More hearings
Proceedings starting Dec. 4 could include Trump and lawyers.
The House Judiciary Committee takes up the question of impeachment next week, and Trump’s invited.
WASHINGTON — The House impeachment inquiry will enter a new phase next week when the Judiciary Committee holds its first public hearing to begin deciding whether President Trump will become only the third president in history to face impeachment.
The Dec. 4 hearing will focus on the historical and constitutional basis for impeachment, the definition of an impeachable offense, and the process going forward.
Democrats did not indicate plans to call back the dozen fact witnesses who have testified to the House Intelligence Committee this month about the president’s dealings with Ukraine. That panel is preparing a report for the Judiciary Committee, which must decide whether to draft articles of impeachment for a full House vote.
In a letter to Trump, Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) asked whether he or his lawyers plan “to attend the hearing or make a request to question the witness panel.”
Trump is scheduled to attend a NATO summit in London early next week and return to Washington Dec. 4. But Nadler urged him to send his lawyers.
“The president has a choice to make: He can take this opportunity to be represented in the impeachment hearings, or he can stop complaining about the process,” Nadler said in a statement. “I hope that he chooses to participate in the inquiry, direct or through counsel, as other presidents have done before him.”
Nadler gave the White House a deadline of Sunday to respond.
The House resolution authorizing the inquiry gave Nadler discretion to decide whether Trump and his legal counsel could participate in the proceedings, and in what ways, based on whether the president makes witnesses and documents available.
“We expect to discuss the constitutional framework through which the House may analyze the evidence gathered in the present inquiry,” Nadler wrote to Trump.
The resolution specifies that, in addition to questioning witnesses, the president’s lawyers may respond to evidence presented by Democrats. They may also petition to present more evidence or witness testimony.
So far, Trump and the White House have refused to participate in the impeachment inquiry, directing over a dozen current and former federal officials not to testify or provide documents, even under subpoena.
Trump tweeted Tuesday that he would “love to have” top advisors, including Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo and acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, testify in what he called the “phony impeachment hoax,” but did not suggest he was permitting them to do so.
When asked whether he was willing to testify, Pompeo told reporters, “When the time is right, all good things happen.”
The courts may force Trump’s aides to appear. On Monday, a federal judge ruled that a White House official cannot claim “absolute immunity” to avoid testifying before Congress.
While the ruling was aimed at compelling former White House Counsel Donald McGahn to testify about Russian meddling in the 2016 elections, it could have implications for the impeachment inquiry if it is upheld on appeal.
The House is considering articles of impeachment against Trump for pressing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Trump’s political rivals, including former Vice President Joe Biden, and a debunked theory that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 U.S. election.
Trump refused to agree to a White House meeting with Zelensky unless he would announce the investigations. Trump also blocked the release of nearly $400 million in military aid that Congress had approved to help Ukraine in its war with Russia. The aid was released in September after a whistleblower filed a complaint over Trump’s actions.
Democrats say Trump’s efforts to muscle Ukraine put U.S. national security at risk to bolster his 2020 reelection campaign.
When and why the U.S. aid was held up have been central to the inquiry.
House Budget Committee officials said Tuesday that evidence shows the Office of Management and Budget had moved to block the aid in early July but did not make it official until July 25, hours after Trump had asked Zelensky for “a favor” — the investigations he wanted.
Michael Duffey, an Office of Management and Budget official and political appointee, signed letters that “made the hold legally binding” starting on July 25, according to a House budget summary and a Democratic aide. Duffey has refused to testify in the inquiry.
His subordinate, Mark Sandy, testified that Duffey initially gave a vague reason for the hold when he learned of it on a forwarded email in mid-July. Soon after, Sandy said, he told superiors that the hold on Ukraine aid violated federal law. Duffey then took over responsibility for approving the hold.
Sandy’s deposition was released Tuesday.
Circumventing strict rules for how and when the government spends money appropriated by Congress could violate federal law. The State Department and Pentagon did not respond to requests for comment on the documents.