Vermont senators praise special prosecutor appointment

WASHINGTON – Vermont’s two U.S. Senators praised the appointment of a special prosecutor to oversee the FBI investigation into potential collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and the Russian government.

U.S. Sens. Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders – along with U.S. Rep. Peter Welch – have been calling for an independent Department of Justice investigation for days, their voices part of a chorus composed mostly of Democratic lawmakers.

On Wednesday, a deputy attorney general named former FBI Director Robert Mueller to lead the Russian investigation.

On Monday, the Washington Post reported that Trump had shared classified intelligence information with the Russians during a meeting in the Oval Office.

The pressure for an outside review heightened a day later, when the New York Times reported that Trump had asked the FBI Director, James Comey, to halt an investigation into Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, over his contacts with Russian officials. The investigation started over allegations that the Russians interfered in the November election.

Trump fired Comey last week.

The deputy attorney general who made the appointment, Rod Rosenstein, was also under mounting political pressure after he wrote a letter to Trump justifying Comey’s dismissal by criticizing the FBI director’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

Sanders called the appointment of Mueller “a positive step,” adding he was “hopeful” that Mueller would allow the investigation to continue unimpeded.

“To ensure the American people have full confidence in this investigation, it must be conducted in an open and transparent manner and be given the full resources it needed,” Sanders said in a statement. “Additionally, the ongoing investigations by the both the Senate and House must continue.”

The Wednesday evening letter from Rosenstein also heartened Leahy, who had, hours earlier, decried the handling of the investigation on the Senate floor, saying “at this critical time, it is not acceptable to remain on the sidelines.”

Leahy said he knew Mueller well from his FBI oversight work on the Senate Judiciary Committee when Mueller ran the agency between 2001 and 2013.

“He is widely respected in Congress, across the political spectrum,” Leahy said. “I welcome this development and am glad that Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein did the right thing by appointing a special counsel. Director Mueller has an enormous responsibility, to impartially determine the extent to which Russia has interfered in our democracy, and the depth of any connections between this administration and Russian officials.”

Leahy has been pushing for Rosenstein to appoint a special prosecutor since the attorney’s March confirmation hearings before the Judiciary Committee. Department rules call for the appointment of a special prosecutor should involvement by federal prosecutors “present a conflict of interest for the department.”

In March, Rosenstein made no pledge to Leahy and other Democrats to appoint a special counsel.

“As far as I’m concerned, every investigation conducted by the Department of Justice is an independent investigation,” he said. “We prosecute tens of thousands of people every year, and every one of those defendants deserves an independent prosecutor. And so I would be certain we had independent investigators to conduct those investigations.”

Rosenstein briefed all 100 senators late Thursday on the ongoing Russia investigation.

Meanwhile, Leahy is also requesting more information on Trump’s business ties across the world, which could potentially violate the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution.

In a Thursday letter joined by 16 other Senators, Leahy pressed the Trump Organization for more information on his foreign business ties. Two of the countries Trump is set to visit on his first trip abroad are ones where he holds assets — Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Jasper Craven

Comment Policy requires that all commenters identify themselves by their authentic first and last names. Initials, pseudonyms or screen names are not permissible.

No personal harrassment, abuse, or hate speech is permitted. Be succinct and to the point. Comments should be 1000 characters or fewer. If your comment is over 500 words, consider sending a commentary instead.

We personally review and moderate every comment that is posted here. This takes a lot of time; please consider donating to keep the conversation productive and informative.

The purpose of this policy is to encourage a civil discourse among readers who are willing to stand behind their identities and their comments. VTDigger has created a safe zone for readers who wish to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation. If you have questions or concerns about our commenting platform, please review our Commenting FAQ.

Privacy policy
  • Steve Baker
    • Robert Lehmert

      Comrade Steve, can you imagine they can walk and chew at the same time? Perhaps it is time for you to run for office to share your perspective with a waiting world. From my point of view, Vermont never suffered through the Great Recession the way that most other states (mostly sun belt states) did. Therefore the premise of measuring by % recovery from the Recession is a little silly. Moreover, if you want to “fix” Vermont, try flattening the hills and importing a couple million consumers.

      • Deborah Billado

        The hills are fine… but why would anyone come to Vermont.. the cost of living is unreasonable, jobs are scarce, the business climate and Montpelier are unpredictable, house is out of this world expensive.. should I say more. Vermont has lost population in the last couple years, not to mention we have over 20,000 fewer kids in the school system than we did 15 yrs ago.. yet the cost of education is one of the most expensive in the nation.. can you say VEA.. or UNION. Many of us are trying to make sense of where we are headed.. do we stay or do we go?

        • Edward Letourneau

          You go. The legislature showed us this year that they will not vote for reforms unless the teacher unions approve.

      • Steve Baker

        It’s laughable that you say Vermont never suffered the great recession, we’ve been in the cellar for so many years it’s hard to tell how bad things are comparatively to other states.

  • Gary Murdock

    This Leahy / Sanders / Welch press release is a textbook example of why I skip over anything written here about Washington. I already know what these three individuals think about every single issue, why waste my time reading about? This is regurgitation, not reporting.

    • Dominic Cotignola

      Because if you don’t keep up with reporting on your representatives, you end up like North Carolina.

      Our reps don’t have much longer in life to go. Better to keep the liberal ideas in for forefront than let it go by the way side and get more repubs in power in VT when current reps decide to leave.

      • Steve Baker

        North Carolina is actually a thriving state. Every economic metric pair doing better than the welfare state of Vermont

  • Ken Hertz

    Re your headline: Special PROSECUTOR is not the same as Special COUNSEL.

    • Pat McGarry

      Very accurate observation. There is currently a Special Counsel pursuant to 28 CFR 600.1. The last Special Prosecutor served during Watergate.

  • Steve Baker

    It’s interesting now that many principled sensible smart Liberals are coming around to the truth.
    Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz both noted attorneys and liberals, Both have asked the constitutional question “what crime has occurred ?”
    Both have stated if Trump and Putin conspired to overthrow Hillary, it is not a crime.
    Matt Lauer, well known liberal mouthpiece has lamented that a special prosecutor takes the headlines away from Democrats……..
    Whereas special prosecutor’s should only be prosecuting crimes, most freethinking legal expert think this is only a political witch hunt.
    The Democrats are the party of No.

    • Robert Lehmert

      No evidence? Evidence is produced during discovery, and admitted during trial, if any. I can sense you’re in a hurry for this to go away but that 1) isn’t going to happen and 2) highlights the huge split between normal Republicans and the Alex Jones-Brietbart-Limbaugh wing. Why, just today there was a nice illustration of how normal Republicans feel about this circus they find themselves in. At any rate, just be patient, this won’t take too much longer before the subpoenas and indictments flow.

      • Steve Baker

        I hope it hangs around for a while actually. It will make it funnier in the end when there no evidence because theres no crime.
        “Evidence is produced during discovery” there’s no discovery without a crime first.

    • David Bell

      It is interesting that you think someone conspiring with a hostile foreign government to hack ones political enemies for the purpose of swinging an election is not a crime.

      It is more interesting that after your endless insistence that no evidence of this collusion exists; you are now claiming “So what if Trump colluded with a hostile foreign government to swing an election, what’s so bad about that?”

      Glad to say I called this months ago; first the response is to angrily declare he didn’t do it, now it’s to angrily declare so what if he did.

      • Steve Baker

        I don’t think someone conspired with a hostile foreign government to hack ones
        political enemies for the purpose of swinging an election.
        The FBI told both Parties that hacking attempts were happening. The Dems were so smugg about winning, they didn’t do anything.

        But Tell me specifically what crime was committed?
        Why would Jonathan Turley or Alan Dershowitz claim there was no crime?
        Your false claim is that Trump did something (not sure what) and that he committed a crime (not sure what).
        Meanwhile the plot thickens with the death of Seth, doesn’t it?

Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "Vermont senators praise special prosecutor appointment"