A breakthrough bipartisan bill to protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller is coming under a new threat: Partisan infighting among leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Confusion and distrust between Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and top Democrat Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has already delayed consideration of the hot-button bill, which is strongly opposed by Republican leaders. Feinstein is worried that Grassley is prepared to water down the bill with a surprise amendment, while Grassley says “it’s ridiculous” for her to try and dictate the committee process from the minority.


Supporters of the bill are hopeful the impasse can be resolved. But Republicans are warning that Democrats could bungle an effort they’ve been pushing for months — just at the moment when worries about President Donald Trump firing Mueller are peaking.

Republican backers say they merely want the special counsel to transmit more information to Congress, not weaken the bill’s protections for Mueller — and are shocked Feinstein is standing in the way.

“They’ve already screwed up. What are we going to do, have a committee where we have to take a product as introduced? That’s beyond bizarre,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C)., one of the bill’s four chief bipartisan co-sponsors.

Sign up here for POLITICO Huddle A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

While Grassley and Feinstein insisted there's no personal animus between them, other members of the committee admitted that there is major tension between the two. In January Feinstein unilaterally released the committee’s transcripts of its interview with Fusion GPS leaders about the so-called Trump dossier, angering Grassley.

Feinstein has also repeatedly pushed Grassley to pick up the pace of the committee's Russia probe. She started work on her own bill on the matter in October and publicly nudged Grassley for public hearings in February. The two have also been at odds over nominees for months, as Grassley races to confirm conservative judges for Trump.

Now their beef is putting the brakes on a bill that is moving forward despite Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s view that it might be unconstitutional. The earliest it would likely get a committee vote is late April, before the next Senate recess, though Feinstein said she hoped that the committee would vote next week.

“They have worked together well in a very difficult and divisive environment on a lot of issues,” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), another sponsor. “But still there’s a great deal of strain between them.”

Feinstein said Grassley has been “gracious” in delaying consideration of the bill, which would give a special counsel 10 days after a termination to challenge the firing in the courts. The legislation, negotiated by Graham, Coons and Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), combined two separate efforts aimed at protecting Mueller — and future special counsels — from presidential interference.

But Feinstein was less complimentary in describing the transparency of Grassley’s efforts to change the bill.

“I don’t know what it is. I don’t know what the bill does, I don’t know what the amendment does. So you would want us to know what we are voting on, right?” Feinstein said. The amendment “obviously“ pertains to a “sensitive subject,” she added.

Grassley could barely contain himself when Feinstein’s concerns were relayed to him during an interview. He insisted he has told her that his aim is to require the Justice Department to report to Congress any significant decisions about the special counsel, including a termination.

Grassley said he was “at a loss” over Feinstein’s delay.

Told Feinstein is complaining she hasn’t seen the amendment, Grassley shot back that he was under no obligation to disclose it to her. “I don’t even have to mention I had an amendment!” he said.

“I had mostly Democrats ask me for [the bill], so all I see is by them using this as excuse that they’re just delaying when I’m trying to accommodate them,” Grassley said in an interview. “I think they ought to see our goal is not injurious to what we’re trying to accomplish.”

Grassley admitted in the interview that the text of his amendment was still being drafted, though committee amendments are typically not filed until the day before a panel vote — which in this case would have been next week at earliest. And Grassley's sudden willingness to move the bill, coupled with the lack of that amendment text, has raised alarms among some Democrats about a potential long-game plan to stymie the bill and prevent it from ever passing.

Democratic skepticism of Grassley has run high for two years, since he agreed to help block former President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court pick.

“If Sen. Grassley is so sure his amendment won’t undermine the special counsel, he ought to show it to Democrats and the public. Media reports indicate that it would open the door to serious political interference from Congress,” said a senior Democratic aide.

The breakneck pace of the bill over the past few days has aligned with renewed attacks on Mueller by the president. Trump called the special counsel “the most conflicted of all” and flatly asserting flatly he has the power to fire the former FBI director.

“If I wanted to fire Robert Mueller in December, as reported by the Failing New York Times, I would have fired him,” Trump tweeted.

Democrats know that the bill is unlikely to be signed by Trump even if it somehow manages to pass the Senate. But they say that moving it through committee would show the Senate is serious that Trump shouldn’t fire the special counsel.

“The signal is being sent," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).

But things are moving so fast on Grassley’s end that it’s caught many Republicans by surprise. On Wednesday, as Grassley opened the door to advancing the bill, many GOP senators said they had no advance notice it was happening. The party line has been that Trump should not fire Mueller, but legislation to protect him isn’t unnecessary.

“Frankly, there hasn’t been a lot of communication between the committee or anybody else about what’s going on,” said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), who dined with Trump and other GOP leaders on Wednesday evening. He said Mueller didn’t come up at the gathering.

But Trump is plainly furious at the Mueller investigation after the FBI raided the offices of his personal lawyer Michael Cohen on Monday. And Grassley said he is still confident that despite the partisan backbiting, the bill will advance from his committee.

“With the bipartisan support it has? Yes,” he said.

Elana Schor contributed to this report.