[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 115 (Tuesday, July 10, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4854-S4857]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Nomination of Brian Benczkowski
Mr. President, back on page 8 of the Executive Calendar of the United
States Senate, there is a long list of nominations that are pending
before the Senate, and one of these, Calendar No. 639 on the Message
No. 1402, is the name Brian Allen Benczkowski, of Virginia, to be an
Assistant Attorney General. You would have to search the Executive
Calendar to find it, but it is going to be voted on this afternoon in
the Senate.
Is it another routine nomination? Not at all. This position in the
Department of Justice is the Assistant Attorney General for the
Criminal Division, who is the leader and is responsible for over 600
Federal prosecutors who are prosecuting cases across the criminal
spectrum from treason against the United States to the opioid crisis
and everything in between--600 men and women, career prosecutors,
prosecuting the laws, the cases on behalf of the U.S. Government.
President Trump has suggested that he wants this man, Brian Allen
Benczkowski, of Virginia, to be in charge of those 600 prosecutors.
Is this a big assignment? In the Department of Justice, it is one of
the biggest assignments. This person will be directing the cases that
are filed on behalf of the United States of America, critical cases for
protecting our national security, critical cases relative to crimes
that are being committed, critical cases when it comes to our rights as
citizens. He will be leading 600 Federal prosecutors.
[[Page S4855]]
Is it not reasonable for us to ask a basic question about Brian Allen
Benczkowski, of Virginia? We did so in the Judiciary Committee, and
here is the question we asked: Mr. Benczkowski, you are seeking the
position of Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal
Division with 600 prosecutors that you will direct. Please tell the
committee how many cases you have prosecuted. As a lawyer--first, how
many civil cases have you tried.
The answer? None.
Oh, well, how about criminal cases? How many criminal cases have you
prosecuted in your lifetime as a lawyer? None.
How many motions have you argued before a Federal court? None.
Wait a minute. You are being chosen to head up the Criminal Division
of the Department of Justice, and you have no experience? You have
never prosecuted a case ever--never once been in a Federal courtroom,
not one time?
So far, President Trump has sent us a record number of nominees for
the Federal courts, and I will tell you, as a member of the Senate
Judiciary Committee, all but a few have been approved. I think some of
them are awful choices, and some are good. But the awful choices are
men and women who have said and done things in their legal practice and
private lives that really raise serious questions about whether they
have the temperament to be a Federal judge.
With few exceptions, all of the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary
Committee have voted every time for Trump nominees. Two exceptions were
a district court nominee for Washington DC and a district court nominee
for Alabama, and in both of those cases, the people who were being
appointed by the Trump administration to a lifetime appointment in a
Federal district court had no experience in a Federal courtroom.
I can tell you that one of the hearings on one of the Trump
nominees--and I will not bring his name up for the record, but you can
find it if you wish--cross-examination by a Republican Senator on our
committee, Senator Kennedy of Louisiana, was devastating. This Trump
nominee couldn't find his way to a Federal courthouse with GPS. He had
no experience whatsoever in trying a case, so the decision was made to
withdraw his nomination. Only rarely in a year and a half have Trump
nominees been so unqualified that they have withdrawn their
nominations.
Now, this afternoon, we consider Brian Allen Benczkowski, of
Virginia, to head up the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of
Justice, a man with no trial experience--none--in a Federal courtroom,
not in a civil case, not in a criminal case.
There is more to the story. Why is he here? He is here because at one
point in his career he was staff director to then-Senator Jeff Sessions
of Alabama. He worked on the Senate Judiciary Committee. I remember
seeing him. He looked like a competent, affable Senate staffer. We
didn't have any direct relationship. Now that Senator Sessions has been
elevated to Attorney General, he wants this staffer, Brian Allen
Benczkowski, to head up one of the most important divisions in the
Department of Justice. That is his connection. That is his angel. That
is why his name is on this calendar. That is why the Trump
administration chose him.
If that were the end of the story, it would be bad enough--someone
with no experience whatsoever prosecuting a case to head up 600 Federal
prosecutors. But as they say, and as Paul Harvey used to say, there is
more to the story.
You see, what happened was this--and follow me if you will. After
Donald Trump won the Presidency and was in his transition period, Mr.
Benczkowski left his private practice of law to be part of the Trump
transition team assigned to the Department of Justice. Between November
and January, the swearing-in, he served on that transition committee,
trying to smooth the way for the new administration to take over the
Department of Justice.
At the end, when President Trump was sworn in, Mr. Benczkowski left
the transition committee and went back to his private practice here in
Washington for a well-known firm. But before he returned to that firm,
he asked the Trump administration and his former boss, I hope you will
consider appointing me as a U.S. attorney somewhere in the United
States.
Remember, he has no experience--none. He has never prosecuted a case,
but he suggested that he wanted to be considered for that lower level
position--compared to the head of the division--as he returned to
private practice.
He went back to his law firm, and follow the story. He goes back to
this law firm, and one of the partners at the law firm calls him in and
says: I need you to take over a case to represent one of our firm's
clients. The client is known as Alfa Bank. It is a Russian bank, and it
is a Russian bank, as I describe the story, that is very significant in
terms of our conversation today about the Russian impact on the U.S.
election. Alfa Bank needed Mr. Benczkowski to look at the so-called
Steele dossier. Do you remember that? It was the memo that came out
about then-Candidate Trump and things that were alleged that occurred
in Russia. Well, they said to Mr. Benczkowski: Represent the Alfa Bank
because their name popped up in the Steele dossier, and we think it is
terrible, and they want to consider a defamation lawsuit. So Mr.
Benczkowski took on the Alfa Bank as a client in reference to
allegations made in the Steele dossier.
There is more to the story. During the course of the Trump campaign,
there were unexplained pings and contacts between Alfa Bank and the
Trump campaign computers--more than one. It is still unexplained as to
why this Russian bank would have any access or communication with the
computers of the Trump campaign.
The Alfa Bank is not just another corner bank. The Alfa Bank is run
by individuals who are oligarchs in Russia. They are closer to Vladimir
Putin than you can imagine.
This Alfa Bank is pretty well connected, and they had some
communication, still unexplained, between that bank and the Trump
campaign. Now, Mr. Benczkowski began representing the Alfa Bank on a
question of defamation lawsuits concerning the Steele dossier as well
conducting a forensic computer analysis of the server communications.
Wouldn't you think for a moment that if you were Mr. Benczkowski
considering the possibility of a job in the Trump administration, you
would have said to your law firm: I am not going to touch this one. We
have all these allegations about Russian involvement in the campaign.
We have some computer contact between Alfa Bank and the Trump campaign.
We have this oligarch close to Vladimir Putin personally. We have this
Steele dossier, which mentions the Alfa Bank. Wouldn't you think that
the average lawyer would say to his law firm: Sorry, I am being
considered for a position in the Trump administration. I am not going
to get close to the Alfa Bank.
No, Mr. Benczkowski said: I will do the work for the Alfa Bank.
When the time came and he wasn't considered for the U.S. attorney
spot, he was considered to head up the Criminal Division of the
Department of Justice, and Mr. Benczkowski filed all of these papers
about all of his activities--as a Senate staffer, as a lawyer, and all
the rest. It came out in the course of that that he had represented the
Alfa Bank.
That is not good. It was discovered, with some background checks
through the FBI, that he was in that position. He was confronted.
Basically, we said in the committee: Are you going to recuse yourself
from any matters before the Department of Justice involving the Russia
investigation?
He said: No, I will not. I am going to stick with involving myself in
the Russia investigation.
What will you recuse yourself from, in light of this representation
of Alfa Bank?
I will not take up any cases involving Alfa Bank.
That is it?
That is it.
That is the best we could get from him in terms of recusing himself
from any potential conflict of interest. Why is this important at this
moment in time? Because at this moment in time, I don't know when Bob
Mueller will complete his investigation. I don't know how the White
House will react. I don't know what will happen with Attorney General
Sessions, who now has
[[Page S4856]]
recused himself from the Russia investigation. I don't know what will
happen when it comes to any threats to the Deputy Attorney General in
terms of his future.
There is a possibility that if this President decides that he is
going to take an action that is going to have a direct impact on the
Mueller investigation and if he decides, for example, that he is going
to remove from consideration of this in the future the Deputy Attorney
General who appointed Bob Mueller--I am talking about Rod Rosenstein--a
vacancy in that position could be filled on an acting basis by Mr.
Benczkowski. He could take up that position.
Is this an important decision, then, back here on page 8 of the
calendar, to be voted on this afternoon? I think it is. First, there is
the obvious gross incompetence and inexperience of this man to head up
the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice; second, the fact
that he represented the Alfa Bank, which is under suspicion as to its
activities; third, the close connection between Alfa Bank and its
owners with Vladimir Putin and Russia; fourth, the ongoing
investigation of the Russian involvement in the last election campaign;
fifth, the threat that this could occur again in the future; sixth, the
fact that we need an aggressive Department of Justice to stand up and
protect our democracy and the right to vote of every single American.
The list goes on and on.
This is the wrong man for this job. I cannot believe, as a proud
Democratic Senator, that the Republican Party couldn't find one
experienced prosecutor in the United States to take over the Criminal
Division of the Department of Justice. Instead, they are going to give
it to a man who has never, ever darkened the door of a Federal
courthouse. That is what they are doing.
It shows you the lengths they are going to go to, and it shows you
the importance of just another nomination stuck on page 8 on the
calendar that will be voted on this afternoon.
Here is the question. It is a majority vote. There are 50 Republican
Senators and 49 Democrats in this Chamber. Senator McCain, of course,
is ill and hasn't been here for several months. It is 50 to 49, among
those likely to attend today. Under the rules, as written in the
Senate, a majority vote can move this man forward--Mr. Benczkowski.
That is all it takes. What it boils down to is whether or not any
Republican Senators see a problem with this nomination. I hope that
each one of those Senators will reflect on the fact that they
personally know a handful of individuals, maybe more, who are more
qualified to take on this critical job than Mr. Benczkowski. Please
join us in stopping this nomination. Let's put somebody in this job who
understands it, who has experience.
How many people would walk into a lawyer's office and say: I would
like you to represent me. Have you ever had a case like mine before?
And the lawyer says: No, I have never seen one like this and have
never represented anybody like you.
And the client would reply: Perfect, that is just what I am looking
for, someone who is so inexperienced and so incapable of representing
me that I can't wait to pay their fee.
Let's not pay the fee to Mr. Benczkowski. Let's return him to his
private practice.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter to President
Trump urging the withdrawal of Mr. Benczkowski's nomination, dated May
9, 2018, and signed by all Democratic members of the Judiciary
Committee, be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC, May 9, 2018.
President Donald Trump,
The White House,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: We urge you to withdraw the nomination
of Brian Benczkowski to be Assistant Attorney General for the
Department of Justice's Criminal Division and to submit
another nominee for this important position.
With new information about Russia's election interference
continuing to come to light and with a federal criminal
investigation ongoing, it is imperative that we have a head
of the Criminal Division who is free and clear from Russian
connections. Mr. Benczkowski's representation of the Putin-
allied Alfa Bank and his refusal to recuse himself from
Russia-related matters mean that he will not be able to
credibly oversee the Division's involvement in Special
Counsel Mueller's investigation and other sensitive matters
such as the criminal investigation of Michael Cohen.
Furthermore, at a time when the Department of Justice's
handling of criminal matters has come under intense public
scrutiny, it is essential that the Criminal Division have an
experienced and well-qualified leader whose judgment and
independence are beyond reproach. Mr. Benczkowski, who has no
prosecutorial experience, does not meet these criteria.
Simply put, Mr. Benczkowski is not the nominee our country
needs at this critical moment.
The Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division
must oversee and manage litigation strategy for hundreds of
federal prosecutors handling a wide range of criminal cases.
Mr. Benczkowski, however, has never served as a prosecutor,
nor has he ever tried a case. While Mr. Benczkowski does
possess experience as a top aide to then-Senator Jeff
Sessions and in various Department of Justice staff
positions, this does not qualify him to lead the career
prosecutors of the Criminal Division. His dearth of courtroom
experience makes him ill-suited for the position he now
seeks.
Mr. Benczkowski also demonstrated poor judgment by choosing
to represent Alfa Bank, a Russian bank controlled by Putin-
allied oligarchs, in March 2017--while he was seeking
employment in the Justice Department and despite public
reports that the bank was under FBI investigation for
suspicious computer server contacts with the Trump
Organization. He continued representing Alfa Bank in April
and May 2017 even while he was under consideration to head
the Criminal Division. At a time when we need the Department
of Justice's Criminal Division to help uncover, prevent, and
deter Russian interference in our democracy, Mr.
Benczkowski's choices so far have not inspired confidence
that he is the right person to lead that fight.
Additionally, unanswered questions remain about Alfa Bank
that should be resolved before the Senate even considers
voting to confirm this bank's lawyer to a top Justice
Department position. The Senate does not know if Alfa Bank
has been, or still is, under federal criminal investigation,
nor do we know the full story behind Alfa Bank's suspicious
contacts with the Trump Organization during the 2016
campaign. The work that Mr. Benczkowski did for Alfa Bank,
which included reviewing the Steele Dossier for a potential
defamation suit and overseeing a forensic data firm's
analysis of Alfa's computer server contacts, in no way put to
rest the serious questions about Alfa Bank's activities. It
would be an abdication of the Senate's advice and consent
role to confirm Mr. Benczkowski without first getting answers
to these crucial questions.
We are further concerned about Mr. Benczkowski's capability
to serve as an independent leader of the Criminal Division.
Mr. Benczkowski has worked closely in the past with Attorney
General Sessions and sought his help obtaining a Justice
Department job in the Trump Administration. We are troubled
by Mr. Benczkowski's refusal to commit to recuse himself from
Russia-related matters if confirmed, and also by the
Department's refusal to identify steps that would be taken to
prevent Mr. Benczkowski from learning information about
Special Counsel Mueller's investigation and relaying that
information to Attorney General Sessions in contravention of
the Attorney General's recusal commitments. Also, if
confirmed Mr. Benczkowski would have visibility into the
criminal investigation and potential prosecution of Michael
Cohen, who reportedly sought to pursue business deals in
Russia, among other alleged activities. Attorney General
Sessions has reportedly declined to recuse himself from the
Cohen matter, and Mr. Benczkowski, if confirmed, could serve
as a conduit of information to the Attorney General about
this sensitive matter, which may implicate the Russian
interference investigation. We need a head of the Criminal
Division who will instill confidence that recusal obligations
will be respected and that criminal enforcement decisions
will be made independently based solely on the facts and the
law. Because of his own inadequate recusal commitment, Mr.
Benczkowski does not inspire this confidence.
Many of us know Mr. Benczkowski and we respect his public
service. But we can, and must, do better when it comes to the
nominee to head the Justice Department's Criminal Division.
There are many well-qualified attorneys who have significant
prosecutorial experience, who are free and clear from Russian
connections, and whose independence and judgment are
unquestioned. Mr. Benczkowski is not such a nominee. We urge
you to withdraw Mr. Benczkowski's nomination and send the
Senate a new nominee who meets that standard.
Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin, Dianne Feinstein, Patrick J. Leahy,
Amy Klobuchar, Richard Blumenthal, Cory A. Booker,
Sheldon Whitehouse, Christopher A. Coons, Mazie K.
Hirono, Kamala D. Harris.
Mr. DURBIN. I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
[[Page S4857]]
Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cruz). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in
morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The remarks of Mr. Jones pertaining to the introduction of S. 3191
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills
and Joint Resolutions.'')
Mr. JONES. I yield the floor.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise to support Mark Jeremy
Bennett's nomination to serve as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit.
Mr. Bennett's nomination is how judicial nominations should work. His
name was not on a rightwing wish list created by outside groups.
Instead, the White House worked closely with both of Hawaii's
Democratic Senators to find a consensus nominee that would get broad
bipartisan support.
Senators are constitutionally directed to provide the executive
branch with advice and consent. I encourage the White House to continue
to consult with Members of both parties on all future nominees.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in
morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.