Senate GOP: Legislation to protect Mueller not needed
© Getty

Senate Republicans on Monday dismissed the need for legislation to protect Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerFox News legal analyst says Trump call with Ukraine leader could be 'more serious' than what Mueller 'dragged up' Lewandowski says Mueller report was 'very clear' in proving 'there was no obstruction,' despite having 'never' read it Fox's Cavuto roasts Trump over criticism of network MORE, downplaying the chances that President TrumpDonald John TrumpPelosi arrives in Jordan with bipartisan congressional delegation Trump says his Doral resort will no longer host G-7 after backlash CNN's Anderson Cooper mocks WH press secretary over Fox News interview 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 CornynTrump slams 'very dumb' O'Rourke for proposals on guns, tax exempt status for churches GOP cautions Graham against hauling Biden before Senate Succession at DHS up in the air as Trump set to nominate new head 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 HatchTrump holds more Medal of Freedom ceremonies than predecessors but awards fewer medals Trump to award Medal of Freedom to former Attorney General Edwin Meese Trump to award racing legend Roger Penske with Presidential Medal of Freedom 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 McConnellWhite House staggers after tumultuous 48 hours The Memo: Trump's sea of troubles deepens McConnell: Trump's troop pull back in Syria a 'grave strategic mistake' 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 FlakeTrump's GOP impeachment firewall holds strong How to survive an impeachment Are Senate Republicans certain that Trump can return to office? 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 CorkerTrump's GOP impeachment firewall holds strong George Conway hits Republicans for not saying Trump's name while criticizing policy Trump announces, endorses ambassador to Japan's Tennessee Senate bid 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 TillisTillis says impeachment is 'a waste of resources' GOP requests update on criminal referrals prompted by 2018 Kavanaugh probe The Hill's Campaign Report: Warren, Sanders overtake Biden in third-quarter fundraising MORE (N.C.) and Democratic Sen. Christopher CoonsChristopher (Chris) Andrew CoonsSenate Democrats want Warren to talk costs on 'Medicare for All' Meet the dog and 'sea turtle' who launched campaigns for office Senators demand briefing on Trump's decision to withdraw from Syria 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."