Democrats, Eyeing a Majority, Prepare an Investigative Onslaught

WASHINGTON — House Democrats, increasingly optimistic they will win back control in November, are mining a mountain of stymied oversight requests in preparation for an onslaught of hearings, subpoenas and investigations into nearly every corner of the Trump administration.

While they continue to distance themselves from the most extreme recourse — impeaching President Donald Trump — senior Democrats who stand to control key House panels could soon oversee inquiries into some of the most precarious threats to Trump’s presidency. Those include whether his campaign coordinated with Russia to influence the 2016 election, if the president obstructed a federal investigation into the matter and what role Trump played in paying to silence two women in the closing weeks of the campaign who say they had affairs with him.

Their scrutiny could also extend beyond Trump’s legal troubles to include his administration’s remaking of federal regulations and other policies that the party has disagreed with.

“I am not looking for headlines,” said Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the top Democrat on the powerful House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. “I am going to be defending the truth. We want to look at what is happening under this administration because all of us can agree this is not normal.”

Republicans, who have used their majority to systematically block Democratic demands of the administration, privately fear the onslaught could knock Trump’s government into a defensive posture or worse. In hopes of scaring voters to the polls, they have begun sounding sirens that Democrats will move quickly to impeach Trump.

“They are going to try to impeach,” said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who has been one of Trump’s staunchest allies on Capitol Hill. “We know that. This is why we have got to turn out our voters and win,” Jordan said. The congressman, a wrestling coach turned politician, is facing his own political scandal stemming from accusations that he was aware of sexual misconduct at Ohio State University but did nothing to stop it.

On Monday, Trump blasted Attorney General Jeff Sessions for bringing charges against two Republican House members before the midterm elections, saying it put their re-election in jeopardy.

“Two easy wins now in doubt because there is not enough time. Good job Jeff,” Trump said on Twitter.

Democrats have been hesitant to loudly advertise the specifics of the potential investigative blitz, convinced that swing voters are more likely to back them based on kitchen-table economic issues like wages, health care and retirement benefits. Loyal Democratic voters do not need to be reminded that a Democratic House will check the power of the president, they argue.

“If this is a referendum on Trump, the way I would want to frame it is not ‘remove or retain’ but ‘contain or enable,'” said Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., who has already introduced an article of impeachment against the president. “There are more votes for ‘contain’ than there are for ‘remove.'”

But with Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, implicating the president directly in the payoffs to Stephanie Clifford and Karen McDougal, the conviction of Trump’s former campaign chairman in federal court and a rash of indictments and other alleged wrongdoings swirling around House Republicans themselves, the Democrats are increasingly selling themselves as a much-needed antidote to a “culture of corruption” in the capital.

Democrats believe the Republicans abused the power of the majority to hobble the Obama administration, deeply damage Hillary Clinton and protect Trump. That frustration, coupled with what most lawmakers expect to be a wave of Democratic anti-Trump outrage fueling midterm victories, could overwhelm the instincts of more moderate members of the party to chart a different, more bipartisan course than Republicans have.

Democrats on the Oversight Committee, typically the House’s most muscular investigative body, have more than 50 subpoena requests that have been denied by committee Republicans since Trump took office, from the administration of security clearances at the White House to chartered jet travel by Cabinet officials to Justice Department documents related to its decision not to defend the Affordable Care Act in court.

“It’s not like we have to go dig them up. They are right there sitting on the desk,” Cummings said.

In the Intelligence Committee, home to the House’s only investigation of Russian election interference, Democrats have shown interest in reopening what they viewed as an anemic inquiry that was prematurely closed by Republicans. They have outlined an ambitious list of witnesses worthy of potential subpoena, and Rep.Adam B. Schiff of California, the committee’s top Democrat, says that unsubstantiated suggestions that Russia could have laundered money through the Trump administration are of “great concern.”

Party leaders could also choose to impanel a special committee to focus on the Russia matter, freeing the Intelligence Committee to more traditional oversight of the CIA and the FBI.

But many of the most sensitive investigations directly touching Trump are likely to fall to the Judiciary Committee, one of Congress’ most partisan bodies, where impeachment proceedings must begin. Led by Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York, committee Democrats have repeatedly pressed for an investigation of whether Trump’s business profits violate anti-corruption clauses of the Constitution. They titled a 56-page report on requests mothballed by Republicans, “A Record of Abuse, Corruption, and Inaction.”

Perhaps more consequentially, Nadler and his colleagues have pushed for the committee’s own Russia investigation, as well as inquiries into the firing of James Comey as FBI director last year and Trump’s attacks on the FBI and Justice Department. While not formal impeachment inquiries, studying those topics would allow the committee to begin to quietly set a foundation for a potential report from special counsel Robert Mueller or the presentation of new facts by prosecutors in the Cohen case.

“We have to see more,” Nadler said of impeachment. “We need more evidence. We need to see what Mueller comes up with. We may get there.” In the wake of Cohen’s guilty plea last month, Nadler requested an emergency meeting of the committee to demand insight from the Justice Department into its continuing investigation of potential campaign finance violations, as well as a public hearing on presidential pardons. The committee’s Republican chairman, Rep. Robert Goodlatte of Virginia, did not reply.

Less marquee committees — including Financial Services, Veterans Affairs, Ways and Means, and Energy and Commerce — would probably carry out their own policy-oriented probes, digging out private communications behind divisive administration decisions and personnel, or even take a run at obtaining Trump’s long-sought tax returns.

Taken together, it would represent a sharp turn from the precipitous drop-off in congressional oversight since President Barack Obama left office. Republicans defend their record, arguing that they have called administration witnesses when appropriate and carried out a yearlong, politically unpopular investigation of Trump’s Russia ties.

But in the last year, that effort has been almost entirely overtaken by an investigation of those investigating Trump at the FBI and the Justice Department. Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., the chairman of the Oversight Committee, has yet to issue a single subpoena.

As a Democratic victory looks more likely, the possible reversal has increasingly worried Republicans. Axios reported Sunday that Republicans have privately circulated a spreadsheet that catalogs more than 100 outstanding Democratic requests for testimony and documents, as well as the names of administration officials in their sights. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who has used his chairmanship of the Intelligence Committee to launch an aggressive investigation of those investigating Trump’s Russia ties, told supporters at a private fundraiser that Republicans in Congress were essentially Trump’s last line of defense.

“If Sessions won’t unrecuse and Mueller won’t clear the president, we’re the only ones,” he said, according to a recording released in August by MSNBC, “which is really the danger.” Even the most liberal members of the Democratic caucus, including those who have already filed articles of impeachment against Trump, have shaded toward political pragmatism as the levers of power have come into reach. Sherman said he has set aside time in December to update his article of impeachment with new details about Cohen and other matters. But in an interview he talked as much about political probabilities as principles.

Democrats are quick to reference the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in 1998 as reason for their caution. Republicans in the House lost seats in the runup to the 1998 midterm elections, then successfully impeached Clinton largely along party lines. But they failed to come close to a conviction in the Senate and ultimately boosted Clinton’s popularity. Democrats fear a similar outcome that could end up strengthening Trump’s hand in the 2020 presidential election.

“We need to attack the problem of corruption we see in the administration and do our oversight. But Democrats are mindful of the fact that if we want to stay in the majority, we have to show that we are responsibly governing,” Schiff said in an interview.

Sidelining impeachment for now could set the body on a more gradual path toward the same end, liberal Democrats open to impeachment say. With subpoenas and gavels, they say, they could begin to unearth impeachable offenses, and embarrassing public hearings could build a public case against Trump as they await Mueller.

“I think you need to build a case,” said Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., who has also introduced impeachment articles. “And then see where the politics are.”