| |
Trump's DOJ Faces New Scrutiny by Dems 11/13 06:20
The Justice Department has functioned for nearly two years as an extension
of the White House, unchecked by a Republican-controlled Congress as it pursued
investigations into President Donald Trump's enemies, fired waves of career
employees and defended administration stances that judges across the country
repeatedly deemed legally dubious.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Justice Department has functioned for nearly two
years as an extension of the White House, unchecked by a Republican-controlled
Congress as it pursued investigations into President Donald Trump's enemies,
fired waves of career employees and defended administration stances that judges
across the country repeatedly deemed legally dubious.
Now, sweeping Democratic gains in Congress have shifted the balance of power
in Washington, teeing up an onslaught of expected investigations into those
actions and others as well as scrutiny from the majority party that the current
Justice Department had until now managed to skirt.
The department has, at least publicly, appeared unbowed by the altered
landscape.
Attorney General Todd Blanche says the department will cooperate with
Congress but has also insisted that "we will not back down" from the Republican
president's agenda. Meanwhile, a top aide told prosecutors on a call to prepare
to be on "wartime" footing and a U.S. attorney publicly warned a top Democrat
about planned congressional investigations.
It sets the stage for a pugilistic dynamic as Democrats promise to join
already-skeptical courts in reining in the Trump administration while a Justice
Department depleted by the losses of thousands of career employees and the
postelection departures of senior leaders pledges to push ahead with its agenda.
A call for a 'wartime' footing
Even though Democrats hold the gavel, they're short on foolproof ways to
guarantee Republican cooperation. Lawsuits can take years, subpoenas can be
arduous to enforce and criminal contempt referrals for noncompliance would be
sent to the Trump administration Justice Department, where they will almost
certainly not be acted on.
"It's a standoff and I don't know what the answer to that is yet," said Stan
Brand, a former general counsel for the House of Representatives. "I don't know
if the Congress knows."
Nonetheless, Democrats are eager to highlight what they view as abuses of
power, including a succession of investigations the department has launched
into the president's perceived adversaries, many of which have been rejected by
grand juries, dismissed by judges or have otherwise stalled without apparent
progress.
In just the eventful weeks leading up to the election, the department
unsuccessfully sought an indictment against former White House aide Cassidy
Hutchinson, accelerated an investigation into Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar,
employed an unusual maneuver to file a fresh criminal case against former FBI
Director James Comey and charged two ex-FBI officials in a complaint that was
swiftly dismissed by a judge.
Political pressure from the White House is unlikely to wane given the
promotion of Stephen Miller, a devoted Trump loyalist, to chief of staff.
And Justice Department leadership has suggested it won't let Democrats'
threats of investigations deter its pursuit of the White House's priorities,
and may become even more aggressive in pressing the president's causes.
"We will not back down. This will not slow us down. This will not stop us,"
Blanche said in a Fox News interview Monday. "President Trump has two years
remaining in this administration and you better believe that we're going to use
it effectively."
In a call with U.S. attorneys across the country this week, a top Blanche
aide, Aakash Singh, told prosecutors to prepare to be on "wartime" footing, and
suggested more U.S. attorneys may be pushed out after a spate of postelection
departures, according to people familiar with the call who spoke on the
condition of anonymity to discuss internal department discussions.
The Justice Department said the "'wartime' reference had everything to do
with public safety," noting that some "newly elected state and local leaders
are no longer interested in partnering with federal law enforcement."
Any additional U.S. attorney departures would be on top of a string of
significant departures in the days after the election, when the
Senate-confirmed leaders of the department's National Security, Civil and Civil
Rights divisions all announced their resignations. The divisions will have
temporary leaders but are unlikely to get Senate-confirmed ones in light of the
Democratic majority.
"What that means for DOJ, potentially, is just a lot of inaction, with tough
decisions not being made because typically those tough decisions are made by
confirmed people at the top of the components," said Greg Brower, a former U.S.
attorney in Nevada during President George W. Bush's administration who was
later the FBI's chief congressional affairs official.
The department said in a statement that it has "full confidence in the
leaders stepping in to guide our Divisions, and its mission is unchanged:
enforce the law, combat crime, and protect the American people."
Early rhetorical clashes between l awmakers and the department
To be sure, tensions between the Justice Department and Congress of an
opposing party are a staple of oversight dating back decades and across
administrations.
The Republican-led House voted in 2012 to hold then-Attorney General Eric
Holder in contempt of Congress. Democrats did the same in 2019 when William
Barr led the Justice Department. There were even interparty clashes during the
first Trump administration.
But the situation now is unlike anything the current department has
experienced.
As the minority party in both the House and Senate, Democrats decried during
hearings and in letters what they saw as the department's erosion of
independence but had little power to demand accountability.
On the rare occasion when the department did appear fazed by congressional
oversight, it was generally because of Republican resistance, including over
the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files or an ultimately abandoned fund to
compensate Trump allies.
The Democrats' planned inquiries have already invited opposition from
Republicans and the White House, with Trump accusing Democrats of "extortion"
and ordering the attorney general to conduct an investigation.
The White House has issued a warning on expected investigations, asserting
in a letter from counsel Will Scharf that such inquiries -- a routine function
of Congress -- may amount to "blatant criminality." Members of Congress enjoy
broad legal protections for acts they take as lawmakers under a constitutional
principle known as "speech and debate."
"My first-year law students would fail if they wrote a letter like that,"
Brand said.
Additionally, the top federal prosecutor in Houston sent a warning letter to
Sen. Richard Blumenthal over the Connecticut Democrat's inquiry into funding
for Trump's White House ballroom. In the letter, U.S. Attorney Aaron Reitz
ordered Blumenthal to preserve all records relevant to his inquiry, and accused
the senator of intimidating "citizens for engaging in philanthropic practices
that will benefit our nation for generations."
Blumenthal responded that he would not be intimidated.
Blanche told reporters Thursday that there were no open investigations into
Democrats' rhetoric and acknowledged that it's not a crime to warn of looming
investigations. But he again expressed concern over what he described as
threats against the administration.
Leah Foley, the U.S. attorney for Massachusetts, said in an interview with
The Associated Press that the message from Washington was for prosecutors to
continue their aggressive focus on the administration's priorities of tackling
fraud, violent crime, drug trafficking and cartels.
"I've been through so many administrations as a prosecutor," said Foley, who
co-chairs a committee that advises the attorney general on policies and
priorities. "This is a lot of noise that's coming out of the elections and
posturing going on. But things are going to settle down and we've operated
proficiently through divided governments before and we'll continue to do so."
|
|
