WASHINGTON -- The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has given Attorney General William Barr one last shot to accommodate lawmakers seeking access to a more complete version of special counsel Robert Mueller's report before beginning contempt proceedings.
In a letter Friday, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., gave Barr until Monday to respond to his request that the Justice Department allow more lawmakers the chance to read the fuller report as well as turn over investigative material underlying the report. Barr had released a redacted version of the report on April 18.
Earlier this week, citing a "compelling need to protect the autonomy and effectiveness of its investigations," the department said it was "unable to provide" Mueller's investigative files in response to a committee subpoena.
"The committee is prepared to make every realistic effort to reach an accommodation with the department," Nadler wrote. "But if the department persists in its baseless refusal to comply with a validly issued subpoena, the committee will move to contempt proceedings and seek further legal recourse."
The Justice Department declined to comment on Nadler's letter.
The letter is the latest salvo in a widening rift between the White House and congressional Democrats, who are seeking to have Mueller and former White House counsel Donald McGahn testify. On Thursday, Barr snubbed Nadler's committee, failing to show for a scheduled hearing after he disagreed with the panel's format.
In his report, Mueller did not find a conspiracy between Donald Trump's campaign and Russian officials seeking to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. The special counsel identified 10 instances of possible obstruction of justice by Trump.
In a March 27 letter that surfaced this week, Mueller complained to Barr that his four-page memo summarizing the report "did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance" of the special counsel's work.
Last month, the Justice Department offered to make a less-redacted version of the 448-page Mueller report available to select members of the House and Senate -- the chairmen and ranking members of the two chambers' Intelligence committees, the leaders and minority leaders of the House and Senate, and the chairmen and ranking members of each chamber's Judiciary panels. That's a total of 12 lawmakers, with one staff member each.
Top Senate and House Democrats rejected the offer, saying it would not permit them to discuss the report with other lawmakers who have top security clearances, and prevent them from carrying out an effective congressional investigation.
"In order for Congress to fulfill its functions as intended by the Constitution, it must operate as a coequal and coordinate branch of government," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said last month in a letter to Barr.
In his letter to Barr, Nadler said the Justice Department "has never explained why it is willing to allow only a small number of members to view a less-redacted version of the report, subject to the condition that they cannot discuss what they have seen with anyone else."
In its April 18 offer made by Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd, the department suggested it was because of the "sensitive nature of the information."
At the White House, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters that she believes "at no point will it ever be enough" for Democrats.
"It is astonishing to me that not a single Democrat has yet to go read the less redacted version of the report, yet they keep asking for more," Sanders said.
Democrats have declined to read the less-redacted version of the report in a secure room at the Capitol in protest of the arrangement offered by the Justice Department.
On Friday afternoon, Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, criticized Nadler for placing "absurd demands on the department to comply with his oversight request." Echoing language in Mueller's letter to Barr, Collins said in a statement that Nadler's accusations "do not fully capture the context, nature and substance" of the situation.
The House Judiciary Committee also wants the department to seek a court order to permit disclosure to Congress of grand jury material. The department has stated that revealing such material in response to congressional oversight requests is barred by law. But, Nadler says, courts have provided grand jury materials to Congress under the "judicial proceeding" exception in the past.
Also, the committee Democrats want "a defined set" of investigative materials, including witness interviews -- known as "302s" -- and contemporaneous notes taken by witnesses of relevant events. "Since these materials are publicly cited and described in the Mueller report, there can be no question about the committee's need for and right to" the evidence to evaluate the facts Mueller established, Nadler wrote.
That need is amplified, he said, when department policy prohibits the indictment of a sitting president "and instead relies upon Congress to evaluate whether constitutional remedies are appropriate."
IMPEACHMENT OPTION
Democrats have assailed Barr's handling of the Mueller report and questioned the truthfulness of his statements to Congress. Pelosi on Thursday said she believed Barr had lied about his communications with Mueller in testimony last month, and that was a "crime." Justice Department spokesman Kerri Kupec called Pelosi's accusation "reckless, irresponsible and false."
Democrats said they're continuing to explore all options to force Trump and his administration to turn over documents and other materials needed to perform their oversight responsibilities.
Trump made clear last week that his administration will defy congressional subpoenas and other demands, including for his personal finances and the handling of White House security clearances. "We're fighting all the subpoenas," he declared.
Even if the House were to find Barr in contempt, it would be up to a U.S. attorney and the Justice Department -- led by Barr -- to prosecute. And the department isn't likely to act when the official's noncompliance is at the direction of the president. Federal prosecutors have broad discretion over whether to bring charges.
Another option is impeachment. It would give the House Judiciary Committee even broader investigatory subpoena and other powers than it now claims in conducting oversight -- but it's not a popular option. And indictment by the House ultimately would prove futile so long as the Republican-led Senate isn't inclined to convict the president or officials like Barr.
Pelosi reiterated Thursday that she doesn't believe it's time to consider impeachment.
Meanwhile, Nadler's committee is working to secure Mueller's testimony later this month. "We're still firming things up, but we're still on target" for an appearance by May 23, a committee aide said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to freely discuss private deliberations.
Talks are also ongoing with McGahn's lawyer over his appearance. The committee Democrats have requested that he turn over by Tuesday documents that he submitted to the special counsel. Those records are in the possession of his lawyer.
Separately, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., wrote to Mueller on Friday asking if he would like to provide testimony regarding Barr's characterization of a phone call with Mueller.
During a hearing on Wednesday, Barr testified that during the call Mueller did not challenge the accuracy of a four-page summary of key findings in Mueller's report that was sent to Congress last month and was only concerned with media coverage of its release.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who questioned Barr about the phone conversation at the hearing, told CNN on Thursday that he wants to hear Mueller's version of the conversation, including whether it mainly involved a complaint about the media.
"Please inform the Committee if you would like to provide testimony regarding any misrepresentation by the Attorney General of the substance of that phone call," Graham wrote.
Barr has said he has no objection to Mueller testifying.
Information for this article was contributed by Ellen Nakashima and John Wagner of The Washington Post; by Billy House and Laura Litvan of Bloomberg News; and by Mary Clare Jalonick, Eric Tucker and Jill Colvin of The Associated Press.
A Section on 05/04/2019