RSN Fundraising Banner
12 Trump Administration Targets House Democrats Are Preparing to Investigate
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=33526"><span class="small">Colby Itkowitz, The Washington Post</span></a>   
Monday, 12 November 2018 15:03

Itkowitz writes: "Now that Democrats will control the House, they have free rein to launch as many investigations into President Trump and his administration as they would like."

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in 2017. (photo: Alex Brandon/AP)
Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in 2017. (photo: Alex Brandon/AP)

12 Trump Administration Targets House Democrats Are Preparing to Investigate

By Colby Itkowitz, The Washington Post

12 November 18


ow that Democrats will control the House, they have free rein to launch as many investigations into President Trump and his administration as they would like. They plan to hold back on any impeachment proceedings — despite nearly two-thirds of voters in battleground states who supported Democratic candidates wanting them to start — until they see what is uncovered in Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

But they still have plenty of other ways to keep themselves busy.

Democrats understand that a significant message from voters last week was for them to provide a check on the Trump White House. Over the past week, incoming committee chairs have said they are planning to utilize their newfound power to this end but will do so strategically. Soon-to-be House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) said Sunday on ABC’s This Week, “I’m not going to be handing out subpoenas like somebody’s handing out candy on Halloween."

Candy or not, there is a lot to chew on. Here is a list, and it is nowhere near exhaustive, of the areas the Democrats plan to investigate and hold hearings on when they take over in January.

Russian interference

Yes, Democrats will wait for Mueller’s report, but incoming House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) has said he would look at how the House’s probe into potential meddling was incomplete and seek to fill in any remaining gaps. His predecessor, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), has been accused of trying harder to find a government conspiracy against Trump rather than wrongdoing by Russia and the Trump campaign.

In an interview with the Fix, Schiff said that “it’s not my intention to sit by idly while we await Mueller.”

“It may be that there is a report before we even take the gavel, and if that’s the case we’ll be guided by what their findings are. It’s my hope they’ll be shared with Congress and the American people. This is too big an issue to be swept under the rug, but if the Mueller report is not available, we intend to push forward with important investigative work. The reality for us is: Republicans walked away from the investigations. They decided to dedicate themselves to the president’s defense, but we never walked away from it. That will be our intention, to finish this work, and we’ll now have power to compel people to testify.”

On a related topic, Schiff wrote in a Washington Post op-ed last month that his committee would address “allegations the Russians may possess financial leverage over the president, including perhaps the laundering of Russian money through his businesses.”

Matt Whitaker

If new acting attorney general Matthew G. Whitaker does not recuse himself from overseeing the Russia investigation because of his outspoken critiques of Mueller and the probe’s merits, and if Whitaker is still in the position by the time the new Congress convenes, House Democrats are prepared to investigate his conflicts of interest.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the likely next chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union” that he plans to summon Whitaker to testify as his panel’s first witness and is prepared to subpoena him if necessary. And Schiff, on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said that if Whitaker does not recuse himself, his actions related to the investigation will be scrutinized for any interference.

“If he has any involvement whatsoever in this Russia probe, we are going to find out whether he made commitments to the president about the probe, whether he is serving as a back channel to the president or his lawyers about the probe, whether he’s doing anything to interfere with the probe. Mr. Whitaker needs to understand that he will be called to answer. And any role that he plays will be exposed to the public,” Schiff said.

Hush money

The House Oversight Committee plans to investigate Trump’s role in paying Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, who alleged they had affairs with him, to stay quiet before the 2016 election. Cummings sent a letter in September to the White House and the Trump Organization requesting documents related to the hush payments but never received them. Now that Democrats are in the majority, they have more leverage to demand that information.

Tax returns

Rep. Richard E. Neal (D-Mass.), who will take over the gavel of the powerful tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said that if Trump does not voluntarily release his tax returns, Neal will file a legal request with the Treasury Department that they be released to a small group in Congress. Neal said last week he expects the issue to end up in federal court.

He also told our Post colleagues that “he could obtain the returns using a 1924 law that gives heads of the congressional tax-writing committees the right to request any American’s tax returns. The panel could then make them public with a simple majority vote.”

Emoluments clause

There are already two lawsuits underway alleging Trump has violated the emoluments clause in the Constitution by accepting payments from foreign governments via dignitaries staying at the Trump hotel in Washington. One of the lawsuits was brought by Democratic members of Congress, and a judge in September ruled they had legal standing to do so. But as the lawsuits make their way through the courts, Cummings has said a potential violation of the Constitution for personal financial gain is one issue he plans to have his committee investigate.

And Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), a senior member of the transportation committee, which has jurisdiction over government properties (the hotel is in the former U.S. Post Office building), said the panel will investigate the Trump hotel, telling Bloomberg TV last week: “We have a constitutional responsibility. . . . Did the president receive money from a foreign government? Think Saudi Arabia. Think Kuwait.”

Security clearances

Democrats want to know how certain individuals, such as Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and former staff secretary Rob Porter, were working at the highest level of the White House without security clearances. They will also probe Trump’s decision to revoke security clearances from John Brennan, the former Central Intelligence Agency director, and other Trump critics.

Media targeting

Schiff thinks Democrats should probe whether Trump used his office to try to punish companies associated with CNN and The Washington Post.

Schiff pointed to Trump’s effort to block AT&T from purchasing Time Warner, the parent company of CNN, and his desire to get the U.S. Postal Service to increase shipping costs for Amazon, whose chief executive, Jeffrey P. Bezos, owns The Post.

“The president is not only castigating the press but might be secretly using instruments of state power to punish them,” Schiff said in an interview with The Post on Sunday. “That’s a great threat to press freedom.”

Brett M. Kavanaugh

While some Democratic voters would love to see the new House majority take up impeachment charges against Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, Nadler said Sunday that that is not the path he plans to take. Instead, he said he intends to use the power of his committee to investigate why the FBI did not do a more thorough job looking into the allegations of sexual misconduct made against Kavanaugh during his confirmation process.

Nadler said on ABC’s “This Week” he would be examining “the process by which the FBI was stifled in its investigation by the White House.”

Family separations

There remain many unanswered questions about the White House’s “zero tolerance policy” at the border that resulted in the separations of thousands of children from their parents. Many children remain separated, and Cummings’s oversight panel intends to probe the lapses that occurred, both in how it is that children are still in government custody as well as reports that children were mistreated while in government care.

Health care

Democrats made health care, and specifically protections for people with preexisting conditions, a cornerstone of their midterm campaign platform. Now Nadler wants to launch an investigation into the Trump administration’s decision not to defend the Affordable Care Act against a lawsuit that, if successful, would bring down the entire law.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos

The Education and Workforce Committee under Democratic control are going to demand more answers from DeVos, who has largely avoided oversight of her work at the Education Department. Inside Higher Ed called her “one of the biggest losers of the midterm elections,” explaining:

Democrats will focus on decisions by DeVos on two major higher education rules. She’s proposed a more restrictive overhaul of the borrower-defense rule, which allows defrauded students to seek loan forgiveness, and a repeal of the gainful-employment rule, which holds higher ed programs accountable for graduating students with debt they can’t repay.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke

Our Post colleagues reported last week that Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who will take over the House Natural Resources Committee, wants to investigate Zinke “on his personal conduct and management decisions.”

On Wednesday, Grijalva said he and his colleagues want the interior secretary to provide answers on several fronts. Last month, the Interior Department’s acting inspector general, Mary Kendall, referred that inquiry, which is examining whether Zinke used his office for personal gain, to the Justice Department.

“This is our check and balance, our constitutional obligation and our jurisdiction,” Grijalva said. “Us exercising our oversight and accountability responsibilities is not asking for a war with the administration.”
Email This Page your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

0 # Benign Observer 2018-11-12 20:58
Russia, top of the list. Really?

Please, tell me, how many Democratic candidates campaigned on Russian interference? ZERO. Why not? Because they know people do not care about this.

So why do they, and the msm, persist? To keep from talking about all the things their donors don't want addressed.

Tax returns, emoluments, sex payments blah blah blah

Where's healthcare? Waaaay down -- BUT IT'S VOTERS' #1 ISSUE.

Where's peace? Where's the military budget? Where's jobs, economic justice, prison and sentencing reform, the opioid crisis? WHERE THE FUCK IS CLIMATE CHANGE?

If this is what the Democrats do -- attack Trump 24/7/52/2 -- they may as well just hand over another four years.

Far from a wave, people gave Democrats just enough power to check Trump's worst antics. That's it.

In 2010 the GOP turned 63 seats.

In 1994 they turned 54 seats.

In 1974, after Watergate, the Democrats flipped 49 seats.

In 1938 the GOP took EIGHTY-ONE SEATS. (But they still didn't gain control -- that's how much power the Democrats had during the New Deal.)

Yet now, with one of the most criminal, cruel and greedy Republican parties in U.S. history, and after two years of Trump's bullshit -- the Democrats take 26-30 seats?

If they don't use the next two years to fight for people, denounce corporate money and embrace a New New Deal -- they're going to blow it again.

But we're the ones who'll suffer -- and they'll blame it on progressives.
-3 # Benign Observer 2018-11-12 21:17
And there are more than a few rumblings of a Black Exit from the Democratic Party. It's been growing for several years, and accelerated after Obama (and Holder) turned his back on homeowners, unions and OWS.

Black turnout for Clinton was low. Both Clinton's dissed BLM and others on the campaign trail, and both defended the policies they'd implemented that betrayed their constituents. Then black women, the party's most loyal constituency, turned out for Doug Jones -- and as soon as he took office he voted with Donald Trump.

Again, in 2018 blacks (and millennials) came out for the Democrats and saved their asses -- because white working class whites, especially men, sure didn't -- even after being courted by neoliberals election after election.

What will their reward be? If they don't see some love, even some fight -- the party, coasting on the belief that the emerging demographic will have 'nowhere else to go' -- is going to be abandoned.

The party is coasting on fumes.
0 # lfeuille 2018-11-13 17:10
That is a Trumpian fantasy. There will not be any appreciable black exit from the Dem party until there is somewhere better for them to go. They will not be moving to the moron king. The alt right has been pushing this, but it is a non starter.
0 # Benign Observer 2018-11-15 12:53
I disagree. I have heard and talked to dozens of black Americans, at rallies and in political groups. This is not a rarity by any means, and I'd say it was confirmed by the (lack of) black turnout for Clinton in 2016. Hell, you can practically time it. She got strong support early in the primary and then it dwindled, then turnout plunged for the general election, particularly among younger African Americans.

There was a video of interviews at a Detroit barber shop after the 2016 election. Four barbers had voted for Obama twice, and in 2016 two of them didn't vote at all, while the other two wrote in candidates. One wrote in his own name and the other wrote in Bernie Sanders.

To dismiss this as fantasy is not smart. We need to take it seriously. Blacks may not vote GOP -- but they WILL stay home. And why not? What has the party done for them? Even Obama -- he bailed out Wall Street but let millions lose their homes, which disproportionat ely hurt black middle class Americans.

They are sick and tired of being taken for granted. I hear this A LOT.
+6 # Jaax88 2018-11-13 00:25
Whew. It looks like the checks and balances will com into play now that the Demos will be charge of the House. Probably one thing they should do is investigate Rep. Nunes for
violations of his oath of office, rules,laws
or honor.
0 # humanmancalvin 2018-11-13 02:32
In these particular times the Dems must stand tough & not back down for one instant. Of course anything that ends up in the Supreme Court now with the venerable & honorable Judge Gingrich injured & possibly retiring as a result & of course Scalia Jr. (or is it Sr.) Kavanaugh is already decided anti House. Then enter the esteemed Senate which to my dismay the Radical Right Insurgency actually gaines seats. How in the hell did that happen? Could be altogether to common today, fraud or still (unbelievably) enough Democrats gave two craps about getting out to vote and further apathy will completely submerge this already sinking ship.
+3 # LionMousePudding 2018-11-13 03:19
"While some Democratic voters would love to see the new House majority take up impeachment charges against Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, Nadler... said he intends to use the power of his committee to investigate why the FBI did not do a more thorough job looking into the allegations of sexual misconduct made against Kavanaugh.."

Because it is better to investigate the crime than save the victim? The victim being everyone in this country who is not white, male, and rich.

Very questionable choice. What is going on here?
+7 # DongiC 2018-11-13 04:06
Sunlight is the best antiseptic. It looks like the dark Republican sun has been replaced by a bright Democratic one. God knows what corruption will be exposed. I think the Republican Party will be severely crippled by what is brought to light by these vitally important investigations. It's like watching separation of powers and checks and balances go into action. The GOP will be hammered for decades. It richly deserves it.
0 # lfeuille 2018-11-13 17:13
Not when the crooks really don't care if people know and figure they will get away with it anyway. That is the situation with today's Republican Party and it's huckster leader Trump.
+3 # tsyganka 2018-11-13 17:32
LeionMousePUddi ng -- And the only thing opponents and the media are mentioning about dishonest kavanaugh is his 'sexual misconduct.' I think he's guilty of attempted rape - but realistically, three other things are more important: 1) his voting and written opinion record, solidly pro-corporation , anti-environmen t, and anti-human beings; 2) his six past perjuries when being interviewed and the perjuries he committed during the interviews for SCOTUS; and 3) his temperament - lack of self-control, rude interruptions of questioners, evasiveness, unhinged oscillation between weepiness and shouting, etc. -- As to the FBI's investigation, it was deliberately limited by trump; and I don't know whether it had the authority to expand the scope.

But more important than fascist kavanaugh: 1) climate change and 2) honest elections: paper ballots, counted and recounted by hand. -- A recent article says Dems intend to put "securing democracy" first. I don't know what that means. Non-hackable electronic fraud machines? That's a farce. Blanket censorship of all 'propaganda'? Who decides what That is? And so forth.

Dems had better dedicate themselves to undoing the extreme damage the fascist trump admin has done to our form of government, and to our water, our air, our land, our food, our privacy, our international relationships, our Survival.
-2 # Benign Observer 2018-11-13 21:02
WaPo lists Russiagate as the #1 thing Democrats should look at, but:

Gallup conducted a poll of registered voters. 10/15-28/2018. They asked about the importance of 12 issues: healthcare, the economy, immigration, women's issues, guns, taxes, foreign affairs, wealth inequality, Kavanaugh, trade, climate change and Russiagate.

Last place: Russiagate.

Mike Morell, ex-head of CIA, said that if there were any evidence, someone would have found it by now, because dozens of reporters are looking for it.. (He said that a year ago.)

Bob Woodward said recently that he looked into it 'hard' for two years, and found nothing.

Richard Engel, NBC foreign correspondent, said he has combed all his sources -- and found nothing.

Politico wrote last month warning people to 'prepare for disappointment'.

Bill Binney, NSA whistleblower, said it was not Russia.

Rachel Maddow: Russia Russia Russia Russia Russia Russia Russia Russia (Next week Rachel intends to break into Al Capone's vault.)

But it is number one on WaPo's list. That says it all.