Senators: Attorney General Holder Should Immediately Appoint Special Counsel to Investigate Leaks
June 27, 2012
WASHINGTON, DC – June 27, 2012 – Citing an ‘avalanche’ of’ nationalsecurity leaks originating out of the Executive Branch 31 senators havewritten to Attorney General Eric Holder requesting he immediatelyappoint a special counsel, free from the appearance of a politics orundue influence, to investigate the matter.
“The numerous national security leaks reportedly originating out of theExecutive Branch in recent months have been stunning,” wrote thesenators. “If true, they reveal details of some of our Nation’s mosthighly classified and sensitive military and intelligence matters,thereby risking our national security, as well as the lives of Americancitizens and our allies. If there were ever a case requiring an outsidespecial counsel with bipartisan acceptance and widespread public trust,this is it.”
The letter was circulated by Senator Lindsey Graham (SC) and signed bySenators Lamar Alexander (TN), Kelly Ayotte (NH), John Barrasso (WY),Roy Blunt (MO), John Boozman (AR), Richard Burr (NC), Saxby Chambliss(GA), Susan Collins (ME), John Cornyn (TX), Mike Crapo (ID), Jim DeMint(SC), Mike Enzi (WY), Charles Grassley (IA), John Hoeven (ND), MikeJohanns (NE), Mark Kirk (IL), Mitch McConnell (KY), John McCain (AZ),Jerry Moran (KS), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Rand Paul (KY), Rob Portman (OH),James Risch (ID), Pat Roberts (KS), Marco Rubio (FL), Jeff Sessions(AL), John Thune (SD), Pat Toomey (PA), David Vitter (LA), and RogerWicker (MS).
TEXT OF THE LETTER:
The Honorable Eric Holder
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Attorney General Holder:
The numerous national security leaks reportedly originating out of theExecutive Branch in recent months have been stunning. If true, theyreveal details of some of our Nation’s most highly classified andsensitive military and intelligence matters, thereby risking ournational security, as well as the lives of American citizens and ourallies. If there were ever a case requiring an outside special counselwith bipartisan acceptance and widespread public trust, this is it.
Press reports indicate that there could be many sources to the leakswithin the Administration. In fact, in Jo Becker and Scott Shane’s NewYork Times story, “Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’sPrinciples and Will” the reporters state they interviewed, “three dozenof [Obama’s] current and former advisers.” Tom Ricks’ recent New YorkTimes review of David Sanger’s Confront and Conceal mentions that “Mr.Sanger clearly has enjoyed great access to senior White House officials,most notably to Thomas Donilon, the national security adviser. Mr.Donilon, in effect, is the hero of the book, as well as the commenter ofrecord on events.”
You have an important role as a member of the President’s nationalsecurity team, and no Administration should be expected to investigateitself impartially on such a grave and sensitive matter in the midst ofan election. Therefore, your recent announcement that two U.S.Attorneys would lead criminal investigations into the instances ofunauthorized disclosures of classified information does not ensure afull and thorough investigation free of influence. The U.S. Attorneysare under your personal supervision. An outside special counsel, withthe appropriate independence and authority, would ensure that theinvestigation remains untainted by even the appearance of a politics orundue influence.
Our request for a special counsel is in keeping with the precedent ofasking for a neutral investigation when there is either a possibleconflict of interest or extraordinary circumstances. In 2005, whenPresident Obama was a sitting senator, he requested a special counsel toinvestigate the Jack Abramoff scandal, saying “FBI officials have saidthe Abramoff investigation ‘involves systemic corruption within thehighest levels of government.’ Such an assertion indicates extraordinarycircumstances and it is in the public interest that you act under yourexisting statutory authority to appoint a special counsel.”
In fact, in the Valerie Plame matter, then-Senator Obama went beyond thecall for a special counsel, seeking a Congressional investigation,arguing in a letter:
“[t]he United States Congress has a constitutional responsibility toprovide oversight of the executive branch, whether a law has been brokenor not. It is time for Congress to fulfill that constitutionalresponsibility in this matter by initiating a thorough investigation. Werecognize that a criminal investigation is underway and that a specialprosecutor continues to present testimony before a grand jury. Theseactions in no way preclude Congress responsibility to provide oversight.We urge you to exercise your authority as Congressional leaders byrequesting the appropriate committees to begin oversight hearings and aninvestigation immediately.”
In 2007, then-Senator Biden called for a special counsel to investigatethe destruction of the CIA enhanced interrogation tapes, stating thatthe “easiest, straightest thing to do is to take it out of the politicalrealm, appoint a special prosecutor and let them decide, and . . . callit where it is. Is there a criminal violation? If there is, proceed. Ifnot, don’t.”
In 2003, then-Senator Biden joined a letter calling for an outsidespecial counsel in the Valerie Plame investigation, concluding that,Public confidence in the integrity of this investigation would besubstantially bolstered by the appointment of a special counsel.” Then-Senator Biden maintained that even if that case were being handledby professional career prosecutors, the integrity of the inquiry mightbe called into question if individuals with a vested interest inprotecting the White House were still involved in any matter related tothe investigation.
If the bar for an outside special counsel were met in the cases ofValerie Plame and Jack Abramoff, it is far exceeded here. We are nottalking about a single, isolated instance of a leak; rather, we arelooking at “an avalanche of leaks” on national security matters. On amatter of this seriousness, there is clear precedent to appoint anoutside special counsel when there is the potential for a conflict ofinterest, the specter of political influence, or other extraordinarycircumstances. As this is clearly the case here, we request that youappoint an outside special counsel immediately.
