美国国家公共电台 NPR Former Attorney General Says Whitaker Appointment 'Confounds Me'

（单词翻译）

MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:

Now we'd like to turn to the bombshell that President Trump¹ delivered the day after the election. Attorney General Jeff Sessions was forced out, and his former chief of staff, Matthew Whitaker, was in as acting² attorney general. Whitaker's office quickly confirmed that he would be, quote, "in charge of all matters under the purview³ of the Department of Justice," unquote, which means that Whitaker, who had been a vocal⁴ critic of Robert Mueller's investigation⁵ into possible Russian interference in the 2016 election, is now overseeing it.

This appointment has raised a bevy⁶ of questions about the legality of the appointment, as well as about Whitaker himself. To assess all this, we have another former attorney general, Alberto Gonzales. He served as attorney general and White House counsel in the presidency⁷ of George W. Bush. He's now dean of the Belmont University School of Law, and he's with us now from Nashville, Tenn.

Dean Gonzales, thank you so much for joining us once again.

ALBERTO GONZALES: It's always a pleasure to be with you on your show.

MARTIN: Well, thank you for that. First of all, questions are being raised about whether this appointment is even legal. Critics are saying that anybody serving in this role has to get Senate confirmation⁸ for this position, and they question why the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, was not placed in this role. What's your take on that?

GONZALES: I've got some issues with this, quite frankly⁹, because the notion that the chief of staff, who is not Senate-confirmed, would have more experience, more wisdom and better judgment¹⁰ than someone like the deputy attorney general or even the solicitor¹¹ general - people in the line of presidential succession within the Department of Justice - to me, it confounds me. I have to question why that decision was made.

Putting aside the question of whether or not it can be done legally, it creates additional problems or questions about the leadership at the Department of Justice at a time when we don't need any more questions about the leadership. You know, for two years, the department has been under attack. For two years, Jeff Sessions has been under attack. For two years, the Mueller investigation has been under attack. I think the last thing the department needs today is more questions about the leadership there. And so, for that reason, I - you know, I don't want to say I disagree with the president's choice. I just find it a very odd choice given the circumstances.

MARTIN: And is the discomfort¹² one of optics, or is there, in fact, a legitimate¹³ question about his authority to hold this position?

GONZALES: I think it's both. I think there is a question. I'm assuming someone spoke¹⁴ to the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice before the appointment was made and inquired as to whether or not, would this be lawful¹⁵? But it's the optics that I'm also concerned about. Whether or not it's lawful or not - and, obviously, the lawfulness¹⁶ is an important issue - but, even if it is lawful, I question whether or not putting Mr. Whitaker in this position at this particular time was a wise move, particularly when you add on top of everything else his public comments about the Mueller investigation. And I think it calls into question his impartiality¹⁷. I think it raises a whole specter of whether or not he should recuse himself.

So, again, we're right back in the situation where you've got the leadership at the department, you know, subject to questioning as to whether or not they can effectively lead the department with respect to one of the most politically-charged investigations¹⁸ that are - that's ongoing¹⁹ right now.

MARTIN: So let me just refresh people's memories, if they don't recall, about why you say that. As a commentator²⁰, Whitaker is on record having said that the investigation needs to be reined²¹ in. He's asserted there was no Russian interference into the election. He's called suggestions of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, quote, "crazy." He's suggested defunding the special counsel's investigation and called on the investigation to be wrapped up quickly. But, as we said, in his public statements or statements about him, there's no suggestion that he's considered recusing himself from the case. Could you just describe again why that is problematic for the people who are concerned about the integrity of the department or the perceptions of its integrity?

GONZALES: Well, let me first say one thing in defense²² of Mr. Whitaker. You know, he made those comments when he was out of the department. He did not have access to information about the investigation. It very well may be that when he gets briefed about the merits of the investigation he may decide, you know what? I was wrong. There's a lot here, and this is a very important investigation, and it should be allowed to complete. But, nevertheless, I do agree that those comments have raised a series of very serious questions, and it - those - and for that reason I question the appointment at this particular time.

GONZALES: Before we let you go, as a former attorney general, you certainly received your fair share of criticism. That goes with the job. But I am interested - as a person who held that seat and is now in the position of training future lawyers, future officers of the court - how does this whole thing sit with you?

GONZALES: Based upon the reporting, I'm troubled. I'm extremely troubled that a change may have been made here to stop an investigation which, by all accounts, is almost complete. I think we just wait and let this thing play out, let Bob Mueller write his report and let the American people know what actually happened here.

MARTIN: That is Alberto Gonzales. He's a former attorney general of the United States. He's now serving as dean of the Belmont University School of Law. He's with us from Nashville.

Dean Gonzales, thanks so much for talking with us once again.

GONZALES: Thanks for having me.