Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell Addison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellThe Hill's 12:30 Report: Trump, Dems eye next stage in Mueller fight House Oversight Dem wants Trump to release taxes and 'get it over with' Senate rejection of Green New Deal won't slow Americans' desire for climate action MORE (R-Ky.) on Monday blocked a resolution calling for special counsel Robert Mueller Robert Swan MuellerSasse: US should applaud choice of Mueller to lead Russia probe MORE's report to be released publicly.
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer Charles (Chuck) Ellis Schumer4 in 5 Americans say they support net neutrality: poll GOP senator: Trump's criticism of McCain 'deplorable' Schumer to introduce bill naming Senate office building after McCain amid Trump uproar MORE (D-N.Y.) asked for unanimous consent for the nonbinding resolution, which cleared the House 420-0, to be passed by the Senate following Mueller's submission of his final report on Friday.
"Whether or not you're a supporter of President Trump Donald John TrumpTrump: 'Haven't thought about' pardons for Mueller target Pence: Rocket attack 'proves that Hamas is not a partner for peace' Conservation remains a core conservative principle MORE ... there is no good reason not to make the report public," Schumer said from the floor. "It's a simple request for transparency. Nothing more, nothing less."
But McConnell objected, noting that Attorney General William Barr is working with Mueller to determine what in his report can be released publicly and what cannot.
"The special counsel and the Justice Department ought to be allowed to finish their work in a professional manner," McConnell said. "To date, the attorney general has followed through on his commitments to Congress. One of those commitments is that he intends to release as much information as possible."
Under Senate rules, any one senator can try to pass or set up a vote on a bill, resolution or nomination. But in turn, any one senator can block their request.
Mueller turned his report over to the Justice Department on Friday, signaling the formal end of the two-year investigation. Barr sent a four-page letter to the House and Senate Judiciary committees on Sunday outlining Mueller's main findings.
Mueller, according to the letter, did not uncover evidence that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.
The attorney general's letter also said that Mueller made no conclusion as to whether Trump obstructed justice in the investigation into Russia's election interference. But it states that Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Rod Jay RosensteinWhy Mueller's hedge on obstruction decision was a mistake The Hill's 12:30 Report: Trump, Dems eye next stage in Mueller fight Dem rep on collusion: 'Impossible' to 'write it off completely' just going off Barr summary MORE, after reviewing Mueller's findings, determined that they would not pursue an obstruction of justice charge.
He's separately told lawmakers he's working with Mueller to determine what in the report should or should not be publicly released.
Schumer added after McConnell's objection that the resolution didn't say the report should be released "immediately" but just that it ought to be released.
"I'm sort of befuddled by the majority leader's reasoning in this regard because it is not in the words of this resolution," he said.
But McConnell countered that the president has had to wait two years while the investigation was ongoing and "it's not unreasonable to give the special counsel and the Justice Department just a little time to complete their review in a professional and responsible manner."
Sen. Marco Rubio Marco Antonio RubioTrump UN pick donated to GOP members on Senate Foreign Relations panel Nunes on Mueller report: 'We can just burn it up' 18 state attorneys general call on Justice Dept to release Mueller report MORE (R-Fla.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, quickly backed McConnell up in a tweet.
Good. Because this measure is an unnecessary solution looking for a problem. Just like the previous one they had to prevent @potus from firing Mueller. https://t.co/x5wSwRZQbc — Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) March 25, 2019
The GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee passed legislation during the previous Congress that would protect Mueller from being fired, but it wasn't taken up on the Senate floor amid opposition from McConnell and other GOP senators.
It's the second time a Republican senator has blocked Schumer's attempt to pass the House resolution.
The New York Democrat’s first attempt came hours after the resolution cleared the House unanimously, but Sen. Lindsey Graham Lindsey Olin GrahamConservation remains a core conservative principle Graham: McCain 'acted appropriately' by handing Steele dossier to FBI The Hill's 12:30 Report: Trump, Dems eye next stage in Mueller fight MORE (R-S.C.), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, objected to his request.
Graham blocked the resolution from passing after Schumer refused to amend it to include a provision calling on the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel to investigate alleged department misconduct in the handling of the investigation into 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton Hillary Diane Rodham ClintonGraham: McCain 'acted appropriately' by handing Steele dossier to FBI Why Mueller's hedge on obstruction decision was a mistake Giuliani says news media treat Dems better than GOP MORE's email use and the Carter Page Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act applications.
LeatherOnion on March 25th, 2019 at 23:56 UTC »
I’ve said it a thousand times but a senate majority leaders ability to not hold a vote on a bill is ridiculous. It’s more powerful than the veto making him (a guy elected by 800,000 people in Kentucky) more powerful than the president in lawmaking. There should be a law that compels the majority leader and speaker to hold a vote if it passes the other house or has a certain amount of sponsors or if it passes committee or something. That our only recourse is a vote of no confidence is ridiculous.
Edit: lot of people not understanding I’m talking about the veto which shocker to people who haven’t taken civics, is powerful in deciding what becomes law. Requiring 67 votes to override, one guy elected by 800,000 people in Kentucky has more power than a presidential veto. Reading comprehension is key
slakmehl on March 25th, 2019 at 22:53 UTC »
It really did pass 420-0, just 11 days ago. Trump himself just today is supporting the release of the full report.
Barr's summary was very precise in it's language. It said there was not sufficient evidence to being a conspiracy case on interference in the election, and we should all be relieved at that conclusion. However, it did not characterize the extent of the evidence that does exist. Perhaps more importantly, it said nothing about the evidence that Trump is simply compromised by Russia, for example by documentation related to corrupt building projects with Russian oligarchs that would aid in the prosecution of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cases against Trump Org.
It could be the case that Trump's subordination to Putin in Helsinki, and insistence on periodic private meetings with no witnesses and destruction of notes whenever witnesses are present is simply due to his deep personal admiration for Vladimir Putin. But we have to know the extent of evidence suggests leverage over our President.
gmsteel on March 25th, 2019 at 22:34 UTC »
So are we going down the route of the house subpoenas it and its then read out on the floor of the house?