House seeks grand jury evidence
WASHINGTON — The House Judiciary Committee on Friday asked a federal judge to unseal grand jury secrets related to Robert Mueller’s investigation, using the court filing to declare that lawmakers have already in effect launched an impeachment investigation of President Trump.
In a legal maneuver that carries significant political overtones, the committee told a judge that it needs access to the grand jury evidence collected by Mueller as special counsel — such as witness testimony — because it is “investigating whether to recommend articles of impeachment” against the president.
“Because Department of Justice policies will not allow prosecution of a sitting president, the United States House of Representatives is the only institution of the federal government that can now hold President Trump accountable for these actions,” the filing told the judge, Beryl Howell, who supervised Mueller’s grand jury.
Referring to the part of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to impeach and remove a president, the filing continued: “To do so, the House must have access to all the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise all its full Article I powers, including a constitutional power of the utmost gravity — approval of articles of impeachment.”
With the filing, the committee’s chairman, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, DN.Y., was attempting to sidestep the debate raging inside the Democratic Party over whether the full House should hold a vote to formally declare that it is opening an impeachment inquiry. In effect, he declared, that inquiry has already begun.
“Too much has been made of the phrase ‘an impeachment inquiry,’ ” Nadler said at a news conference. “We are doing what our court filing says we are doing, what I said we are doing, and that is we are using our full Article I powers to investigate the conduct of the president and to consider what remedies there are. Among other things we will consider, obviously, is whether to recommend articles of impeachment.”
Other members of the committee were more forward.
“We’re now crossing a threshold with this filing, and we are now officially entering into an examination of whether or not to recommend articles of impeachment,” Rep. Veronica Escobar, DTexas, declared.
Democrats hope that Howell will agree that their request for the grand jury material falls into the same legal category as a Nixonera precedent under which the committee gained access to Watergate evidence. But there is a difference that could matter: In 1974, the full House had voted to declare an impeachment inquiry opened.
The new filing comes two days after Mueller testified before Congress for the first time about the findings of his 22month investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible obstruction of justice by Trump. Republicans — and some Democrats — said Mueller’s lackluster appearance had all but ended the impeachment threat, and they were not convinced the committee’s actions Friday had changed that.
“Democrats want to convince their base they’re still wedded to impeachment even after this week’s hearing, but a baseless legal claim is an odd way to show that,” said Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee. He predicted that the legal maneuver would fail.
But Democrats who control the panel called Mueller’s testimony an “inflection point” and are now seeking to add more evidence about what they believe to be serious wrongdoing by Trump.
Nadler said the committee would continue the investigation during the House’s sixweek summer recess, calling additional witnesses and filing a lawsuit as soon as next week to force Don McGahn, the former White House counsel, to testify unless he agrees to come voluntarily.