mr. Rosenstein you would want independent advice, yes. Senator graham can you assure this committee if there is such an investigation that would make sure the investigators are advised by professional lawyer by the department of justice who is independent, even during the gathering of facts . Mr. Rosenstein i view it as as my responsibility to make sure that every case was investigated independently. Senator graham is it true that the current to the attorney general could appoint a special counsel if they believe that is appropriate . Mr. Rosenstein that is correct. Senator graham and that person is appointed by president obama. Mr. Rosenstein dana boente. Senator graham when the subject of the investigation has a political bent to it, do you believe you could do that job even though you have been appointed by this president . Mr. Rosenstein absolutely, senator, and we have policies regarding refusals, but my office in the district of maryland in 1972, a republican u. S. Attorney prosecuted the republican president and Vice President of the United States. So i believe i certainly do. Senator graham so you believe all of your time before taking this job has prepared you for that moment of that moment of her comes . Rosenstein i certainly hope so, senator. Graham do you believe or do you have an opinion if we need sentencing reform . Mr. Rosenstein it is always appropriate to evaluate tools available and to ensure they are being used properly and whether or not there are additional tools they need or tools are divided that perhaps you should take away. It is appropriate for that be an ongoing process. Senator graham thank you. Senator thank you. Ms. Brand, you have a good choice of colleges in minnesota. Thank you for that. I wanted to start with something important to me because my dad was a journalist, and that is freedom of the press. I raise this issue with the attorney general. He said he was still reviewing the regulations. Yet in 2015, the attorney general revised the departments rules for when federal prosecutors can subpoena journalists or their records and committed to releasing a report on subpoenas issued and charges against journalists. The previous two attorneys general promise to not put journalists in jail for doing their jobs. First of all, what are your views on the standards that attorney general holder put forwarding and were upheld during Loretta Lynch is tenure . Ms. Brand that freedom of the press is one of the freedoms enshrined in the constitution. I am aware of those guidelines, but i confess since i have not been in department in about 10 years i have not studied them. I understand they heightened the standard which were already relatively strict in terms of the circumstances in which the department could subpoena a journalist. They require highlevel approval. Senator klobuchar would you uphold those standards . Ms. Brand that would be under the purview of the deputy. I hate to throw him under the bus. I cannot commit to you because it is not going to be my decision. Senator then i will go to you, mr. Rosenstein. Rosenstein i apologize, i thought rachel was going to ask that. Would you please restate that . Senator klobuchar the question is about a yes or no answer on the standards that the attorney general put forward to revise the freedom of the press, when subpoenas can be given to journalists for their records . Mr. Rosenstein i am familiar with those rules, and they been modified, and it is important to determine to revisit our policies to make sure we get it right because sometimes we find out we did not have it right the last time. As a general proposition, i think those rules and if you wanted a yes or no answer, i apologize but it is a balancing. I would not rule out somebody thought it was appropriate to take a look at them. Senator klobuchar you would leave the rules in place . Mr. Rosenstein im not aware of any plan to revisit them. Senator klobuchar over the weekend news reports say comey called on the white house to publicly reject the recent assertion that president obama ordered the wiretapping of the phones and trump tower during last years campaign. My question is, in a situation where the president the united tes makes it an effectual makes it a factual statement and later it is determined to not be correct, what is the responsibility of the Justice Department to set the record straight. Vista rosenstein i cannot answer that in a hypothetical way. It was not my understanding that it was a comment on the Justice Department investigation. Maybe it was. I was somewhat distracted this weekend with other issues. I am familiar with the tweets. What i would do in any situation what that was talk to the fbi director, jim coming, and certainly consider his views and make in independent determination about what to do under the circumstances. Senator klobuchar it would be your call to make that decision and not the director of the fbi . Mr. Rosenstein since i do not know what decision what i have read purports to be leaks that may or may not have occurred, so i do not know what protocol was. I would anticipate the fbi reports to the Deputy Attorney general and mr. Comey was the director, so that would be my responsibility. Senator klobuchar are you aware that a citizen was wiretapped without a proper warrant . Mr. Rosenstein not on my watch. Senator klobuchar are you aware of a time that probable cause existed . Mr. Rosenstein not only watch. Senator klobuchar in your statements and you and senator durbin went back and forth that at some point you said if russia interfered and i know you have not read that 17page report that we are all the public report that the 17 agencies put out youre basically putting you rself i bet you have not have been many reporters here it is because you will essentially be putting yourself in his. Shoes. So, i am just asking that you read that report said that i can ask you the same question that i asked our nowattorney general sessions and that is whether or not he believed there was any reason to doubt that and he said doubt it. No reason to mr. Rosenstein i should clarify, as a lawyer maybe im sometimes too careful with my words. I have no reason to doubt the Intelligence Community. As a prosecutor the issue is, what can i prove in court which may be different from what i believe. But i have reason to doubt the conclusions. Senator klobuchar i appreciate your statement where he said he looked at things, what can i do, what should i do, and how do we explain things, cause way too much of this administration so far has been whether the refugee order, it is about explaining things. Instead of first asking whats the right thing to do and what can i legally do. And so that is where i want to get if in fact you, in this matter or any other matter, and up appointing a special consulate special counsel, but in this matter you would be the one to make the decision. Anyw says the scope of special counsel investigation would likely be determined by the acting attorney general for the purpose of the investigation. How would you define the scope of any investigation . It also says you could overrule a special counsels decision. When would you be willing to overrule a special counsels of authority . The question is, under the rule, how would you define the scope and in fact when would you be willing to overrule. A completeein answer to your question what take a lot of time. I dont want to along the hearing. They dont care, its fine. [laughter] there was an statute. We pointed we appointed special counsel. Under current law, every special counsel we appointed is answerable to the attorney general. This was of course true in the watergate era. Archibald cox was tired. I would say whatever authority was appropriate to make sure he or she had the full range of the full to conduct range of the investigation that is justified just as we do with all other matters under investigation. Good afternoon. Mr. Rosenstein, can we agree that there is a difference with aninterfering election and actually changing the outcome of an election . Mr. Rosenstein that is not an issue with in my jurisdiction, if somebody interferes would potentially be a crime whether it had an effect on the outcome or not. You are running for office and a super pac runs ads criticizing you. The super pac would be interfering legally in your election. With those ads may not impact the outcome of your election. Do you see the distinction im trying to make . Mr. Rosenstein i do and i apologize. If somebody interferes lawfully that would not be a Law Enforcement issue. Mr. Kennedy you can lawfully and unlawfully interfere. Mr. Rosenstein if that is your definition, yes. Mr. Kennedy do you believe fresh interfered . Mr. Rosenstein that is the conclusion of the Intelligence Community. I have no reason to doubt that. Russianedy can we agree has interfered in past elections . Rosenstein i am not aware of that. Mr. Kennedy are you familiar with a branch of the kgb . That is who did it. 1968ou aware that in service a attempted to head off the election of Richard Nixon . Arethey offered to you aware in november of 1984 service a try to stop Ronald Reagan from being reelected . No personal knowledge of that, no. Are you aware that service a planted stories in the United States that former president kennedy was actually killed in a secret cia plot . I am certainly aware of some of the issues from the cold war era, senator but i do not recall those specific details. Senator kennedy well, can we agreed that russias interference, if any, in the election in november was not the first time it has try to do that . Rosenstein i certainly have no reason to doubt that. Senator kennedy well, lets get down to it. You are going to be in charge of this investigation. I want you to look me in the eye and tell me that you will do it right, you will take it to its conclusion, and you will report to the American People your results. Mr. Rosenstein senator, i would do every investigation within my authority right and the 115,000 employees and the department of justice would support me on that hand we would take it to the appropriate conclusion. The reporting aspect, senator, i dont know what that entails. There are a lot of agencies that have equities, not just the department of justice and i do not have experience with that i would have to rely on career officials. As you know, i highly value our responsibility to inform the American People to the extent we can. That is my default position. If we have a lawful basis, it reassures the public when they know what weve done and when we have done it. Senator kennedy let me rephrase the question, would you be willing to do what i just asked within the parameters of National Security . Mr. Rosenstein within the parameters of National Security and the law, yes. Senator kennedy i happen to the u. S. Attorney position as one of the most powerful, being president is more powerful. The attorneys job is to protect the American People. But at the same time, a u. S. Attorney can ruin somebodys life. Are you comfortable with the checks and balances that our u. S. Attorneys may . Mr. Rosenstein yes, i referred to a speech in the whole of justice in 1940 and that was addressed. I agree we do have significant power. Our assistant district attorneys have tremendous power handed this critical they utilize that responsibly. Senator kennedy let me ask you a question, ms. Brandt. I would like for you to talk to me about this. You have had experience in this area. Your personal philosophy on the intersection of National Security and privacy. Ms. Brandt thank you senator kennedy, that is really important question that i have spent quite a lot of time thinking about over the last few years. It is hard to talk about it in the abstract of course. Government is going to undertake for example a Surveillance Program and the National Security context it is critical for them to do it within the bounds of law. But also in the balance of what from a policy perspective in terms of protecting privacy interest. I think it is possible to account for both interests in every case but where the line is depends upon the circumstances. Ok. Doesnt the power of government scare you a little bit in terms of privacy rights . Just you as a citizen . I would say be power of government, i do not know if it scares me but i view the power of government to be considerable and intentionally concerning in virtually every area which is why it is important to have checks and balances, legal requirements, and oversight. Do you agree we have the proper checks and balances right now . That depends on the circumstances. I think in many areas, yes, whether they always work correctly is another question but i think the structure works well in the area i am familiar with. I want to thank you both for your willingness to serve. A q mr. Chairman. Thank you mr. Chairman. Congratulations to you both on your nominations. Im going to ask misbranded a question and ms. Rosenstein, you are free to space out on this one. I wanted to give him a moment to pause [laughter] close racket. Can you comment on President Trumps claim about president obama tapping his phone. Can a sitting resident just order a wiretap . Senator, i cannot comment on the comments because mr. Franken just into my question. Is that how it is done . And the president just order a wiretap . Ms. Brandt under fisa, a court order is required but i dont know any facts that underlie this so i am reluctant to comment on the hypothetical on that. Mr. Franken he has to get a pfizer order i believe and i suppose if you are a cat burglar and go through the airconditioning ducts, he couldve done it himself. Exactly eightin, weeks ago, this Committee Held a confirmation hearings for the attorney general. Former colleague, jeff general, now attorney sessions and i have different views about a lot of things but the purpose of a confirmation hearing is not to resolve differences of opinion on policy, it is to allow the people to decide for themselves through our exchanges are in the committee whether the nominee is qualified to serve. Hearing tor for the truly serve that purpose, nominees must answer questions honestly. That is why they swear an oath. Eight weeks ago my question was honestly. Ed i asked a thensenator sessions the following question, it if there is any evidence that anyone in the Trump Campaign communicated with anyone in the russian governments during the course of the tempe and what would you do . I asked how the man had become the top official, the man who served as chairman and the Trump Campaign Advisory Committee would conduct himself if it required that the department of justice demanded investigation of members of the same campaign. Heres what thensenator sessions that. Sen. Franken im not aware of any of those activities. Iam being called to serve and did not have communications with the russians. Let me repeat that. I did not have communications with the russians. As we all know now, that was not true. Attorney general sessions met at russianice with the ambassador and 2016. Event during he an the Republican National convention, and once in september in a private meeting in his senate office. The attorney general sessions did not acknowledge the fact testimony misrepresented the truth until the Washington Post published an article exposing his meetings with the Russian Ambassador. In the seven weeks seven weeks between his appearance on the committee of the publication of that article, attorney general sessions had ample opportunity to come clean and correct the record but that is not what he did. So after an embarrassing story in the post describing his undisclosed meeting with the very same russian official whose communications forced the president s National Security adviser to resign, turning sessions hastily called a press conference and announced that he was recusing himself from overseeing any investigation withrussian interference the election. So mr. Rosenstein, now that the attorney general has recused himself, it is your turn to answer the very same question. Again, here is the question i asked thensenator sessions and that i would like you to answer now. If there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump Campaign communicated with the russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do . Mr. Rosenstein if there is predication to believe that such communication was in violation of federal law, senator, i would order an investigation. Franken mr. Rosenstein, you understand you have an ongoing obligation to update your testimony and correct any inaccuracies or mistakes you discover after you leave the hearing today . Mr. Franken youre making me very selfconscious governor, do. Yes i believe i mr. Franken good. I must have just taken it for granted that witnesses understood their obligation to correct inaccuracies in their testimony but evidently that obligation was not known to attorney general sessions. Yesterday, four days after the press conference at which he ounced his recruits all recusal and five days after, he finally updated his testimony. And that updated testimony, the attorney general references a letter written by the democratic members of this committee on march 3. Attorney general sessions said and i quote, the letter asked what i did not supplement the record to note any contact with the Russian Ambassador before its disclosure. Having considered my answer responsive and no one having suggested otherwise, there was no need for a supplemented answer. It would seem that in the attorney generals view, unless this committee has reason to believe that a witness provided false testimony or unless this Committee Suggests that a witnesses answer is grossly misleading or unresponsive, that that witnesses relieved of his or her sworn duty to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But i do not think that is how it works. Generalight of attorney sessions failure to recognize his obligation to this body i thought it was important or me to make sure that you clearly understand this obligation will stop and you do understand his obligation, right . Mr. Rosenstein i do. Mr. Franken ok. I think mr. Sessions should come back. I think he owes it to this committee to come back and to explain himself. Because he also says in his thisay i just will be very short. Says, i did not mention communications i had with the Russian Ambassador over the years because the question did. Ask about them i asked him what he would do as attorney general if it was true that members of the campaign had met with the russians. So he says, i did not mention it communications i had with the Russian Ambassador over the years because the question did not ask about them. He answered a question i did not ask and for him to put this in his letter as a response is insulting she should come back and explain himself. Ipos that to us. I think he owes that to us. Been over back i have bent over backwards not to say he has lied. I have given him the benefit of the doubt. But he has to come back. May i make one clarification and i apologize senator frankens comments is important, i wanted to make sure you did not the speaker earlier. I asked whether or not i would announce if an investigation was ending. I wants to mature you are all clear. I dont know if there is an investigation. I find it very disturbing the you did not read declassified report on russias activities. I find that very, very disturbing. Read the newspaper story. I would like to comment on what senator franken just said. I dont expect sen. Franken backslide i would toward our witnesses. As i remembered senator franken asking his question of senator sessions, he referred to something, there had been something on cnn that franklin said senator sessions would not know what it was. Havent taken into consideration that it would have been all right and you should have given him a chance to get the information you had and reflect on it and give an answer in writing. Both of you know i said this to you when you are in the privacy of my office. If i was going to ask you a gotcha question i would tell you about it ahead of time. That as ansider gotcha question. It was not a gotcha question. He did not know what you were asking about. I said that as i was asking the question. You have not heard this and i dont expect that you have heard it. Look at the tape area tape. A couple of questions, i want to ask of the attorney general nominee. When the Obama Administration, mr. Rosenstein. Officeernment out of the accountable to the office titled doj strengthen procedures for disciplining attorneys. Are you aware of that report . What year was that . It was 2014. I am not sure im aware of that particular report. Im aware the general issue. I probably was aware at that point. I would ask you in your capacity as the attorney general to look at that report because there is no evidence that ive been able to find since it was issued that there has been any prosecutorial misconduct and issues were clearly articulated in the report. I would like to you to review that port and get back if you think there are things in your capacity you would consider moving forward on. I will commit to you that if you i will talk to the attorney the Inspector General because it is important to consult with the ig and make sure if they have advice we should do to utter enhance the integrity of our prosecutors at three institute those. Somewhere in the your capacity you advocated for businesses. You worked in an organization that has been as their members. Are the reputed abuses of these worker programs . I am one who actually supports Immigration Reform measures. Do you have any insight into how we can actually get through the u. S. Attorneys or through others to identify where legitimate abuse exists so we can make examples of the businesses preventing us from making examples preventing us from having a intelligent discussion about reforming the visa work programs. I was a litigator. Thatwas not involved in work. The visa programs the department of Homeland Security and department of labor for certain worker visas. We have got to have somebody on the problem. Weve got to have somebody presenting specific evidence of real abuses of the program because there are more phantoms than reality. We needed to make examples out of businesses. We need to find somebody to own it. If it is not the doj i need to go to some other agency. I would certainly if i were informationde any we could to help you. That would be very helpful. The next question i have relates to immigration and the resources we have. That we neededog to address. To what extent have you studied us and what could you offer me as some hope we can get to a point where we have more timely hearing and closing of jasons cases in the Immigration Court . Tracks have not studied it. I have not studied it. I understand there is a backlog. I will figure out whether or not there are procedural changes that we can make or if we need more resources to move the cases more quickly. It is could go the department both in critical to make sure that we resolve those matters as expeditiously as we can. Are i know that during my former time in the Justice Department there was a Significant Management challenge involved in funding the resources to address the incredibly high volume of immigration appeals. I dont know exactly where that stands but i would be happy to look at that when a confirmed. My less question will be to you. It has to do with state and with theperation department in terms of Public Safety. One of the areas here this i dont know if youre familiar with the issue that we have had over time with equitable sharing. There is been some abuses of it in terms of some seizures. For the most part it is a very Important Program to continue to ensure state and local participation. What are your views . One of my priorities has been to work with state and local Law Enforcement in all contexts from resources. Ing our how can we Work Together to address them so it is not just the federal government dictating , the Equitable Sharing Program is a critical part of that effort. We need to make sure that if we are using that authority we are using it appropriately and consistently with federal Law Enforcement. To start byike congratulating both of you and your nominations and im thanking you for your long careers in Public Service. Somence, persistence, and not just during your years but in this hearing. I think the attorney general should return to this committee and clarify his answers under previous questioning. I think it is important that we resolve the currently unresolved issues that i think were not clarified. Is it ever appropriate for the president or senior white house officials to contact the department of justice for the fbi with instructions or directions on how to conduct an ongoing criminal investigation . If there are contacts about ongoing criminal investigations they should be directly with the attorney general. I imagine there may be context with National Security equities or Foreign Affairs issues where it might be appropriate in a together case. The presumption is no and only the deputy should be in position to coordinate with the attorney general to make a determination in any individual case. No. He presumption is there should be limited contacts and in no way should those ford,ts be designed to stonewall an investigation that is wellfounded in proceeding. That is correct. We spoke previously about your commitment to preserving the independence and Public Confidence in our Law Enforcement system. Your record of Public Service and personal testimony reinforces that. Given that the unanimous opinion of our Intelligence Committee that russia did in fact interfere in our elections and troubling evidence of actual possibleand even collusion between the Trump Campaign and russia, would you agree that it is vital to the assurance of confidence in our democracy and Law Enforcement that any investigation into these matters be fair, free, and politically independent . Yes. You stated previously that he would be willing to resign if you felt that was not the case. He felt you were inappropriately being pressured to shut down an investigation or the investigation was being stonewalled. He would oppose those efforts. You would oppose those efforts . Would you commit that he would share with the American People if you were compelled to reside under those circumstances that that was the reason you resign . I cannot answer that. Hypothetically would depend on the circumstances and with an appropriate case i wouldnt i would. We dont talk probably about our cases and i dont know what context it might arise in so i can assure you that if it is lawful i certainly would. To 5 you believe three million individuals voted illegally in the election . I have no independent basis of knowledge about that. Im not at position to comment. Have you plan on using the resources of the doj to investigate alleged is consists cap instances of a foot or fraught question mark i just paid we will continue to do it the way we have been doing it in the bush and Obama Administrations. When that information came to the attention of our offices we have attorneys in each u. S. Attorney office that are trained that it matters. That may result in federal charges. You agree to withdraw from a variety in the fifth circuit concluded that the texas law in question actually had a discriminatory impact on minority voters in the Southern District of texas is considering the evidence whether texas enacted the law with richly discriminatory intent. Rex i read newspaper stories but i have no role in the original position or the revised position. I was encouraged in your statement that corruption and civil rights cases are among the most sensitive and important. It is my hope you will continue what has been your record of Public Service. The office the attorney general overseas, you once somethinge which my predecessor, the former Vice President was having proud in having a hand in having. Supportrmed, will you the office on violence against women continuing the current activities to reduce genderbased violence . Im glad that you brought that up because that is an issue i think the microphone is on and i needed to put his. Is that better . It is important to me. In their introductions i serve on the board of directors of a nonprofit. Violencea domestic said house. I absolutely support the work of the office of violence against women. Forgive me. Pursuing Public Integrity cases and protecting americas inventions and innovations through in it intellectual property enforcement. Im interested in your view of the cops programs and grants for a tool to combat violent crime. I would be interested in your view on how we might Work Together to strengthen state local Law Enforcement corporation Law Enforcement. And in combating violent crime. I look forward to if im confirmed working with you on both of those issues. Workingd with police agencies. I dont know all the details of it. My interactions with the cop office was one incident in which they initiated a cops investigation and it is certainly going to be a useful tool. Im into space we would use that authority as all others. To try to work with and improve state and local Law Enforcement. Thank you for the testimony. I apologize if im covering something that is been covered before. Rosenstein, we talk about an aspect of immigration is important in arizona. We had something along the southwest border called operation streamline. Program,rpose of the to cut down on illegal order crossings. For those were entering the first time, it is increased border security. It is been very effective there. Nevertheless in recent years the u. S. Attorney office adopts a i asked many times attorney general holder and lynch and i was never able to get a straight answer as to why this program has ended. It is to make sure enforced. We have had success and i dont know why with a Successful Program along the border we would adopt either posture. The federal government doesnt do this the burden falls to them. Can you talk about operation streamline your understanding of it and if the doj plans to go forward under your leadership . Maryland does not have an International Border and im not familiar with the streamline project. Law enforcement can be a useful tool to combat immigration crimes and all other crimes. If i become Deputy Attorney general i would consider that an important issue to review and some the u. S. Attorney in your. Istrict i dont think we should rule out any cases categorically if it could have an impact by prosecuting those cases. You had operation streamline border crossings down significantly. The tucson sector never adopted it and it pushed illegal crossings toward tucson. Even application of law and the impact on border communities, i was hoping you would move forward with regard to operation streamline. When i asked Jeff Sessions about this he is familiar and committed to move forward. Fiscal year 2009 through 2013, 17 billion in grants. It was reported that doj squandered as much as 100 million in taxpayer dollars over the last five years. Question nearly all of more than a 23 million grants awards to big brothers and big sisters of arizona of america. Inspectorartments general said before the Judiciary Committee there is virtually no visibility on how grant funds are actually believe used by the recipient. Unless there is no ig audit or investigation or the resources collected analyze accounting information, government and taxpayers are virtually in the dark regarding how grant funds are actually used. This is a serious problem. I work for the Justice Department and other agencies and there are tools we have available to ensure if they are not used appropriately that we take appropriate remedial action. If we determine a grant recipient has not complied with rules guarding a particular grants we have criminal enforcement if fraud has been committed. I would consult with the Inspector General about his findings and determine whether or not theres more we can do. The eight secretarygeneral has the authority to have a criminal enforcement component so they can occur serve effectively as the police for fraud in their agency. I will ensure that is done in a particular basis. In that role you will be theged with making sure department maintains timely response for information. Records, howsitive do you intend to do this . The office of information and privacy has a career official at the head of the agency who has and they want to make sure that is operating efficiently and as quickly as possible. You have developed a reputation for bringing Law Enforcement together at all levels to work toward a common purpose. This is desperately needed with regard unifying local Law Enforcement and federal officers on Immigration Laws. Cracks it is critical that recorded coordinate local Law Enforcement and there are some areas in which we are in agreement, Violent Crimes and gangs. More complex political issues such as immigration. Find Common Ground so we can Work Together to make sure he we we use our resources most effectively. We have situations in arizona where individuals are into the felonyty who have had a charges without informing local Law Enforcement this was being done. Can you commit that that wont continue . I would not want it to occur under our purview. The department of Homeland Security and make sure to fix it. There needs to be cooperation between the doj and the department of Homeland Security when individuals have been charged. Yes sir. After these two witnesses for the a second round three on this side that we can work our way through this and get it done. Sure do you am fine do you need a fiveminute break . Im fine. We will go to you first and have a second round and i will have one question after everybody else has asked a question. Loves second round as well. Thank you both for your Public Service and thank you for being forthright in your answers today. About thetalk to you Justice Department that both of us love and mentors we share and those echoes both of us have heard as United States attorneys and prosecutors. Are shared. Hat i want to set the outset that i regard your experience and career as a prosecutor as your intellect and integrity certainly qualifying you for this position. You i will oppose your nomination if you are unwilling to commit to appoint a special prosecutor. I say with sadness and regret, this issue of principle is so profoundly important and only have the power to appoint a special prosecutor. We are and extraordinary time cleaning for a constitutional crisis. In complete agreement that the russians launched a massive attack on our democracy. Through cyber attack and misinformation and propaganda. Is a tie between potential russians and the during the time when that attack occurred and there is a danger indicated by is the apparently false statements made to this committee. About his contacts with the russians and others in the Trump Administration and the National Security adviser michael flynn. I believe a special prosecutor is absolutely necessary to assure the independence as well as the integrity of this investigation. Is why i press you cap that and publicly there needs to be a special prosecutor even though i support the investigation of the Intelligence Committee which must do its work as well as the appointment of the select committee and a special commission that can produce recommendations. Only the department of justice can pursue criminal wrongdoing. Pursueprosecutor can lawbreaking that violate terminal loss. None of those other bodies can do it. Let me begin by asking you if you presented a witness to a grand jury who presented false statements and you knew they were false, wouldnt you immediately correct the record . The january made false statements grand jury make false maintenance is a trick question. It is a yes or no question. In a grand jury it is not my job to tell the grand jury what the truth is. If you presented a witness to a jury in a trial who testified falsely you would immediately correct the record. If i knew it was false i would have responsibility to take correction. I believe strongly that this committee has an obligation to bring back the attorney general to correct the record and didain why he stated as he had noctly that he meetings with the russians. A question about the ongoing investigation. We know from the newspapers which is apparently your source of information that the fbis investigating. Wont the fbi needs to ask jeff want whoever the prosecutor is have to ask the attorney general why he made the statements, what they have to ask the formal National Security adviser and other trump why they made false statements . Wont that be a part of the investigation . I suspect if im confirmed i should clarify. Both feinstein and franken asked me about this 15 page public report. I rely on the media for a lot of information, not information that matters to my work with general information. I will commit to you that i will read that report available on the internet. I committed that he will read that. Unquestionably, i dont expect you to disagree. The ties in the the ties between the trumpet ministration and the russians would involve questioning the attorney general of the United States . Your boss. And possibly others in the administration. Investigate your boss . If there is evidence that the attorney general as information relevant in this case as previous cases, i will make sure. Ive done that before. You have never investigated the attorney general of the united dates. You dont believe have never investigated the president. I was involved in as a target or subject of criminal wrongdoing . I dont want to comment on the more details of my experience. I want to assure you that i will make sure that anybody with relevant information is question. If you declined to name a special prosecutor will you come before this committee and explain why . Appreciate your candor with me yesterday about that issue. Summary ross to my attention runday afternoon that you office said he would obstruct my amination if you it was superb meeting as i appreciate your candor and disability and we may disagree on this narrow issue but i think you and i have a lot in common including our affection for david margolis. I hope we can talk about issues of mutual concern. I thought about this issue. You view it as an issue of principle that i need to commit to appoint a special counsel and a master that i dont even know if it is being investigated and i view action is your principle that a nominee should not be promising to take action on a particular case. Post myeel you need to nomination i respect your right to do it and i dont take it personally but i would encourage you to consider my perspective on this. He said that it was important for u. S. Attorneys to avoid dissipating in the machinery of politics. Issue this as a political and a completely legitimate issue for you and i respect your right to consider rest but my view is i have responsibility but i think that both that i cannot take commissioned how i would take a particular case. Some future general would be ite and say rosenstein did him why wont you. It is a matter of principle for me to take the position as Robert Jackson said that the purpose of this process is to determine whether or not the integrity general as the integrity for the job. White house does not ask me that question and i think we cant answer to your. Hope we can Work Together if i get the job. A Great Respect for the department. I believe it will have a constructive relationship. Thank you mr. Chairman. With the most recent unsubstantiated earlymorning tweet from President Trump, accusing president obama of you. Ing wiretap, thank maybe putin can do that but the president of the United States cannot do that. Characterizing the question as a hypothetical it is not a hypothetical question, is a question of law. Do you agree that the office of the attorney general is not the president s personal law firm . Absolutely. The ag serves as the chief lawenforcement officer and head of the department of justice representing the people of the United States. Commit to providing your best independent judgment in your discretion and duties as the Department Justice works yes i will. Ask the president indicates he would not want a special counsel, in the investigation into russias interference in our elections and if you counsel ishat such warranted, will you be willing to deny the president s request . I believe i would. It would depend on the context, certainly if the president had a conflict in a particular matter i would not take invites in the president. You would make your own determination because youre are a lawyer for the people of the United States. Hypothetical, it is difficult for me to answer have a that it was as i accept your answer. Lets is the president has issued a crime, i would not follow the president s advice. That happened in the nixon era, there is a question on whether they can wiretap. I believe it is happened before. I dont believe it is happened recently. In our personal meeting you mentioned the need to preserve the integrity of the elections and too many that is doublespeak for Voter Suppression. Byer suppression laws claiming rampant voter fraud. President trump continues to claim that three point 35,000,000 votes were cast illegally during the election. Do you agree with this assessment that 35,000,000 votes were illegally cast . We met yesterday you asked me about the importance of the Voting Rights act. As well as voter fraud. I think what i said is it important, both are important. Pretty response to my question which is do you believe that 35,000,000 votes were cast illegally in the recent general election . If i might just finish that point. I think it is quickly important for the department to do both. If there are allegations of voter fraud the Criminal Division would pursue those. In fact a comprehensive 2014 study published in the Washington Post found 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud. Out of more than one billion votes. Even this small number is inflated as all caps claims regardless of whether or not they were found to be valid. For a 16 found similar negligence of impersonation fraud. Given these facts a dozen states have passed Voter Suppression laws and i would like to ask you, will you commit to prioritizing doj resources to where the problems lie . Lie inblems do not footer fraud, they appear to lie in the Voter Suppression laws that states have been very busy passing after the shelby case. Whether you would prioritize resources after the Voter Suppression laws. Certainly looking at these laws. To see whether in fact they would suppress votes. I understand your concern with this and i share concern for anything that would violate the Voting Rights act. That statute to be i would approach that issue like i would approach any issue. If an issue is raised in a particular case i would look at the law. I would be consulting with the lawyers in the Civil Rights Division. They would be doing the work in the first instance. I would talk at them, but the facts, shes my best judgment. I will hope that you would hope that you have that kind of approach. I think he said that protecting the rights to vote and access to voting is a core function. Would you agree with that . Absolutely. Under the Obama Administration, expedited removal was used only been an immigrant was arrested within 100 miles of the border and have been in the country less than two weeks. Under new executive orders issued by President Trump, but i did removal will now remove all those in the country up to two years. They could marry, they could have children, no matter where they are in the u. S. Those were not brought before an immigration judge. I have had no direct involvement in immigration. Civil cases that arise out of disputes. Really a matter of Homeland Security. I regret that im not in position to comment on that. Wouldnt the doj be prosecuting these kinds of cases . The same because they dont come it is not ine that your administrative forcible removal, criminal when a prosecutor as u. S. Attorney. Which decision about immigrants to remove is in the first instance to Homeland Security. I will consult with the experts in the department and be happy. Thank you. Thank you. I agree he should have the chance to familiarize himself with a never before you make the call about a special counsel. I would add to the record that in which heions stated the appropriate response in the subject matter is public and arises in a highly charged public atmosphere. It is for the attorney general to appoint a social council of great special counsel of great indisputable of independence that assures it will be handled without partisanship. If senator sessions mr. Chairman had answered accurately, the question that has been the subject of so much debate, there would have been followup questions. The as well what was content of those medications . I think those are legitimate questions and i dont think the committee should be deprived of his questions simply because we are deprived of an accurate and truthful answer. Will hearey general from us. Precedence over an executive order that might direct agencies. Im not a regulatory lawyer, i dont know that. Congressk an act of supervenes executive order . Dont the laws of congress supervene executive orders . Yes. Ok there we go. A rightwing commentator has compared Department Staff to fill. Be filth. The attorney general has questioned whether the doj can handle the truth . How will you defend the department from a religionbased or ideological hiring practices . Department by large through its history. How would you protect that . I have a great deal of respect for the lawyers in the department of justice. This commission on the basis of religion and hiring is illegal anywhere. Impact ofct to the partisanship on hiring, i think that very important everybody in the hiring capacity understands what the rules are. I believe every employee is supposed to be trained in a whole variety of laws that govern their conduct. Will this be a priority to assure the department does not fall back into the predicament that it fell into under gonzales . Yes. Specifically climate denial has been propagated by the fossil fuel industry for years through an array of front groups. The chamber of commerce which you worked for has been a relentless enemy of climate action. You have been there lawyer in environmental cases. Can we trust you on Climate Science as related issues come up in the department . Confirmed willm the officials in the department of justice to engage in their own Law Enforcement functions which include enforcing the clean air act, water act, and so on. Doj does not make those decisions in the first place but the policy, whatever it is, should be enforced by the department of justice. You had ad that private client that had private interests and the attorney were obligated to advocate for private interests but in Public Service what would be important would be to serve the Public Interest. Is there a Public Interest in addressing Climate Change . There is a Public Interest in the department of justice enforcing the Laws Congress has enacted. That is not the question i asked. Is there Public Interest in addressing on a change . For think you are asking me a personal judgment on the policy question and im not sure that is relevant to the way i would do my job as a Law Enforcement official. My law my job would be to enforce the law. There are policy calls that get made in there is a difference between somebody who does not think there is a Public Interest in doing something and 70 who does. Highlyly look relevant. Is there Public Interest in addressing on a change . I can tell you that there is significant Public Interest in the department of justice enforcing the laws passed by congress and defending roles entrusted by congress. You very much mr. Rosenstein. Local leaders from of have commented on your good working relationship with Law Enforcement. We talked about that when we met. Ive seen firsthand the Important Role of having police on the beat to keep in our community safe. Reauthorize the cops program along with republican senator Lisa Murkowski of alaska. The president of her for told her police, it is an Important Program. Your views onur the program and the support it provides at the state and local Law Enforcement and would you support this program as Deputy Attorney general . I would like to hear your views and you will be involved. I have seen in effect from the cops program. There are budgetary issues, every decision is a tradeoff in terms of where resources will go. Do think that that money has in some instances been spent effectively. Bring in experts who can help them update policies and procedures. Thank you. I know how interested you are in the program. I have a lot of experience with the cops program. I could not add much to it but certainly in my capacity i will be overseeing the cops office. Mr. Rosenstein protecting National Security of the u. S. Is the top priority as a Justice Department. We have worked very hard on going after extremism and recruitment in our state. Could you talk about how you could approach the issue, i know you would be devoted to that. The Justice Department, your predecessors in the job as well as the Homeland Security office has been involved in this. I appreciate the emergency to talk with you. We are not in the prosecution business because we like to fill business prisons. It is a necessary tool in order to deter crime. You talk about extremism and any other conduct and it is damaging to Public Safety. Need to do everything we can to prevent those from committing those violations. We can intervene and prevent people from being radicalized to the point where they commit these crimes. There are a lot of other agencies that have a role in ensuring that we are raising Good American citizens who will not engage in that conduct. I believe we have something to add. Im the ranking mentor of the we have worked and headed up this committee now for many years. We believe is very important when we have these hearings and senators have an opportunity to ask questions about mergers. A major wave of mergers in the last two years and worked with the department. The department has a Important Role to play in challenging insight competitive practices reviewing mergers to make sure they were not harm consumers and competition and stopping price fixing cartels. Will he commits to making the robust commitment of the antitrust authority . Yes. That is a good answer. Trafficking, a question on opioids on the record. Thomistic priorities for trafficking. We hope the senate has been working on bills regarding foreign trafficking as well. The Justice Department releases National Strategy to combat Human Trafficking as required at the end of last year. Will you commit to prioritizing the implication of the strategy if you are confirmed and if you want to add anything about these cases i would appreciate it. I will commit to that. Opioids, we talked about that yesterday. That has been a real priority in maryland because we saw a explosion of Overdose Deaths attributed to have your debts. Opioid drugs. A good example where it is not just Law Enforcement. In the state of maryland mevacor needed effort but by the governor of maryland to make that a top priority. Welcome go ahead. To welcome the witnesses and congratulate you on your nominations. I want to thank each of you for your long records. You served in the Department Justice for a couple of decades. You developed a distinguished career marked by integrity and fairness. Heidi and i have been friends with you and your husband a long time. Have a distinct career in Public Service and have earned a reputation for integrity and fidelity to law. That reputation will never be more important in this new job in which you have been appointed. In this hearing, in number of my democratic colleagues have focused a great deal on the aspersions that have been cast on the on Jeff Sessions. A man of integrity. It has been interesting to see a number of Democratic Senators rosenstein that you commit to appointing a special prosecutor. At the very outset before even being confirmed to the position of Deputy Attorney general. Interestingmewhat and ironic and at the same democrats who are denting your ability to be fair had a very different view of your record a few years ago. Senator leahy described mr. Rosenstein as a tough, honest prosecutors and the epiphany of professional prosecutors. Likewise like we define him as a scrupulous man who is independent. She further stated she had no reason to believe why you cannot work with the fbi and a symbol of very strong Prosecution Team where warranted. Rosenstein, given the reputation you have earned as a fair and scrupulous prosecutor, how do you believe the department of justice should approach any criminal investigation and what should i do principles for Going Forward forward mark going stion mark forward . The folks ive worked with training well. Every this dictation needs to be independent. It does not matter who the defendant. It always needs to be conducted independently. With some of the resources we need. It includes federal agencies, whichever is the Relevant Agency dividing the agents and the armed officers who conduct their investigation to make arrests. But this generally the case. I am sure that we do but overall senator im extraordinarily proud to be associated with this institution and i have conferences for the department of justice. I will continue to exercise their authority with independence and appreciation and importance of their positions answer Critical Role and promoting Public Safety and enforcing the law. Manyagree there is a great career officials who are principles and have a fidelity to law. And who are eager to have a job mandate that is simply fairly enforcing the law across the board. You have by you and i have it is deeply concerning to me and to a great many people that over the last eight years the leadership of the department of justice has been very politicized. Is not surprising that the Democratic Senators assume that the same asian will continue but for eight years we have seen political attorneys general, allowing illegal gun transactions with mexican drug traffickers as part of fast and furious which resulted in an illegal gun it knowingly sold to murder Border Patrol agent ryan. We saw the attorney general eric holder held in contempt of congress when he refused to cooperate with Congress Investigation in the past years. We saw the irs is legally targeting american citizens for exercising their First Amendment rights because they were perceived to be political opponents of the president and we saw the department of justice assigned the investigation of this case to a partisan democrat. A democratic donor who gave 6,000 to obama and the democrats. None of the Democratic Senators have any concern at all. Today they want to special prosecutor. But what a partisan democrat was leading the investigation, they saw no need whatsoever for a special prosecutor. We saw the department of justice with operation choke point punished without due process lawabiding citizens that didnt align with the president s political leanings. We saw the department of justice continue to allow millions of dollars of taxpayer funds to flow to sanctuary cities that were openly defying federal Immigration Law and releasing violent criminal illegal aliens who were committing horrible crimes. We saw the administration refuse to enforce the laws on the books and we saw that the department of justice sign off on a decision to pay a nearly 2 billion ransom to the nation of iran that flew in the middle of the night on unmarked pallets landing in an airport. That pattern of politicized administration of justice has been dismaying to veterans of the department of justice because for decades d. O. J. Has and had a tradition of being nonpolitical, nonpartisan, fairly and faithfully applying the law. That has been true under inthat has been true under republican and democrat president s until the last eight years. The question i would ask of each of you is will you commit to this committee not to be a Political Department of justice in the same mold but on the republican side, that is most assuredly not your job, but rather will you commit to faithfully and fairly uphold the law without regard to politics . Mr. Rosenstein senator, i will certainly commit to faithfully and fairly uphold the law without regard to politics. Ms. Brand yes. Senator cruz thank you. Chairman grassley senator franken for five minutes. If the senator from hawaii wants five minutes. Ill finish. Senator franken thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to Say Something about the chairman. I have incredible respect and regardor the chairman. And, dare i say, affection. The chairman has cosponsored my legislation more than any other republican. Chairman grassley be quiet about that. [laughter] senator franken hopefully this doesnt go to iowa. Ixnay on the osponsork. So i just want to i dont think its fair to characterize understand that you were standing up for your friend, senator sessions, and attorney general sessions chairman grassley trying to tell you how try to treat nominees. Senator franken i know. But im saying i dont think my question was a gotcha question. Let me read the question and then i would ask people go to the tape. I couldnt have been nicer. I went, ok. Ok was the previous answer. Cnn has just published a story and im telling you this about a news story thats just been published. Im not expecting you to know whether or not its true. But cnn just published a story alleging that the Intelligence Community provided documents to the president elect last week that included information that, quote, russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and Financial Information about mr. Trump. These documents also allegedly say, quote, there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between trump surrogates and intermediaries for the russian government. Now, again, im telling you this as its coming out, just so you know, but if its true, its obviously extremely serious. And if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump Campaign communicated with the russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do . I think that was a fair question. Certainly not a gotcha question. And he didnt answer my question. What he said to that question was senator franken, allegations get made about candidates all the time and they have been made about president elect trump lots of times, most of them virtually im sorry. Reading from further down. This is what he said. Senator franken, im not aware of any of these activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign, and i did not have communications with russians. And im able unable to comment on it. So in other words, he it cant be a gotcha question if he didnt answer the question. So the thing that got him was him saying that had he not met with russians. But that wasnt even my question. My question was just, if this is and i asked it of mr. Rosenstein, which is if it turns out to be the case that members of the campaign, of the Trump Campaign, have met with russians and colluded with them on this, dont you think what would you do . I asked mr. Rosenstein that. It was not a gotcha question. Thats all i want to say. And if you go back and look at tape, i have to say, i couldnt have been nicer. I couldnt have been sweeter. Really. So thats that. Mr. Rosenstein, i want to ask you a question. The president s former National Security advisor, michael flynn, resigned his position because he misled Senior Administration officials regarding his communications with the Russian Ambassador. It has been reported that sally yates who once held the position you are looking to fill and was acting attorney general early in the Trump Administration, warned the white house that mr. Flynn could be vulnerable to blackmail because of his coverup. Mr. Rosenstein, knowing what we know now, do you think ms. Yates was right to be concerned . Mr. Rosenstein senator, i hope i have been clear on my point throughout this testimony. I appreciate opportunity to clarify it. Point, i believe as a lawyer and Justice Department official currently and potentially in the future, its important for me to limit my testimony to matters which i know both the facts and the law and where i have consulted with the department of justice professionals who are engaged in handling the matter. On issues like that one, i appreciate senator whitehouses sharing his perspective earlier, you need to know the facts and relevant information. You cant prejudge matters. Theres currently an acting attorney general, dana, who is in that position with regard to many investigation that nay may be occurring. With regard to your specific question my answer is, senator, i do not know the details of what the basis was for that. And i wouldnt reach any opinion about it just based upon what i read in the newspaper. Senator grassley senator from hawaii. Senator hirono there are more than 18,000 Law Enforcement agencies in the country. Of course the vast majority of our Law Enforcement officers do an exemplary job in protecting their communities and our safety. But there have been also specific cases where there was use of force, deadly incidents that have sparked nationwide outrage. And i know that you are familiar with the attorney general Civil Rights Division, which has investigated Police Departments and entered into Consent Decrees to resolve frequent unconstitutional policing during your time as u. S. Attorney in baltimore, the d. O. J. Has either finished negotiating or is negotiating a Consent Decree that involves you folks and its before a judge. Attorney general sessions confirmation hearing, i asked him whether he would honor the department of justices existing decrees some 20 of them that ability. In my view did he not adequately assure me as attorney general he would uphold these agreements. He left open the possibility that he would revisit these agreements, renegotiate these agreements. This concerns a lot of us. Id like to ask you the same question. Will you commit to maintaining and enforcing the current Consent Decrees that the department of justice has negotiated . Mr. Rosenstein senator, my familiarity with this issue is limited. But i can tell you my general perspective is like all tools that we have available to us, its appropriate to use this one in a particular case. The question youre asking is it appropriate to renegotiate or revisit them . I think sometimes it probably is, but i just dont know the details of any particular agreement. What issues may arise. These are negotiated agreements between parties. Those are always subject to revision if circumstances change. I would imagine there might be circumstances where you would have to revisit them. I certainly agree with you its a valuable tool provided to us by the congress and in an appropriate case would need to use it. Senator hirono i take it with the 20 or so Consent Decrees currently in force, there may be times you might want to, because of circumstances have changed and meeting of the minds, but i hope that is not your intention to cast them aside. Mr. Rosenstein i have no intent i just have no basis of information. I accept your representation. There are approximately 20 of them. I dont know the details. I know theres one currently under review in baltimore that has not been accepted by the court, but im not familiar with the details of the others. Senator hirono if youre going to reopen some these, i hope there is a process whereby you can let Congress Know that thats what your intention is. Because these kinds of agreements have National Ramifications in my view. During his confirmation hearing, a. G. Sessions stated that he would uphold the Supreme Courts Marriage Equality ruling and the lgbt inclusive federal hate crimes statute and settled law. Will you both, both of you, commit to upholding Marriage Equality and hate crimes prevention for lgbt . Mr. Rosenstein senator, i would anticipate upholding any laws. Certainly any laws the attorneys committed to uphold. Yes. Ms. Brand yes. Senator hirono do you both agree that title 9 protections apply to transgender students or transgender persons . Mr. Rosenstein senator, i do not know the answer to that. I know thats a controversial issue of law. Its a statutory issue as i understand t aim just not familiar with the analysis one way or the other. But i know that if that issue were to come up to my desk, i know we have experienced career professionals in that department that would help us discern what congress had in mind. Once i reached my independent decision about that, that would be my advice to the attorney general. Senator hirono title 9 says basically that there can be no discrimination on the basis of sex. And youre saying that is not clear whether that covers persons, transgender persons . Mr. Rosenstein im not saying one way or the other. Im saying i dont know. Senator hirono ms. Brand . Ms. Brand im in the same position as mr. Rosenstein. Its not a statutory construction question i have studied. I understand its exactly the issue i havent had a chance to study it myself. Senator hirono title 9 being remedial legislation i would hope it would be broadly interpreted. One more question, mr. Rosenstein, do you think a construction question i have studied. Muslim registry would present constitutional problems . Mr. Rosenstein senator, it would depend upon what you meant by that. Certainly as a general proposition i think any kind of registry in america that was predicated solely on somebodys religion would certainly present problems. Senator hirono such a register would be based solely on the basis of muslim religion. Thank you. Chairman grassley couple short statements i want to make and then a third thing would be to tell everybody on the committee that the record will be open for one week for answer for questions in writing. And then if nobody else comes, when im done well adjourn. In 1986 i got a bill passed through congress amending the false claims act. Now its called the false claims act empowering whistle blowers to help the federal government hold contractors accountable for fraud. Since that time the government has recovered more than 53 billion. More than 37 billion of that is because of whistle blowers. Will you vigorously enforce the false claims act to recover taxpayers dollars lost to fraud . Mr. Rosenstein yes. We have enforced that in my office in the district of maryland. Our civil assistant u. S. Attorneys have an affirmative Civil Enforcement program and we certainly will continue to enforce that. Chairman grassley then i would imagine on the second point whether its whistle blowers in regard to the false claims act or whistle blowers generally, would you commit to ensuring that the department of justice attorneys work collaborative with the whistle blowers in regard to the fraud under the false claims act, but the protection of whistle blowers generally . Mr. Rosenstein yes, senator. I would certainly make sure whistle blowers receive any protection they are entitled to by law or regulation. Ms. Brand yes. I know thats really important to you. And whistle blowers are protected by the act and other statutes and regulations. I support that. Chairman grassley three letters i want to put in the record. Supporting mr. Rosensteins basically his record of independence. From jamie and david, they served as Deputy Attorneys general for president clinton and obama. James cole, president obamas Deputy Attorney general, and Phillip Hyman who served as Deputy Attorney general under president clinton. And then a couple short statements. President trump raised a very serious issue over the weekend but has been reported in the Mainstream Press as well. The New York Times reported on january 19 based upon one anonymous source that the intelligence intercepts related to the Trump Campaign officials were provided to the Obama White House. If that is true, then the public needs to know, one, how the intercepts were obtained. Number two, why they were provided to the white house. And three, whether any of the information was used for political purposes. After President Trumps tweet, president obama spokesman denied any involvement, but someone 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 that news report regarding the Previous White House involvement. But its very different when there were reports of Trump White House officials asking the f. B. I. Director comey about this matter. Democrats started suggesting was somehow a sign of improper political influence. Yet they have not asked any questions about indications that the Obama White House was gathering information from intelligence sources on political appointments. Ill put a New York Times article in the record. Then the last thing would be in regard to charges about collusion between the Trump Campaign in russia. These have been raised several times. So i would note for the record on meet the press the former d. N. I. Director clapper under president obama said there was no evidence of collusion. Chuck todd of meet the press asked him, quote, does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following questions, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump Campaign and russian officials, end of quote, and then the quote from mr. Clapper, we did not include any evidence in our report that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump Campaign and the russians. There was no evidence of that included in our report. Mr. Todd asked, quote, i understand that. But does it exist, end of quote . Clapper said, not to my knowledge. So without objection a copy of that transcript will be placed in the record. He was the director of national intelligence. He was ordered by president obama to conduct a full review of the situation. As the d. N. I. He had access to all Source Intelligence all Source Intelligence is in quotation marks. In other words, everything that the government had. So if hes telling the truth and did his job properly, there is no evidence at this point to support these allegations. There is plenty of evidence, though, about illegal leaks of classified information by people out to get the Trump Administration. Meeting adjourned. If you want to comment. I just wanted to thank the nominees and we look forward to working with them and especially again i know more about you, mr. Rosenstein, just from colleagues. I want to thank you and your taking on a big job. And i wanted to respond and part of why this is such a big job is that we have 17 u. S. Intelligence agencies who have said that russia attempted to influence our election and we have the attorney general of the United States recusing himself. And i just want to point out that this weekend, the chairman raised the issues of the president s tweets, this weekend the director former director clapper actually said that he did not know of this kind of wiretapping or that that had there had been any fisa court order. He denied that. And we also have the reports now that the f. B. I. Director was trying to get this clarified. That this was not occurring. I just havent seen any credible evidence to support the president s tweet from saturday morning. And i just think its important that we clarify that on the record. Chairman grassley i do thank youall for being here. And serving. Go ahead and we will adjourn. I just wanted to say thank you. I appreciate your courtesy and colleagues. Its a privilege for me to be here and part of this process. My family feels the same way. We look forward if im confirmed to continue to work with all of you. Chairman grassley thank youall. Meeting adjourned. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] conversations] up next, live remarks from announcer who will when studentcams grand prize of 5,000 . Join us this morning for the announcement. We asked middle and High School Students to present issues with the most urgent issues for the president and new congress to address and 2017. We received responses from the United States, singapore, taiwan, and other countries. For prizes. Peted you can logon 30 minutes before the big announcement to view all winning documentaries at studentcam. Org and be sure to watch the announcement of our grand prize winner this morning at 8 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan. Republicans running for the