You have reached your limit of free articles this month.

Enjoy unlimited access to myStatesman.com

Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks.

GREAT REASONS TO SUBSCRIBE TODAY!

  • IN-DEPTH REPORTING
  • INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING
  • NEW TOPICS & COVERAGE
  • ePAPER
X

You have read of premium articles.

Get unlimited access to all of our breaking news, in-depth coverage and bonus content- exclusively for subscribers. Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks

X

Welcome to myStatesman.com

This subscriber-only site gives you exclusive access to breaking news, in-depth coverage, exclusive interactives and bonus content.

You can read free articles of your choice a month that are only available on myStatesman.com.

Commentary: Bring on the special prosecutor


In light of the stunning events of the past week, the question is not whether the Trump administration’s ties to the Russian government need to be investigated immediately and fully — clearly they do. It’s who will be in charge of that investigation.

The Republicans in Congress can’t decide whether they would rather act like a responsible, independent branch or just the friendly legislative arm of the White House. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House oversight committee, would sooner investigate a cartoon character named Sid the Science Kid than any allegations relating to President Donald Trump.

The prize for partisan candor goes to Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, who said on Tuesday, “We’ll never even get started with doing the things we need to do, like repealing Obamacare, if we’re spending our whole time having Republicans investigate Republicans.”

James Comey, the embattled FBI director, can’t be trusted to be a neutral investigator, either — not after his one-sided interference in the 2016 election compromised the bureau’s integrity and damaged Hillary Clinton’s campaign in its final days. Comey reports directly to the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, who was not only Trump’s first and most ardent supporter in the Senate but also the chairman of the Trump campaign’s national security advisory committee.

Despite his closeness to Trump, Sessions has said he sees no reason to recuse himself from any inquiry into the relationship between the president’s top aides and Russia. Trump’s unexplained allegiance to that country and its thug of a president, Vladimir Putin, has been a major concern from the start of his candidacy. But the scope of a potential investigation expanded sharply in the last four days, with the firing of Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Flynn, for lying to the White House about his contacts with the Russian ambassador, and the news that members of the Trump campaign’s inner circle were in repeated contact with Russian intelligence agents last year, at the same time that Russia was actively attempting to swing the election to Trump.

There is, in fact, only one person who could conduct such a high-profile, politically sensitive investigation fairly and completely: a special prosecutor.

Some Republican senators have recognized the need for an investigation, and it would be right for the Senate to move ahead in its role as a check on the executive.

But the need for an independent actor who can both investigate and prosecute criminal wrongdoing in the executive branch is clear, because the attorney general and the Justice Department cannot be reliably impartial about their own bosses. Of course, what’s simple in theory has been politically fraught in practice. In scandals from Watergate to Iran-Contra to Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky, special prosecutors have butted heads with presidents and their staffs, sometimes with calamitous results.

A 1978 law, the Independent Counsel Act, created a mechanism for appointing special prosecutors who were empowered to investigate broadly and protected from presidential meddling. But the law expired in 1999 amid partisan dispute; today only the attorney general has the power to appoint a special prosecutor.

In this case, the need couldn’t be more obvious. For starters, did Trump order Flynn — directly or indirectly — to discuss sanctions with the Russian ambassador? If not, why did he not fire Flynn weeks earlier, when he apparently first learned of his lies? Were Trump’s aides colluding with Russian agents during the campaign? Perhaps most important are Trump’s tax returns, which could tell us whether he is beholden to, and thus compromised by, the Russians? House Republicans, assuming their standard supine stance toward Trump, voted Tuesday against requesting the returns from the Internal Revenue Service; a special prosecutor would not feel so politically constrained.

It’s never easy to conduct robust, independent investigations of the most powerful people in the world, but it is one of the foundations of a functioning democracy. The concern is particularly great in the case of the Trump administration, which seems uninterested in telling the truth in matters large and small.

Sessions must appoint a special prosecutor, and he knows why. As an article published on Fox News’ website days before the election said, “The appropriate response when the subject matter is public and it arises in a highly charged political atmosphere is for the attorney general to appoint a special counsel of great public stature and indisputable independence to assure the public the matter will be handled without partisanship.”

The article, which called for an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server and pay-to-play allegations surrounding the Clinton Foundation, argued that Loretta Lynch, then the attorney general, could not serve as a neutral arbiter, given her impromptu meeting with Bill Clinton on her airplane earlier in the year. One of the article’s co-authors was Jeff Sessions.



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Commentary: Our schools are broken; it’s time to demand change
Commentary: Our schools are broken; it’s time to demand change

Last year, the Texas Supreme Court called our state’s school funding system awful, inadequate and basically a mess – yet still ruled that it met some minimum standard for Texas students. When I asked one legislator to explain this, he said that only three or four people in Texas understood the school finance system — and he wasn&rsquo...
Commentary: Ride-hailing shenanigans at Legislature could produce harm
Commentary: Ride-hailing shenanigans at Legislature could produce harm

A great irony is transpiring at the Texas Legislature. Some conservative legislators are asking their colleagues to throw the principle of local control overboard while also weakening public safety laws. We refer of course to the great ride-hailing legislative scam. Proposed bills would cancel the authority of local governments to regulate Uber and...
Letters to the editor: March 24, 2017
Letters to the editor: March 24, 2017

Re: March 11 letter to the editor, “Free press critical to U.S.; Trump must be rebuked.” Those defending the media recently have gotten two things right: The free press is the watchdog of the government, and its protections and duty are explicitly granted in the U.S. Constitution. But when the press becomes derelict in this duty, who is...
Herman: Teaching young people to respect cops in the times we live in
Herman: Teaching young people to respect cops in the times we live in

In Latin and in law it’s known as “in loco parentis.” It’s often a concept of last resort, one not pursued lightly because it runs counter to our better instincts. The literal translation is “in place of a parent.” The best societies are built on the notion that parents — more than governments, more than judges...
Commentary: Rep. King words not offensive; they’re a reminder to us all
Commentary: Rep. King words not offensive; they’re a reminder to us all

Representative Steve King of Iowa recently tweeted, “We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies.” According to the media, the comment set off a firestorm as critics accused the immigration hardliner of endorsing white nationalism. King says he was equating ‘our civilization’ to culture, not race...
More Stories