Skip to content

Grassley on the Democrats' Slanted Public Comments about Their Trump Investigation

Prepared Floor Remarks by U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
On the Democrats' Slanted Public Comments about Their Trump Investigation
Monday, August 9, 2021
Last week, Judiciary staff interviewed Jeffrey Rosen, the former Acting Attorney General, and Rich Donoghue, Rosen’s Deputy at the Justice Department.
These interviews were done as part of the Democrats’ never-ending series of investigations into former President Trump.
Their obsession with him is consistent, I’ll give them that. So, too, are their public comments that grossly mischaracterize – at least for now – the state of the evidence.
This country has had to deal with the Democrats’ obsession with destroying Trump for much too long. In the process, I fear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have done and will do lasting damage to our country.
For example, in May of 2017, then-Ranking Member Feinstein and I met with then-Director Comey about Crossfire Hurricane.
At that classified meeting Comey said Trump was not under investigation.
But, that didn’t stop the Democrats from publicly saying that he was.
And, because Comey kept the answer classified, we couldn’t rebut it. But, Democrats knew it was lie. And, they kept on saying it until Trump fired Comey because he wouldn’t make the fact public.
Unfortunately, the Democrats’ big lie eventually got them what they wanted. Because Comey then helped orchestrate an investigation over his firing.
Day after day, year after year, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle misled this country about the true facts relating to Crossfire Hurricane.
In doing so, they undermined their credibility. But, they kept the investigations going, along with an all-too-supplicant press.
My staff have participated in these staff-led interviews and I’ve been briefed on the matters at hand. I was also at the Rosen interview.
Within hours of Saturday’s Rosen interview, the Democrats were already on television and in the papers talking about the substance of the interviews.
In their public comments, they provided politically slanted mischaracterizations about where this investigation currently stands.
And I’d like to specifically note that Senator Durbin said, in part, to CNN on Sunday about the Rosen interview that, “the Justice Department had set it up for us and said we’re waiving any privilege. He can speak to any issue. We’re not holding back.”
At the Donoghue interview on Friday, the Justice Department objected to my staff’s questions on several occasions and prevented Donoghue from answering.
The same happened at least once in the Rosen interview.
And, I believe the Justice Department made an objection to a Democrat-led question in the Donoghue interview.
So when the Democrats say these witnesses “can speak to any issue”, well, apparently that’s not the case.
The Biden administration and its Justice Department have waived executive privilege for these witnesses to speak about close and intimate conversations that the President had with his advisors.
If you get even a little bit away from Trump, well, then the Justice Department doesn’t want Congress to know the facts.
Mind you, the Justice Department and other executive agencies consistently refuse to produce records to Congress claiming “deliberative process.” When it comes to Trump, usual order doesn’t apply.
Given the new executive privilege position that the Biden administration has created here, it’s entirely possible that at some point in the future we could all be talking to President Biden’s closest advisors about their internal deliberative process.
I have to laugh a little bit at that possibility, knowing how my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will complain about how such a decision is political in nature.
With respect to Trump and what was said at these high-level meetings, those are the types of meetings where all kinds of things are discussed. That’s the whole point.
The president has every right to discuss ideas and strategy with his closest advisors. The president, whether a Democrat or a Republican, should feel unrestrained to bring ideas to his closest staff for robust discussion.
Eventually the facts will come out and Trump will have to address them – good or bad depending on the facts at hand.
However, the essential question that should be asked is: what was the final decision?
And that is my major concern about the recent public comments relating to this new Trump investigation.
Unlike my Democratic colleagues, I won’t discuss the evidence publicly at this point in time.
But, let me remind the American public with a couple already-public points.
Did Trump fire the Acting Attorney General, Jeffrey Rosen?
Did Trump fire Rich Donoghue, Rosen’s deputy?
Also, an August 7, 2021, CNN article states, “the men testified that in their interactions with Trump, he didn’t order them to do anything illegal and eventually accepted their advice that the Justice Department couldn’t take actions to claim fraud when it had no evidence of it.”
Incredibly, one of the same committee democrats who spread the Trump lie, today said criminal prosecutions could come out of this investigation.
If the facts eventually fit the Democratic narrative that they so badly want to be true, then they fit. It is what it is. But, I haven’t seen anything backing up their misleading conclusions.
Until then, the Democrats should quit trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. And, they need to stop violating committee rules and protocols.
Why would any witness want to testify now, at the risk of their words being leaked and twisted to satisfy a partisan agenda?
Facts and evidence matter, not speculative partisan cheap shots.