[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 171 (Thursday, November 19, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8151-S8152]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          NOMINATION OBJECTION

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I intend to object to any unanimous 
consent request at the present time relating to the nomination of 
Thomas A. Shannon, Jr., of Virginia, a career member of the Senior 
Foreign Service, class of Career Ambassador, to be an

[[Page S8152]]

Under Secretary of State, Political Affairs.
  I will object because the Department of State has still not responded 
to almost a dozen investigative letters dating back to 2013. In 
addition, on August 20, 2015, my staff met with Department officials in 
an effort to prioritize material for production. The Department has 
failed to comply with its commitments, producing material late, failing 
to provide all requested material, and even failing to provide material 
to the Senate Judiciary Committee contemporaneously with providing the 
same documents to Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, requestors. These 
are the same complaints that I raised on September 30, 2015, when I 
placed a hold on Brian James Egan of Maryland to be legal advisor of 
the Department of State. Apparently, the Department simply does not 
understand its obligation to respond to congressional inquiries in a 
timely and reasonable manner.
  Two and a half years ago I began a broad inquiry into the 
government's use of special government employee programs. I did not 
single out the State Department on this issue. To the contrary, I wrote 
to 16 different government agencies.
  Two and a half years have passed since I began my inquiry, and the 
State Department has still not produced the materials I have requested 
or certified they do not exist.
  In addition to the investigation of the Department's special 
government employee program, I am also investigating the Department's 
compliance with the FOIA as it pertains to Secretary Clinton's private 
server that was used to transit and store government information.
  The Minority Leader has questioned whether the Judiciary Committee's 
jurisdiction extends to these matters. I would note that the special 
government employee designation is an exception to Federal criminal 
conflict-of-interest laws. Those laws are within the jurisdiction of 
the Judiciary Committee, as is FOIA.
  During the course of my investigation, a former State Department 
employee--Mr. Bryan Pagliano--declined to speak to the Judiciary 
Committee about his work on Secretary Clinton's email server.
  He pled the Fifth Amendment.
  We keep hearing that the FBI's inquiry is just a security review and 
not a criminal inquiry; yet this witness cited his Constitutional right 
against self-incrimination to avoid talking about his work on the email 
server. And he is relying on the Fifth Amendment to withhold his 
personal emails as well.
  So naturally we are searching for other ways to get information 
before deciding whether it might be appropriate to seek an immunity 
order for his testimony. The most likely source of information without 
forcing the witness to testify would be his emails.
  Yet the Department has failed to produce any in response to my 
request and the request of Chairman Johnson of the Homeland Security 
and Governmental Affairs Committee.
  As a further example of the Department's continued intransigence, I 
requested all SF-312 ``Classified Non-Disclosure Agreements'' for 
Secretary Clinton, Ms. Huma Abedin, and Ms. Cheryl Mills on August 5, 
2015. My staff met with Department personnel three times since that 
letter and participated in dozens of emails and phone calls in an 
effort to acquire these documents. In addition, after the Department 
complained that it had received too many requests from me, my staff 
produced a prioritized list of requests to assist the Department in 
producing responses. At number three on that list were the SF-312 
forms, and at number one are the official emails of Mr. Pagliano.
  Notably, during conversations with my staff on the subject, 
Department personnel stated that they could not locate those forms with 
the exception of only page 2 of Ms. Abedin's SF-312 exit form. On 
November 5, 2015, the Department produced SF-312 entrance forms for 
Secretary Clinton, Ms. Abedin, and Ms. Mills to a FOIA requestor but 
failed to provide the same to the Committee. Clearly, the documents 
exist.
  In addition, I am also looking into several State Department 
inspector general and whistleblower reports that suggest that the State 
Department does not hold its own employees accountable for human-
trafficking and prostitution violations.
  Earlier this year, the Judiciary Committee led the effort to pass the 
Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, and I have sent letters to DOJ 
and DHS--and not just the State Department--to ensure that Federal 
employees are held accountable for soliciting prostitutes.
  Last week, the minority leader questioned my use of Judiciary 
Committee resources to conduct these investigations, suggesting that my 
work in this area is somehow taking away from the committee's other 
work.
  Back in September, the Justice Department sent me a letter 
complaining that I have sent them almost 100 oversight letters 
containing more than 825 questions and document requests--in 2015 
alone.
  Since then, my office has sent 11 additional oversight letters to the 
Justice Department, containing more than 65 questions and document 
requests. So perhaps the minority leader should ask the assistant 
attorney general for legislative affairs at DOJ whether my committee is 
not doing enough DOJ oversight.
  The continued intransigence and lack of cooperation make it clear 
that the Department did not care enough about their Foreign Service 
officer candidates to ``get in gear'' and begin to produce responses to 
my oversight letters. Accordingly, I have released my hold on these 
officer candidates and have escalated to Mr. Shannon.
  The Department of State's refusal to fully cooperate with my 
investigations is unacceptable.
  As I have noted before on the floor of the Senate, the Department 
continues to promise results, but there has been very little or no 
follow-through. The Department's good faith will be measured in 
documents delivered and witnesses provided.
  My objection is not intended to question the credentials of Mr. 
Shannon in any way. However, the Department must recognize that it has 
an ongoing obligation to respond to congressional inquiries in a timely 
and reasonable manner.

                          ____________________