Republicans resist call for broader Russian inquiry

WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans, straining to defend the Trump administration amid investigations of Russian interference in the 2016 election, resisted growing calls Thursday for a special prosecutor or select congressional committee to review the matter, even as Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from any inquiry.

That decision followed a day in which Republicans mostly closed ranks around Sessions, a well-liked former Senate colleague, amid revelations that he spoke with the Russian ambassador last year, seemingly contradicting testimony from his confirmation hearing in January.

[Sessions talked to Russian ambassador, contacts he did not disclose during hearing]

Initially, the fallout seemed to spawn fissures among Republicans: Several, including Sens. Rob Portman of Ohio and Susan Collins of Maine, were quick to call for Sessions' recusal, defying party leaders — including President Donald Trump — who had said earlier Thursday that they saw no reason for it.

But by day's end, consensus appeared to have been restored: Sessions would step aside in any investigation. And that, Republicans suggested, would be enough, at least for now.

None joined the chorus of Democrats, led by Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York and Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, demanding Sessions' immediate resignation.

And it was not clear that the episode would alter the landscape of investigations on Capitol Hill.

"First and foremost, any talk of resignation is nonsense," said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, before which Sessions testified.

He praised Sessions as "an honest and forthright public servant" and thanked him for pledging to send a letter to the committee "to clear up any confusion regarding his testimony."

Democrats were unmoved.

"They only do the right thing when they are caught doing the wrong thing," Schumer said of the Trump administration.

For weeks, Republicans have held the line in defense of their president. Leaders have said that any investigation of ties between Trump's team and Russian officials should be conducted through normal channels — placing one vocal Trump campaign supporter in charge of the primary Senate inquiry and, until this week, another at the head of any Justice Department review.

"My concern is," Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, said, "why are our Democratic senators so doggone rude" to Sessions?

Speaker Paul Ryan said he saw no need for Sessions to recuse himself unless he was under investigation, accusing Democrats of "lighting their hair on fire" to keep connections between Trump and Russia in the news.

And so far, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the majority leader, has shown no signs of budging from his long-standing resistance to calls for a select committee. His office did not respond to questions about whether his position had changed.

The result, though, is that the controversy has focused attention once again on an investigation by the Senate Intelligence Committee, led by its Republican chairman, Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, an often outspoken Trump supporter.

In a statement Thursday, Burr said he would trust Sessions to "make what he feels is the appropriate decision as to his involvement in any investigation into Russian active measures and the 2016 election."

Even before Thursday, the Intelligence Committee inquiry had been viewed skeptically.

Last week, The Washington Post reported that Burr spoke with the White House about Russia-related news reports and engaged with news organizations to dispute reports that associates of Trump had consistent contact with Russian intelligence operatives during the campaign.

Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the ranking Democrat on the committee, expressed "grave concerns" about Burr's contact with the White House. But despite Democrats' deep reservations about Burr's capacity to carry out a thorough investigation, many party leaders still view the committee's work as the best hope of holding Trump and his associates to account.

[White House sought to enlist key intelligence officials, lawmakers to counter Russia stories]

On Thursday, Schumer said that if the Justice Department would not appoint an independent special prosecutor, Congress should intervene by reviving an independent counsel law put into place after Watergate. He also asked the department's inspector general to begin an immediate inquiry into Sessions "to discover if the investigation has already been compromised."

Schumer sought to distinguish between Sessions' meeting with the Russian ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak, which he called appropriate, and the "very inappropriate" step of misleading Congress. (One Democrat, Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, invited criticism Thursday for saying that she had never held a call or meeting with the Russian ambassador, despite previously describing two such conversations on Twitter. She blamed Twitter's character limit for the confusion.)

At his confirmation hearing, Sessions said he "did not have communications with the Russians" during the presidential campaign. But the Justice Department now acknowledges that Sessions twice communicated with Kislyak last year: once after a speech at the Republican National Convention and once in his office.

The Democrats' message Thursday was echoed among even the most moderate corners of their caucus. Sen. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, the lone Democrat who voted to confirm Sessions, said that the attorney general should resign if he lied under oath.

In the House, Democrats on the Judiciary Committee demanded an immediate criminal investigation into Sessions in a letter to James Comey, the FBI director, and Channing D. Phillips, the U.S. attorney for Washington.

Republicans did not join the effort, but several chided Sessions, particularly those hailing from moderate districts.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said the developments reinforced the need for "an independent review by a credible third party."

Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Colo., said Sessions had made a "grave omission" in not disclosing his meetings with the ambassador.

And Rep. Brian Mast, R-Fla., said Sessions should resign "if he cannot commit to ensuring this process is completed with transparency and integrity."

Still, in both chambers, Republicans generally resisted impugning Sessions too forcefully. Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., lamented that "the implication is somehow he's colluding behind the scenes."

"We don't have any facts," he added.

On this point, some Democrats seem to agree, with more than a hint of frustration. Rep. Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, criticized the FBI for withholding information from lawmakers related to its investigation into Russian interference.

"I would say at this point, we know less than a fraction of what the FBI knows," he said.

The committee's Republican chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes of California, raised a separate concern: rushing to conclusions about anyone who has contact with Russian diplomats.

"I'm sure some of you are in contact with the Russian embassy, so be careful what you ask for here," he told reporters. "Do you want us to conduct an investigation on you or other Americans because you were talking to the Russian embassy?"

—

Emmarie Huetteman, Jennifer Steinhauer and Thomas Kaplan contributed reporting.