Dems see obstruction as Trump bullies
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump has sought to intimidate witnesses in the impeachment inquiry, attacking them as “Never Trumpers” and badgering an anonymous whistleblower. He has directed the White House to withhold documents and block testimony requested by Congress. And he has labored to publicly discredit the investigation as a “scam” overseen by “a totally compromised kangaroo court.” To the Democratic leaders directing the impeachment proceedings, Trump’s bullying actions to stymie their probe into his conduct with Ukraine add up to another likely article of impeachment: obstruction. The centerpiece of House Democrats’ eventual impeachment charges is widely expected to be Trump’s alleged abuse of power over Ukraine. But obstruction of Congress is now all but certain to be introduced as well, according to multiple Democratic lawmakers and aides, just as it was five decades ago when the House Judiciary Committee voted for articles of impeachment against President Richard Nixon. But Nixon resigned before the full House vote. “It’s important to vindicate the role of Congress as an independent branch of government with substantial oversight responsibility, that if the executive branch just simply obstructs and prevents witnesses from coming forward, or prevents others from producing documents, they could effectively eviscerate congressional oversight,” said Rep. David N. Cicilline, D-R.I. “That would be very dangerous for the country.” Democrats argue that the Trump administration’s stonewalling — including trying to stop subpoenaed witnesses from testifying and blocking the executive branch from turning over documents — creates a strong case that the president has infringed on the separation of powers and undercut lawmakers’ oversight duties as laid out in the Constitution. Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law scholar at Harvard Law School who has informally advised some Democratic House leaders, said Trump’s actions are unprecedented. “I know of no instance when a president subject to a serious impeachment effort, whether Andrew Johnson or Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton, has essentially tried to lower the curtain entirely — treating the whole impeachment process as illegitimate, deriding it as a ‘lynching’ and calling it a ‘kangaroo court,’ ” Tribe said. “It’s not simply getting in the way of an inquiry,” he added. “It’s basically saying one process that the Constitution put in place, thanks to people like
James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, for dealing with an out-of-control president, is a process he is trying to subvert, undermine and delegitimate. That, to me, is clearly a high crime and misdemeanor.”
In recent weeks, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and other top Democrats have become more forceful in their obstruction language. They have regularly warned the White House that any attempt to withhold or conceal evidence related to the Ukraine episode from congressional investigators could be grounds for impeachment.
Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, have been accusing Democrats of overreaching, despite their own history of using congressional subpoenas to interrogate Obama administration officials while they held the majority.
“Generally speaking, a fishing expedition that would offer subpoenas for high ranking executive officials is not something that Congress has ever expected in the past nor should it expect now — unless there is a true impeachment,” said Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., a Trump confidant.
“A fishing expedition like this, where [they’ve] gone on for three years, hoping they can subpoena everybody who’s potentially talked to the president, is not what congressional subpoena power is all about and it certainly goes against the division of the branches,” Meadows said.