First subpoena

Dems ready first subpoena fight with Trump administration

Lawmakers don’t expect Treasury to comply with their demand for documents on the decision to ease sanctions on companies tied to Oleg Deripaska.

By ANDREW DESIDERIO

House Democrats are gearing up for what’s likely to be their first subpoena fight with the Trump administration — targeting the Treasury Department’s decision to lift sanctions on companies tied to a billionaire Russian oligarch.

The chairs of the Financial Services, Intelligence and Foreign Affairs committees sent a joint document request to the department this week, and lawmakers are already anticipating they’ll have to issue a subpoena to get their hands on information about Treasury’s controversial move boosting Kremlin ally Oleg Deripaska.

Newly empowered Democrats are expected to fire off subpoenas on a host of fronts if administration officials try to stonewall their investigations.

And a senior Democratic lawmaker on one of those committees, who was not authorized to discuss internal deliberations, said the demands of Treasury would likely be the first subpoena the House issues in the 116th Congress — offering Washington a preview of the oversight battles to come and underscoring the scrutiny Democrats are placing on all things Russia.

Due to the high volume of documents requested this week by three House committees, combined with the sensitive nature of the information they’re demanding, more than a dozen lawmakers and aides told POLITICO they expect a subpoena fight with the department in the near future.

“Oh, we expect them to fully cooperate with us,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said mockingly, “in the spirit of bipartisanship and respect for the legislative branch’s prerogatives under the Constitution and Article I.”

Connolly, who has been a vocal critic of the Trump administration’s Russia policies, indicated that lawmakers are not expecting the Treasury Department to voluntarily fork over the documents, especially given the department’s record of ignoring Democrats’ demands about Russia sanctions. “We’re doing it the nice way,” he said, but Democrats aren’t optimistic.

“Once we initiate a document request, I believe we have to back that up,” said Connolly, a senior member of the Foreign Affairs panel. “If they don’t comply voluntarily, then you have to use the powers you have to compel compliance. It’s not an option. It’s not a voluntary thing once we ask for documents or, for that matter, your testimony.”

Democratic Reps. Maxine Waters and Adam Schiff of California, and Eliot Engel of New York — who chair the Financial Services, Intelligence and Foreign Affairs panels, respectively — gave Treasury until Feb. 5 to deliver information related to the decision to remove sanctions on three companies tied to Deripaska.

The department announced in December that it would de-list EN+, Rusal, and EuroSibEnergo after it had reached an agreement with Deripaska that would include reducing his holdings in those companies.

But Democrats say the deal “appears designed to allow him to retain significant influence, if not de facto control,” over the three companies. In their letter, the committee leaders asked for all documents, “regardless of classification,” relating to Deripaska and the process to lift sanctions on his companies. They also requested information on who exactly stands to benefit as a result.

Engel has said subpoenas should be only a last resort. A spokesman for Schiff also declined to comment. Waters, who has drawn attacks from the president over her calls to impeach him, could soon face pressure from the newcomer progressive firebrands on her committee to issue subpoenas, especially considering how important her members believe the Deripaska documents are.

“I think we’re prepared to do that,” said Rep. Chuy Garcia (D-Ill.), a freshman member who was just appointed to the Financial Services panel. “We want to know relationships, we want to understand if there might be conflicts of interest. We simply want to know more. The activities that we’re interested in have lots of to do with … whether or not the businesses present a problem with our national interest.”

Democrats say the documents will help them further understand Russia’s corporate structures and its relationships with oligarchs like Deripaska, and they’ve alleged that the decision to lighten up on Deripaska was not made in good faith. Some lawmakers have suggested that the decision was clouded by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s alleged conflicts of interest.

House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings of Maryland and Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon wrote a letter to Mnuchin on Tuesday asking about the secretary’s connections to a wealthy Republican donor, Len Blavatnik, who could benefit financially from Treasury’s decision to lift the sanctions. A spokesman for Mnuchin has dismissed those claims.

The de-listing went into effect on Sunday, despite strong opposition from Congress. The House voted overwhelmingly this month to reverse the decision. A similar effort won bipartisan support in the Senate but failed to clear the 60-vote threshold. Democrats had asked Mnuchin to delay the de-listing process and to brief lawmakers further on the issue.

A Treasury spokesman declined to comment on the broad demand for documents, but confirmed that the department has received it and is reviewing the request.

When Democrats were in the minority for the first two years of the Trump administration, their requests for information and testimony often went unanswered. A key focus was the administration’s delayed implementation of congressionally mandated sanctions against Russia, which were approved overwhelmingly by both chambers in 2017 as a way to punish Moscow for its election interference.

Some Democratic lawmakers are privately getting antsy that no subpoenas have been issued so far. Committee leaders have pushed back, noting that the panels had their organizational meetings only this week and wouldn’t kick off their official duties until next week, when former Trump fixer Michael Cohen, among others, is slated to testify.

“These folks are going to have to get comfortable issuing subpoenas,” a Democratic lawmaker said. “I don’t know that they’re comfortable issuing subpoenas yet.”