Senate GOP: Legislation to protect Mueller not needed
© Getty

Senate Republicans on Monday dismissed the need for legislation to protect Robert MuellerRobert Swan MuellerSasse: US should applaud choice of Mueller to lead Russia probe MORE, downplaying the chances that President TrumpDonald John TrumpReporters defend CNN's Acosta after White House says he 'disrespected' Trump with question Security costs of Trump visit to Scotland sparks outrage among Scottish citizens Ex-CIA officer: Prosecution of Russians indicted for DNC hack 'ain't ever going to happen' MORE will fire him, despite Trump's recent attacks on the special counsel.

"I don't think that's going to happen, so I just think it's not necessary and obviously legislation requires a presidential signature and I don't see ... the necessity of picking that fight right now," said Sen. John CornynJohn CornynSunday shows preview: Trump readies for meeting with Putin GOP moderates hint at smooth confirmation ahead for Kavanaugh GOP senators introduce resolution endorsing ICE MORE (Texas), the No. 2 Senate Republican, when asked about legislation limiting Trump's ability to fire Mueller.

He added that he believes Trump's public criticism of Mueller is "unhelpful" and agrees with his colleagues who have said firing the special counsel "would be a mistake and produce all sorts of unintended consequences."

Cornyn declined to say what the potential consequences would be. 

ADVERTISEMENT
The latest round of speculation about Mueller's future comes after Trump teed off over the weekend against the probe into Russia's election meddling and potential ties between the Trump campaign and Moscow, saying the probe is made up of "hardened Democrats."

"A total WITCH HUNT with massive conflicts of interest!" Trump tweeted on Monday. 

The White House has stressed that there are no plans to fire Mueller, though The New York Times reported earlier this year that Trump ordered his staff to fire Mueller last year but ultimately backed down when his White House counsel threatened to resign. 

And while this weekend's tweets sparked a new rush from lawmakers to defend Mueller, GOP senators also appeared deeply skeptical on Monday that legislation is needed or that Trump would actually fire the special prosecutor, who is widely respected in Washington. 

"My conversations with the White House have led him me to believe legislation is not necessary at this point because I do not believe the president would take such a foolish action," Sen. Orrin HatchOrrin Grant HatchGOP moderates hint at smooth confirmation ahead for Kavanaugh GOP senators introduce resolution endorsing ICE Yale Law School students, alumni denounce Trump Supreme Court pick MORE (R-Utah) said in a statement.

He added separately to reporters that while the president's attacks against Mueller are "a little uncomfortable" he doesn't ultimately think Trump will "dump him."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellKavanaugh gets questionnaires for confirmation hearing Dem infighting erupts over Supreme Court pick Franken offers Dems a line of questioning for Kavanaugh's 'weirdly specific bit of bulls---' MORE (R-Ky.) hasn't weighed in on the current round of Mueller criticism but downplayed the need to pass legislation earlier this year, saying there was "no effort underway to undermine or remove him." 

"I don't see the need to bring up legislation to protect someone who appears to need no protection," he said.

Senators have introduced two bills to limit Trump's ability to fire Mueller, but those proposals have stalled for months in the Judiciary Committee. 

GOP Sen. Jeff FlakeJeffrey (Jeff) Lane FlakeThe Hill's Morning Report — Trump readies for Putin summit: 'He’s not my enemy’ Overnight Defense: Fallout from tense NATO summit | Senators push to block ZTE deal in defense bill | Blackwater founder makes new pitch for mercenaries to run Afghan war On The Money — Sponsored by Prudential — Lawmakers demand answers from Mnuchin on tariffs | Fed chief lays out stakes of Trump trade war | Consumer prices rise at highest rate in six years | Feds to appeal AT&T merger ruling MORE (Ariz.), a perennial Trump critic, questioned on Monday if the legislation is constitutional but argued it would "behoove our leadership to be forceful" before Trump acts and say "this is the line we cannot cross." 

"If you're going to pick a fight, this is the fight to pick. You've got to pick this fight. If you don't pick this fight, we might as well not be here. This is a serious one. ... The best thing would be — is, preemptively to convince the president, 'don't go there,'" he said. 

Sen. Bob CorkerRobert (Bob) Phillips CorkerOvernight Health Care: Watchdog finds Tom Price improperly used funds on flights | Ex-Novartis CEO sent drug pricing proposal to Cohen | HHS staffers depart after controversial social media posts HHS staffers depart after controversial social media posts: report McConnell: We may 'be in the early stages' of a trade war MORE (R-Tenn.), who has also criticized Trump, told CNN, "I can't possibly imagine why Senate leadership wouldn't place a protection" in the omnibus, calling it the "perfect place for them to deal with it." 

Corker later clarified that he wasn't saying he would support such a move — and noted he wasn't voting for the mammoth government funding bill, regardless — but "I just suggested that if I were the Senate Democratic leadership I would be pushing for that. ... I just assumed that Sen. [Charles] Schumer [N.Y.] and ... Leader [Nancy] Pelosi [Calif.] would be pushing for that." 

A second bill, from GOP Sen. Thom TillisThomas (Thom) Roland TillisGOP senators introduce resolution endorsing ICE Administration to brief Senate panel on family reunifications 'Paws for Celebration' event brings rescue animals to the Capitol MORE (N.C.) and Democratic Sen. Christopher CoonsChristopher (Chris) Andrew CoonsSunday shows preview: Trump readies for meeting with Putin Sunday shows preview: Washington braces for Trump's Supreme Court pick America stands to lose as China places bets on developing world MORE (Del.), would let Mueller or any special counsel challenge their firing in court.

Asked about the legislation, Sen. John KennedyJohn Neely KennedyMORE (R-La.) said on Monday that "I don't think it's necessary ... [and] I've never been convinced that it's constitutional," he said.
 
Even Graham on Monday dismissed the need to pass his own bill, saying he introduced it to "let people know where I stand." 
 
Asked why leadership wasn't speaking out more forcefully about the consequences of firing Mueller, he said, "You spend your capital on issues where you think you get the best return." 
 
"I don't think anybody in our conference believes Mueller is going to be fired," Graham said. "... If he got fired without cause there would probably be an effort to reinstate him."
 
Asked what, if anything, Congress would do if Trump fired Mueller, Kennedy said: "We'll cross that bridge if we come to it."