The Daily - Trump’s Pick for Attorney General

Episode Date: January 15, 2019

William P. Barr, President Trump’s nominee for attorney general, is set to go before senators today for the beginning of his confirmation hearings. What would it mean for the president and the special counsel to have an attorney general who is in charge of the Russia investigation? Guest: Katie Benner, who covers the Justice Department for The New York Times. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily.

From The New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Today, the Senate begins confirmation hearings for President Trump's latest choice of Attorney General, William Barr. What will it mean for Trump and the special counsel to finally have an Attorney General who is actually in charge of the Russia investigation.

It's Tuesday, January 15th. Katie, later this morning, the Senate will begin confirmation hearings on the president's latest attorney general, William Barr. Before we get to him, how did we get to this point? So, in March 2017, Jeff Sessions decided to recuse himself from any matters related to the election. He'd worked on the Trump campaign. There had been disclosures that he may have had conversations with the Russian ambassador that he hadn't previously disclosed. And so suddenly, it became apparent that he could not be involved in any matters related to the investigation.

Of course, at the same time, we have a firestorm brewing between the president and Jim Comey, which leads to the firing of Jim Comey. Katie Benner covers the Justice Department for The Times. So after that happened, inside the Justice Department was incredibly chaotic, and Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, decided to step in and create a special counsel. And the special counsel would specifically look at the election. So now you have a situation where there's a huge investigation into the president. The president's handpicked attorney general is powerless to help him and to be on his side, which he believes is the role of the attorney general. That's up for debate. And suddenly, all of the anger of the president is trained on both the Justice Department and Jeff Sessions.

We have an attorney general. I'm disappointed in the attorney general. And Jeff Sessions should have never let it happen. He should have never recused himself. It's extremely unfair. And that's a mild word to the president. So I'm very disappointed in my Justice Department. Because of this ridiculous witch hunt, I have said I'm going to stay away from the Justice Department until it's completed. Just look at what is now being exposed in our Department of Justice and the FBI. Look at what's going on. Look at what's going on. The Attorney General made a terrible mistake when he did this and when he recused himself, or he should have certainly let us know if he was going to recused himself or he should have certainly let us know if he was going to recuse himself and we would have used a put a

different Attorney General in he wants sessions out of the department but it feels like there's no good time to do it he went after Jeff Sessions yesterday now he's done this in fits and starts but this is another level I don't have an Attorney General it does not get any more clear than that. The president again has decided to make clear to Jeff Sessions, I wish you would go away. The president's very angry and wants to fire Jeff Sessions, but can't right now. Why is he still there? Republicans on Capitol Hill have been pleading with the president not to fire Jeff Sessions,

especially ahead of the midterm elections. Their fear, of course, is that it would put the majorities of Republicans in jeopardy ahead of the midterm elections. Their fear, of course, is that it would put the majorities of Republicans in jeopardy ahead of the midterms. Eventually, the midterm elections come and go. It's no longer a political problem for him. And literally, the day after the election, Sessions is out. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has now resigned at the request of the president. It takes effect immediately.

The president never forgiving him for recusing himself in the Russia investigation. immediately, the president never forgiving him for recusing himself in the Russia investigation. And what did the firing of Sessions after the midterms mean for the man who has been overseeing the Russia investigation day to day, the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein? Well, so it's interesting because normally when the Attorney General leaves, the Deputy Attorney General, who is Rod Rosenstein, would take that job. So you would think that it would mean that the man who's been overseeing the Russia investigation as the acting attorney general would just become the acting attorney general for the whole building and nothing would really change. However, that's not what happens. The president just tweeted, quote, we are pleased to announce that Matthew G. Whitaker,

chief of staff to Attorney General Jeff Sessions at the Department of Justice, will become our new acting attorney general of the United States. He will serve our country well. We thank Attorney General Jeff Sessions for his service and wish him well! A permanent replacement will be nominated at a later date. So instead, Matt Whitaker, who's been Jeff Sessions' chief of staff, who is very friendly with Donald Trump, who Donald Trump really likes and trusts, becomes the acting attorney general.

Matthew Whitaker has been on the president's succession list since at least late September. A lot of people who watch the news every night are saying, we never heard of Whitaker, and now he's the guy. I mean, the guy who is now the acting attorney general, it's like a staffer. And, you know, that's unusual. We've not seen that before. I mean, this is the attorney general of the United States. The big worry was that now that Matt Whitaker is the acting attorney general could technically oversee the Russia investigation, he would do something to impede it as a favor to Donald Trump. Now he who he Rosenstein should have been the one to take over. That's the point, Fred. He hires Whitaker.

Who is Whitaker? He is a pundit. Ken Matt Whitaker, the new acting attorney general, and the Mueller investigation. On top of that, Whitaker's own resume was not traditional for the post of attorney general of the U.S. The president named this lackey Matthew Whitaker. Matthew Whitaker is the name you're looking for.

Yeah, Matthew Whitaker. Who is Matt Whitaker? He had been a U.S. attorney at Iowa, but he'd also been involved in shady business dealings in a company that was fined by the U.S. government for being fraudulent and for bilking investors and customers out of lots of money. It's a simple design, but a unique design that I think is going to really not only protect people from typical injuries that you get from using a straight razor blade. He had been seen in YouTube videos trying to sell hot tub technology. It's a unique design that's going to help lots of people that have mobility issues get in and use their

hot tub in a safe manner. He was involved in daycare centers and other projects that didn't take off. And it's unclear what he actually did in his own law firm. He didn't seem to take on a lot of big cases. And Matt Whitaker had spent quite a bit of time on CNN as a political commentator. You can see a scenario where Jeff Sessions is replaced with a recess appointment, and that attorney general doesn't fire Bob Mueller, but he just reduces his budget so low that his investigation grinds to almost a halt. While that might have appealed to Donald Trump, it certainly alarmed Democrats.

The appointment of Mr. Whitaker should concern every American Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative who believes in rule of law and justice. If he stays there, he will create a constitutional crisis by inhibiting Mueller or firing Mueller. So Congress has to act, has to act. The Democrats want to know, is Matthew Whitaker Donald Trump's person who was going to interfere in the Mueller investigation and was firing Jeff Sessions and installing Matt Whitaker an act of obstruction of justice? They want to investigate this. And now, because of the election results, they have the power and they can. His actions fit a clear pattern of interference and attempting of sabotage of the special counsel's investigation. And we think it's very important that the president be put on notice that he is not above the law and the American people will not tolerate his trying to act like a tyrant and a monarch, not like a president.

And as it happened inside of the building, people were very cognizant of all the questions around Whitaker, whether or not he should recuse himself from the rest of the investigation. And so inside of the Justice Department, ethics officials began a process of determining whether or not he should recuse himself from that probe. And what did they ultimately find? So after six weeks, the ethics official said, out of an abundance of caution, we really think that there is an appearance of conflict that would make us think that it would be a good idea to recuse. But at the end of the day, they didn't say that he had to recuse. They said ultimately it was up to him, but that they would recommend that he recuse. And what did he do? Ultimately, he, knowing that the decision was his, decided not to recuse. Whitaker to stay in this job, which means, and this would be Democrats' biggest fears, that he could squash the final report from Robert Mueller. Sure.

And that's their biggest fear. That fear, though, was allayed because in early December, Donald Trump, having noticed that there was quite a furor over Matt Whitaker, came out and said, I have found my new attorney general. Bill Barr will be nominated for the United States Attorney General position. I think he will serve with great distinction. And it will be William Barr. A terrific man, a terrific person, a brilliant man.

And who is William Barr? William Barr is a classic Republican. Coming up next, it's coverage of today's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the nomination of William Barr, President Bush's choice to be the nation's new Attorney General. He was the Attorney General under George H.W. Bush and was known at that time as the Boy A.G. He was so young. He was in his early 40s. William Barr is 41 years of age. He worked for the Central Intelligence Agency and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals before joining with President Reagan's transition team. And he came up through the Justice Department. He had been the head of the Office of Legal Counsel. He'd been the deputy attorney general. And then he was the attorney general of the United States.

I'm honored that the president has selected the traditional mold of the attorney general. And not just highly credentialed. He is also revered, especially amongst conservative legal circles, for being such a sharp legal mind. The thing with being the attorney general is that you are a political appointee. You're the face of the department. You're kind of famous, at least you're D.C. famous, but you do not have to be the best lawyer in the world. William Barr, on the other hand, some would argue is one of the best lawyers in the world. But William Barr is a really low-key guy. If you think about the two years when he was attorney general, there were huge cases that came before the Justice Department. The Rodney King riots, the Talladega prison uprising, and the shooting at Ruby Counsel. And then he took their guidance and he decided to do what the department needed to do. He wasn't really a public face. AGs come and go. And if you confirm me,

I would like at the conclusion of my tenure to have it said that I upheld the law and that I left the Department of Justice a more effective, stronger, and a better institution. So it sounds like he is a very safe and solid choice. And I wonder if that was the point, that the president specifically chose someone who was so obviously qualified and credentialed because of the perception, at least by some, especially Democrats, that Matt Whitaker was a partisan and not nearly as qualified. Absolutely. I think that both inside the Justice Department and inside the White House, people were incredibly relieved to have somebody finally, hopefully, act as attorney general who would bring to an end this era of complete chaos that had engulfed the Justice Department and its relationship with the president. But just a week later, things shifted again.

Hmm. How? Well, we saw that William Barr had written a memo and sent it over to the Justice Department saying that he had real concerns about Robert Mueller's investigation. In a memo from this past summer, Bill Barr called the obstruction inquiry, quote, fatally misconceived with potentially disastrous implications for the presidency, saying Trump's firing of former FBI Director James Comey was within the power of the president.

He doesn't think that it's the case that the president obstructed justice by firing essentially his employee, somebody who he has every right to fire. Barr wrote the memo speaking as a former attorney general under President George H.W. Bush. Sources tell CNN Barr discussed the memo with the president, pointing out it could be a sticking point for his confirmation. Now, past Justice Department employees, they are all attorneys. They are incredibly opinionated people. But writing a very, very long, extremely detailed, argued memo about aspects of an investigation of which he admits in the memo he doesn't know, he doesn't understand, and he has no details about, that is unusual.

So that seems like a pretty big red flag at this moment when one of, as you said, the biggest pieces of the Mueller investigation is investigating whether the president obstructed justice. So how do all these constituencies who are so nervous about who the next attorney general will be and what they will do with the Russia investigation, how do they respond? They immediately start calling for an explanation. They want to know why Barr wrote the memo

and they want to know what Barr's thoughts on the Mueller investigation are today. Democrats wanted to hear much more than what he was saying. They were not satisfied at that point. The fact that as a citizen, he filed this 19-page memo. I don't have citizens that do that. They might, you know, send me 19 characters and a tweet about an issue,

but he filed suddenly a 19-page issue like a tryout for this job. But you have some real issues here that we're going to have to question him about under oath. I shared many of Mr. Barr's thoughts about the consequences of obstruction of justice for personnel decisions. But having said that, he'll need to defend his reasoning. William Barr was sending freelance memos to the Trump administration, making a case to undercut the Mueller investigation. a case to undercut the Mueller investigation. So the deep concern will be, is this just a preface to either undercutting the investigation or trying to keep the results of it

hidden from the American public? And how does he respond? So Barr goes to the Hill and he starts the work of calming people down. William Barr meeting with lawmakers on Capitol Hill last week. William Barr speaking with Democratic and Republican senators, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. William Barr met with Republican Senator Lindsey Graham earlier. The South Carolina lawmaker told reporters Barr has agreed to allow Mueller to finish his job.

I asked Mr. Barr directly, do you think Mr. Mueller is on a witch hunt? He said no. Do you think he would be fair to the president and the country as a whole? He said yes. So ahead you think he would be fair to the president and the country as a whole? He said, yes. So ahead of today's confirmation hearings, Barr has basically run a kind of mini PR campaign to make sure that senators don't think that he will interfere with the Russia investigation.

And he's basically saying, trust me, despite what I have said or written in this memo, that I will not touch the Mueller investigation. Has that worked? It, for now, has worked. But we will see what happens during the hearing. A lot's going to ride on his performance. He's going to be asked all these same questions again. And how he answers and how convincing he is in that setting

is going to go a lot further than the private meetings that he just had on the Hill. You know, what's interesting, Katie, is that from the start, the president has been really at odds with his own Department of Justice because of the depth of his resentment over the Russia investigation. He was furious at his first handpicked attorney general, Jeff Sessions, because he recused himself from the investigation and because it was suddenly under the control of a person that he couldn't really influence, Rod Rosenstein. Then he appoints a temporary attorney general who immediately comes under a cloud of suspicion

and who never really gets a chance to be in charge of the investigation. Now, finally, if Barr is confirmed, the president will have an attorney general who won't recuse himself and will more or less oversee the Russia probe in the way that the president wants. Does that mean that the president's relationship with the Department of Justice will finally become more civil and productive? I think this is a huge

question for Barr. He has a big job to do. He needs to both rehabilitate the relationship with the White House and he needs to improve morale inside of the building, which is pretty low after almost two years of constant attacks from the White House. One of the things about William Barr that people expect, including people at the White House, is that he will say no to the president, and he will be willing to defy the president. William Barr is not coming into the job as a former Trump campaign official, and he's not coming into the job as a former Trump campaign official, and he's not coming into the job as one of the president's first and earliest and staunchest supporters as Jeff Sessions did. He is coming into the job largely independent. And so I think

there's more of an expectation of independence from him than there was with Sessions. So whether or not Barr can walk the fine line between doing his job, which sometimes means saying no to the president, and making sure that that doesn't spill over into this acrimonious relationship again, that's going to be really difficult. But I think he has a way better chance of doing it than Jeff Sessions ever did. I wonder if, at the end of the day, having Sessions and having Rosenstein in these powerful positions, which is about to end, if having them as kind of foils and punching bags was really useful for the president because it allowed him to cast doubt on the Russia investigation and frankly, any investigation he didn't like that the Justice Department overtook. Does that mean that having someone like Barr, is that going to make it harder for the president to attack these investigations and try to undermine them? I don't think that the president sees a world in which just because he chose somebody for a job,

he can't attack them. There's nothing in the last two years of his presidency to suggest that. So even though he's nominated William Barr and he wants Barr to become the attorney general, he also nominated Sessions. He also nominated Rosenstein and was happy when it suited him to turn on them. But Barr is a little bit different. He's already done the job. He's already been attorney general and has a sterling reputation to preserve. I don't anticipate a world in which he will not push back and try to defend the department and the people who work there when the president does attack. I wonder, though, if that's a recipe for a very short-lived attorney generalship. Someone who sees his role as protecting the department

and standing up to the president. I think it's part of the job of the attorney general. And could it mean that he has a very short term in the office? It could. That said, if you're William Barr and you have this sterling reputation, which would you rather do? Be attorney general for a few months and go down in a blaze of glory because you defended the department in a tough time? Or say nothing and be considered forever in the history books as somebody who remained silent and allowed the president

to trample on the department that you once represented. Katie, thank you very much. Thank you. In his written testimony for today's confirmation hearing, William Barr pledged to allow the special counsel's office to finish its investigation and said it is, quote, very important that the public be informed

of the investigation's results. The country needs a credible resolution of these issues, Barr wrote. If confirmed, I will not permit partisan politics, personal interests, or any other improper consideration to interfere with this or any other investigation. Barr's testimony before the Senate is scheduled for 9.30 this morning.

We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. On Monday, President Trump rejected a proposal made by a close Republican ally, Senator Lindsey Graham, to reopen the government temporarily to negotiate funding for a border wall before resorting to an emergency declaration that would allow Trump to start building the wall without Congress's consent. I would urge him to open up the government for a short period of time, like three weeks, before he pulls the plug, see if we can get a deal.

If we can't at the end of three weeks, all bets are off. See if he can do it by himself through the emergency powers. That's my recommendation. Asked about the proposal on the White House lawn, Trump said it was insufficient. Well, that was a suggestion that Lindsey made, but I did reject it, yes. I'm not interested. I want to get it solved.

I don't want to just delay it. I want to get it solved. With no negotiations underway, the shutdown is now in its 24th day. And... Here we are on a rainy day in the richest country in the world, in the richest state in the world, in the richest state in the country,

in a state as blue as it can be, and in a city rife with millionaires, where teachers have to go on strike to get the basics for our students. In Los Angeles on Monday, more than 30,000 public school teachers began a labor strike over demands for higher pay, smaller classes, and the need for more support staff. Teachers united will never be divided. The strike is the latest case of teachers across the country walking off the job to protest working conditions. Last year, teachers mounted large-scale strikes in six other states, from West Virginia to Colorado. Los Angeles said its 900 public schools will remain open throughout the strike,

staffed by substitute teachers. But many parents have said they will keep their children out of school rather than making them cross a picket line to attend class. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.