[ad_1]
Tom Hamburger
An investigative journalist focused on the intersection of money and politics in Washington.
The lawyers of President Trump and the White House are opposed to an increasing number of requests for information emanating from Congress, which increases the chances of a protracted legal battle likely to put in the future. Test the power of Congressional summonses.
The battle for construction will determine the amount of materials that Democrats in the House will be able to obtain on Trump's policies and personal finances through multiple investigations launched by various congressional committees.
White House officials are already kneeling in front of a series of demands related to Trump's actions as president. The administration does not intend to disclose the information sought on how certain persons have received their security clearance, Trump's meetings with foreign leaders and other topics they plan to discuss are subject to leadership privilege, according to several employees accustomed to internal discussions.
White House lawyer Pat Cipollone and the president's legal team are preparing for a protracted legal battle, if any, over Congressional summonses, councilors said.
On Monday, Trump's private lawyers warned his accounting firm not to comply with a subpoena by the House Oversight and Reform Committee. In addition, two other House committees issued subpoenas to several banks on Monday asking for information on Trump's finances, which has significantly increased the stakes of the president, who is particularly unhappy with efforts to try to to convince him.
[House Democrats subpoena Deutsche Bank, other financial institutions tied to Trump]
Rudolph W. Giuliani, one of Trump's lawyers, said he had urged the president not to cooperate with the Democrats' demands for Congress, because, he said, they ultimately want to dismiss him. "I will not cooperate with any of them," he said. "I would fight tooth and nail."
Democrats in the House said on Tuesday that they were committed to issuing subpoenas if necessary and prosecuting them to the fullest extent permitted by law. They said they had little confidence in the fact that the Attorney General's Department of Justice, led by Attorney General William P. Barr, will apply contempt proceedings if their claims are flouted, but they believe that subpoenas can be executed in the context of civil proceedings.
"The Trump administration believes, for whatever reason, that the congressional power of summons is weak and that the courts will stand on its side in any dispute over the validity of the use of this power to produce documents," said Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), member of the House's oversight and intelligence committees. "This kind of excessive trust could be very wrong."
However, the resulting legal battles could be long, costly and unpredictable, based on previous disputes over Congressional summonses.
"It will clearly take time to resolve – the question is how long," said Mark Gitenstein, senior counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee in the 1980s.
Using the courts on many occasions to enforce legislators' demands will require resources and, critically, valuable time that Congress may not have. Congressional subpoenas – as well as any criminal contempt proceedings that may follow – expire at the end of a congressional session, which could make matters questionable after the 2020 elections.
"No doubt the legislator's interest will be to seek prompt action from the courts," said Rep. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Md.). "Here, justice delayed, democracy denied"
The Democratic Legislative Counsel of the House looks into the subpoena litigation before the Congress as a guide to their strategy.
One of the key tests was conducted in 2007, when a House of Representatives jury, Harriet Miers, then a White House advisor, asked for information about President George W. Bush's efforts to sack US lawyers. . The White House objected to her providing information, citing the privilege of the executive, and it was not until two years before she was called to testify.
During Barack Obama's presidency, the Attorney General of the time, Eric H. Holder Jr., was the victim of a subpoena and resolution on contempt of the Oversight Committee. the House, which was looking for information on a controversial border enforcement program called "Fast and Furious". Holder's information began in 2011 but was not resolved until 2016, long after he left office.
The Senate's Standing Senate Subcommittee on Investigations got quicker results in 2015 when it asked Backpage.com for information as part of a human trafficking investigation. Senate investigators won in court and were able to compel the production of information in about 13 months.
[House panel opens probe into allegation Trump told immigration official to break the law and promised a pardon]
Democrats in the House believe that their requests for information from the president's banks and accounting firms could be much faster.
On Monday, intelligence and financial services committees summoned Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup to seek information on Trump's business activities.
In addition, the House Oversight Committee sent a subpoena last Monday to Mazars USA, the accounting firm Trump, for all the financial information that the firm has prepared or reviewed for the company and the president's foundation.
William Consovoy and Stefan Passantino, lawyers for the president and his company, wrote in a letter to Mazars USA on Monday that a subpoena from the Oversight Committee "would have no legitimate legislative purpose "and asked the company to notify them of a 10-day notice of its actions" so that we can take the appropriate legal steps to protect the rights of our customers ".
Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), Chairman of the Oversight Committee, described the letter as "a new attempt by the president and his companies to throw the kitchen sink to Congress to prevent us from". obtain crucial information as part of our constitutional control responsibilities ".
"But unlike the president, these outside entities understand that subpoenas to Congress are mandatory and understand their legal obligation to comply with the law rather than hinder it," he added.
The Republican committee representative, Jim Jordan (Ohio), accused Cummings of using the "limited resources of the panel to attack President Trump for political purposes."
For its part, Mazars USA said in a statement that it "will respect the legal process and comply fully with its legal obligations".
Deutsche Bank said in a statement that it was "engaged in a productive dialogue" with the House committees. "We remain committed to providing appropriate information to all authorized investigations, in accordance with our legal obligations," said the bank.
Other financial institutions declined to comment.
The organization Trump declined to comment. On Tuesday, a person close to the company called the president's financial information subpoenas "a new low" and said that they created "a dangerous precedent".
House lawyers are confident that any claim to executive privilege could be invoked by Trump's lawyers and that banks will not be afraid to provide documents to Congress.
A senior Democratic official, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe his internal strategy, said the Democrats were waiting for "weeks, not months" before Deutsche Bank do not transmit the requested documents.
"We do not foresee any problem with their proper response to our legal and lawful subpoena," said the assistant. "I would be very surprised if a bank did not comply with a subpoena to be legally authorized by a congressional committee."
Two former House councilors said the Democrats in the House had a good chance of winning because they could completely eliminate Trump's lawyers.
Charles Tiefer, deputy legal adviser to the House of Representatives in the 1990s and a lecturer at the University of Baltimore Law School, said Trump's lawyers should sue financial institutions to prevent them from complying with the quote. to appear from Congress. But even in this case, he was not sure what their argument would be to crush such a request.
Some legal experts have suggested that a judge could reverse the assignment because it concerns a private matter and not a broader government control. But Kerry W. Kircher, a House advocate with the Republican majority from 2011 to 2016, said that he was not sure that such an argument would hold.
"It's a big challenge. The congressional oversight powers are quite extensive and extensive, "he said. "You can try that; I think it's a loser. "
The Democrats' strategy of trying to compel the production of news has grown in recent months in close consultation with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), According to the project's regulars . Each group of experts was urged to establish a clear legal basis for its investigation and to give the administration and related entities multiple opportunities to respond to their requests.
All requests for information from the House are eclipsed by what a lawyer called "The Great Kahuna": the request of the House Judiciary Committee for access to the unexpurgated report of the Special Advocate Robert S. Mueller III, an effort that sparked the participation of the presidents of a half dozen committees of the House.
The many requests from House committees have infuriated Trump, who told his aides that he did not want to cooperate with investigations, according to people close to his thinking.
[House Democrats give IRS hard deadline of April 23 to turn over Trump tax returns]
He is particularly unhappy with the efforts of the Ways and Means Committee to obtain his tax returns. He told his aides that he would fight against this requirement until the Supreme Court and added that, by then, the 2020 elections would be over.
"You will never see his tax returns," former White House official and Trump advisor Anthony Scaramucci told MSNBC on Tuesday. "He will not release them."
The White House also plans to retain information on how certain people have received their security clearances and will reject requests for notes on President's meetings and phone calls with foreign leaders, exchanges between senior advisor Jared Kushner and the president's talks. with Cabinet members about initiatives, among others, according to people knowing his or her thinking.
Cabinet agencies have been asked to seek White House approval before handing out documents to Congress, and lawyers at the council office are closely following requests, the aides said.
The White House declined to comment.
Democrats in the House who were preparing for a legal battle against the administration said the walls of Trump were infuriating.
"They fight us for everything now. They fight us when we publish the uncensored Mueller report, they fight us for the president's taxes. . . they basically decided to thwart Congressional oversight, "said Raskin. "It is an attack on the separation of powers and more particularly on the congressional oversight function."
David A. Fahrenthold and Renae Merle in New York contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Source link