Who have been down this road many times. Criminal investigations are designed to find out if a crime was committed and hold somebody responsible. Congress has a broader mandate, were not prosecutors, but our goal is to shed light on information that may be highly significant but not necessarily criminal. Adjust policy as needed, change laws when appropriate. But in a particular circumstance, find out what happened, not as a prosecutor but as a policymaker. Mr. Rosenburg said in the absence of a constitutional privilege or selfimposed statutory restriction upon its authority, congress and its committees have a virtual pliniary power needed to discharge legislative functions. I think its true but its bounded by the respect for the criminal process. So were trying to find out where that boundary exists, how to navigate this problem, and proceed in an orderly manner so we do not get in the way of mr. Muller, but we discharge our duties to the public at large. After i cut my phone off, ill swear in the witnesses. Would you please rise. Raise your right hand, please. Do each of you swear the testimony you give before this committee is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god . Thank you. As i indicated we have an Incredible Group of people who will be helpful to this committee as to how we move forward. From 95 to 96 mr. Ben vanista was on the whitewater committee. From 73 to 75 he held the position of the chief of the Watergate Task force. From 2003 to 2004, he served as one of the ten commissioners on the bipartisan 9 11 commission. Welcome and thank you for coming. Ms. Danielle bryant issued a report entitled necessary and proper, best practices for congressional investigations and thats what were trying to find out what are the best practices. Mr. Andrew frye, represented the government at the iran contra conviction of admiral poindexter and colonel north. Mr. Keeper was chief counsel to the house Iran Contra Committee in 1987. 1984 to 1995 he was the general counsel to u. S. House of representatives. He was assistant Legal Counsel at the United States senate from 1979 to 1984. Each of you in your own way have a tremendous insight into how congress should behave when theres a conflict between the congressional investigation and a potential crime. And just as hes known for perfect timing, senator whitehouse will give his Opening Statement. Thank you, chairman. I like the haircut. You must have ran all the way from rhode island. So first of all, thank you for doing this. I appreciate it very much. We learned today that donald trump jr. Knowingly sought information from the russian government to help his Fathers Campaign and that the repeat denials were false. And i have no doubt special counselor muller will get to the bottom of any violations of criminal law. Congress has a duty to know who knew with what, when, regarding the russian governments campaign to help get president elected. We will help the public understand what happened, to frame responses to the threats of continued russian influence, and in todays case, to insure the parallel investigations do not conflict. These questions are deadly serious as they implement the president s fitsness to perform the duties of his office. Let me thank chairman graham for continuing to persist in holding substantive hearings in our subcommittee. I hope the full committee gets energized. But in the meantime this subcommittee is doing its job. The investigative function of Senate Committees is vital. Woodrow wilson once said the investigative function of congress is to be preferred even to its legislative function. The Supreme Court has held the scope of our power of inquiry is its penetrating to enact and appropriate under the constitution. From senator trumans investigation of defense contractors to the Army Mccarthy hearings, the watergates hearings, our function has always been important, even if sometimes imperfect. Senator graham and i have been prosecutors. As has senator clobeshar. Congressional investigations in the legislative branch, to proceeds in parallel without harm to either. We are pleased to have experts in this area to help shed the light of their study and experience. One particular issue is the still undisclosed tax returns of donald trump. And the separate means for criminal investigations and congressional investigations to gain access to such materials. There are different rules and procedures for the executive and legislative branches. But the bottom line is this, while it would be wrong for Senate Investigations to peer over the shoulders of executive investigations and look into the contents of their files, there is nothing wrong with both investigations looking at the same evidence, acquired separately and consistent with law. One last point before we turn to the witnesses, the assertion and legislative hearings of executive privilege. Attorney general sessions refused to answer senators questions based on what we called Longstanding Department of defense practice, protecting the right of the president to assert executive privilege if he chooses, end quote. He said that the basis for this historical practice is laid out in two 1982 memos. Well, ive read those memos. One focuses on Congress Broad power of inquiry to expose corruption in the executive branch. It emphasizes the limits on executive privilege. The second memo allows to hold off on inquiries whether the president decides executive privilege. The magic word in this is obeyiance. The diction definition is temporary in suspension. Ultimately, the president must assert executive privilege or the attorney general must answer. And in my view, that clock has run. The witness who appears before the senate owes the senate honest and accurate responses to questions. This is a principle worth defending. The proper functioning of our constitutional democracy demands that congress get straight answers and senator graham and i intend to get straight answers. Thank you, chairman. Thanks. Ser grassley has just arrived. I would appreciate if i could ask questions after the panel has spoken. Absolutely. The floor is yours. [ inaudible ] chairman graham and Ranking Member whitehouse, im pleased to accept your invitation to appear before this subcommittee to discuss my personal views on the overlapping but largely distinguishable responsibilities between congressional oversight hearings and the work of federal prosecutors. I have been fortunate over the course of my legal career to have served as a federal prosecutor in the Southern District of new york and assistant special prosecutor in the office of the Watergate Special prosecution force. Chief minority counsel, chaired by both senator Lawton Chiles and senator arln speenspecter we was a republican of pennsylvania and as a defense lawyer in a criminal case brought by a special prosecutor and as a meer of the bartisan 9 11 commission. Congressional investigations have long been a shining example of democracy in action. Informing the public and providing factbased grounds for critical legislation. Investigations of organized crime, union busting, union corruption, wall street banking practices, the ku klux klan are but a few areas in which important societal changes have resulted from congressional inquiries. As such, i have great appreciation for the invaluable benefit to our society of congressional inquiries that have allowed disinfecting sunlight into dark corners that otherwise might remain hidden from view. And, of course, it is in regard to congresss oversight responsibilities that there is sometimes a bit of bumping and even bruising with prosecutors function of bringing lawbreakers to justice while insuring the due process of law is observed and the rights of individuals are respected. Sometimes in high profile investigations, the prosecution has been too focused on protecting proscuatoryal options to appreciate the larger issues of the publics right to know. Its little remembered that Watergate Special prosecutor ar ar archibald cox, from granting immunity to john dean. This was not archie coxs finest hour. The senate went forward with immunity and deans resulting testimony provided congress and the public with critical information it needed to know about misconduct of extraordinary scope at the highest reaches of government that might otherwise have taken an unacceptable amount of time to expose. As it happened dean gave testimony that was irrefutably corroborated by president ial tape recordings. And the evidence uncovered by the Senate Watergate committee proved essential Building Blocks to our work in the special Prosecutors Office in completing the investigation and bringing indictments and trial. Despite significant changes in law and procedures since watergate, the lesson remains that sometimes waterga watergate, the lesson remains that sometimes exposing serious public corruption particularly when wrongdoers are still operational will trump providering prosecutors all the flexibility they desire. In short there are no compelling reasons why congressional investigations should not proceed concurrently. The system works best when Congressional Committees are in internal sync. Where the chair and Ranking Member are speaking with one voice, and planning and executing an investigative strategy that will be both appropriately aggressive, and at the same time thoughtfully define engs to legitimate prosecutorial objectives. In my view, the best example of bipartisan cooperation was seen in the relationship between tom kaine and lee hamilton as vice chair. Deron straighting how much investigative energy and firepower can be harnessed when humans put the National Interest above narrow party goals. In conclusion, unlike congresss goal of educating and informing the public, prosecutors are bound by rules that promote secrecy, and discourag even criminalize inappropriate extra judicial disclosure of their work process. Imbued with tremendous power, prosecutors must have the experience and judgment to separate the wheat from the chaff, and exercise discretion in deciding to bring or not bring charges. In the investigation of the ramifications of russian state interference in americas 2016 president ial election, congress has the responsibility to collect and present by way of public hearings, why this event deserves every americans serious attention. And the Judiciary Committees of both houses have an additional obligation in my view. That special Counsel Robert Mueller be permitted to complete the work he has been dually appointed to oversee. Including a fair and thorough investigation of russias interference in our president ial election. And whether any u. S. Citizen was complicit in or aided and abetted that interference. It must be made clear that serious constitutional remedies would follow any improper attempt to curtail or interfere with special counsel muellers inquiry. Thank you and i thank the members of this subcommittee for your attention. Chairman grassley, chairman graham, Ranking Member white house, thank you for inviting me to testify today. Pogos mission has long included to strengthen the capacity of congress to do oversight. Pogos Congressional Oversight Committee has educated hill staffers from both sides of the ill and chambers the oversight powers and responsibilities of the congress and thank you, senator grassley for being the honorary cohost of that work. Let me be clear, congress and the executive branch are capable of conducting concurrent investigations. The oversight functions of congress are constitutionally mandated and are essential to legislating, holding the executive branch accountable, and for insuring that our democracy system of checks and balances is working. Clearly, the controversy and debate over russian interference with the 2016 president ial election demand congressional attention. The lack of common understanding across the country on the facts, what did or did not happen, and whether our rule of law is being properly followed is fueling a damaging rift to our democracy. It is the role of the congress to provide the public with the facts. As chairman graham mentioned, we recently released a report on the history of congressional investigations, that shows the Public Benefits when both the legislative and executive branches examine the same events. And we identified four important elements to successful investigations. That they be bipartisan, that they have a clear scope, that they be have Leadership Support in having the chairman of the full committee here as evidence of that and fourth is being wellresourced, which is something we can talk about in the q a later. Investigations led by a special counsel can play a critical role, but they are limited in scope, are not public and of course remain vulnerable to executive branch pressure. Congressional investigations have a broader mandate, often have a quicker pace and can unearth troubling information that may be significant, but not necessarily criminal in nature. Congress is also uniquely positioned to consider legislative solutions to address systemic problems. Congress at committees investigated the watergate iran contra, 1996 Campaign Finance and jack aamoff lobbying andals, all concurrent with criminal investigations. All of those investigations led to needed reform the that wouldnt have occurred if the inquiries had been limited to criminal Law Enforcement. The watergate committees work let to the passage of improved Campaign Finance law and other landmark reg legislation, including the strengthened freedom of information act, the ethics in Government Act in wake of the 1996 president ial leaks, the senates investigation into whether money from china made its way into the coffers of candidates and Political Parties preceded while the Justice Department successfully obtained convictions and guilty pleas from many of the same individuals under congressional scrutiny. The Senate Investigation into Jack Abramoff conducted its investigation concurrent with numerous criminal prosecutions, ultimately the Justice Department obtained 20 guilty pleas and convictions. The congressional investigation led to a number of new lobbying disclosure and ethics rules, as well as the creation of the office of congressional ethics. Its important to note that sometimes its more important to get to the bottom of a problem and find solutions than it is to hold one or two individuals accountable through criminal proceedings. In the Iran Contra Affairs two convictions were reversed because of grants of immunity by congress. But despite that outcome both former independent counsels Lawrence Walsh and ken starr concur that congress should not automatically defer to the criminal Justice System when pursuing its own inquiry. Congress must after consulting with the Justice Department determine for its itself what course is in the best interests of the nation. It should also be noted that in the end the Iran Contra Committees work led to new laws including the creation of a statutory c. I. A. Inspector general. Executive branch criminal investigations examine the past, congress can consider a broader set of issues, including solutions for the future. Without congress, significant Public Policy questions about the russians attempted interference in the 2016 elections will remain unanced. Is the Foreign Agent registration act working . Do we need to increase protections for the integrity of our elections . Have there been nonkiloliter abuses of power . And has the application of justice been politicized . None of these questions will be answered by criminal prosecutions. I encourage to you continue your work with vigor and confidence. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Afternoon chairman graham, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to offer my thoughts on the important topic thats the subject of todays hearing. Now i think i may be carrying coals to newcastle when i talk about the overarching issue here, which is whether the committee should defer or abandon in any way its investigation. Because i get the sense that everybody has agreed that the committee should not, for reasons that have been expressed over and over. By chairman and by speakers who have preceded me. The functions that the committee will perform are very different from the functions that the criminal investigation performs. As ms. Bryant said, the committees efforts are in part backwardlooking to gather the facts and to report to the American People whats happened, and to inform and guide their own actions, in terms of the deciding what legislation may be needed and what corrections in governmental action may be necessary. But the emphasis is forwardlooking. What can be done to safeguard the 2018 and 2020 elections from a recurrence of interference by russia or other foreign powers . And also to help our allies in europe from the same thing happening to them . Criminal investigations are very different, theyre essentially backwardlooking, theres no Public Interest in the accou