[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.