[ad_1]
Tom Hamburger
An investigative journalist focused on the intersection of money and politics in Washington.
April 25 at 13:54
Democrats in the House are struggling to know how to respond to President Trump's widespread reluctance to cooperate with their investigations – a challenge that legal experts believe could undermine the nation's fundamental principle of counterweight.
Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), Chair of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, announced his intention to detain a Trump administration official who allegedly defied a subpoena for contempt of court. Congress and would have threatened a second with the same penalty if it did not show itself Thursday deposition. And with Trump's promise to prevent all past and present badistants from testifying, the House has begun to consider the possibility of issuing multiple contempt citations and filing civil suits to defend its supervisory role.
"It's a mbadive, unprecedented and growing obstruction," Cummings said in a statement Wednesday.
Yet Democratic leaders have also insisted that their inquiries into the president should not overshadow their legislative agenda, which they consider essential to retain their majority in the House in the 2020 elections. While lawmakers are furious Against the White House, Democratic leaders are trying to come up with a plan to allow investigators to repel Trump's attacks without completely reversing their proposals on health care, infrastructure and the economy.
In this sense, Trump's position of non-cooperation has created an enigma for the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Democrats worry about appearing overzealous in their investigations of the president. Trump, however, can only give the Democrats the choice to declare a total war against his strategy.
"We are fighting against all subpoenas," Trump told reporters Wednesday, accusing the politics of their investigations. "Democrats are trying to win 2020 … . And they will not win against me. "
House Watch and Reform Committee Chair Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) Leads a meeting to summon summons earlier this month. (J. Scott Applewhite / AP)
Trump's comments come one day after the Treasury Department ignored the deadline set by the House Ways and Means Committee to submit its tax returns. The White House then took steps to prevent an administration official from appearing to testify about security clearances. Trump officials also announced that they would ban former White House lawyer Donald McGahn, one of the key witnesses of Trump's potential obstruction, from testifying before the court. the Judiciary Committee of the House on the request of the President to dismiss the special advocate Robert S. Mueller III.
In addition, Trump's private sector lawyers filed a lawsuit against Trump's supervisory board and accounting firm after the panel had filed its financial statements. And the Justice Department announced Wednesday that Attorney General William P. Barr had ordered one of his highest officials to ignore a subpoena.
Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.), Member of the Oversight Committee, said Trump's actions "trigger a constitutional crisis" and said the White House's position should not only be about Democrats, but also the Republicans. The House, he said, should revisit the idea of instructing the sergeant to find and imprison those who challenge the subpoenas until their release, a as the Congress did not cross since the 1870s.
"Yes [Trump] If you want to win in this fight, you will definitely weaken the role of the government's legislative branch and fundamentally change the constitutional framework, "Connolly said. "We can not let that happen. . . . The consequences would radically change the balance of power within our government. "
The representative of the chairman of the House Judiciary Judiciary Committee, Jerrold Nadler (DN.Y.), recently suggested a fine to Trump officials who had refused to obey the subpoenas or even imprison them, according to Bloomberg News. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) Suggested to the House to challenge the IRS Commissioner for refusing to provide Trump's tax returns, information that Congress has traditionally obtained upon legal request.
"The idea that the IRS commissioner would follow the instructions of Donald Trump's legal team instead of statutory guidelines just can not stand the test," Huffman said in an interview Wednesday. The indictment of heads of departments and agencies, he said, "constitutes the constitutional foundation when executives refuse to comply with the law. . . . This must be in the conversation at some point if they continue to act as arms of Trump's legal team. "
Democratic advisers downplayed the possibility of this happening, but such comments underscore Congress's frustration. Democrats have expressed optimism that they would win on the merits when their problems go to court, but Trump's strategy creates political pitfalls and the prospect of delays in the legal system.
The badistants stated that Trump's challenge would force them to prioritize the strongest and most critical cases for their investigations. This was a topic of discussion that was discussed Wednesday by the House's lawyers and their advisers and discussed how to respond to the Trump Administration's refusal to comply with subpoenas.
House Democrats also discussed the idea of linking federal funding to the requirements of department and agency heads to conduct their investigations. They also considered finding ways to enforce an obscure law that prohibits public servants from being paid if they prevent another federal employee from cooperating with Congress.
Anticipating potential clashes with Trump, Pelosi argued a change of rule at the beginning of the Congress that would allow the bipartite legal advisory group, consisting of five Pelosi members, from the majority leader, Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), From the bad of the majority. E. Clyburn (DS.C.), Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) And Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) – to approve the approval of a contempt charge in court, according to a congressional badistant who spoke the condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.
Traditionally, the House votes on a resolution holding some contempt of court before the lawyer brings the case to court. But the leaders understood that they could have several instances of contempt and looked for a way to streamline the process. Under the new rule, only two members of the advisory group should approve such action.
The change would allow Democrats to remain focused on legislation rather than having to vote constantly to scorn Trump officials – a likely event if the government persists in its strategy.
However, Democrats may decide to submit contempt quotes to Parliament to force Republicans to vote. The GOP, for example, has supported the subpoena of John Gore, a Deputy Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, who should ignore his testimony Thursday on the subpoena. on the project of the administration to add a question of citizenship to the census of 2020.
In addition, Pelosi worked to change the rules of the House to strengthen committees. She supported a change to clarify that the Oversight Committee has jurisdiction over the White House, for example, while it was less clear before.
Richard Ben-Veniste, a former Watergate attorney, called Trump's reprimand summons "a serious escalation of the president's efforts to defy control of executive power by Congress" and "a deep erosion of precepts fundamentals of the balance of power enshrined in the constitution by our drafters. He noted that the constitution makes it clear that "the president and executive power are subject to congressional control".
"You can not have a president acting like he's the monarch," he said.
Correction: This story has been updated to reflect the fact that the bipartisan legal advisory group in the House consists of five members from the majority and minority leadership, not three.
Source link
