TODAY IN CONGRESS (TIC):
Your One Stop Shop For Learning What Our Congress Critters Are Up To!
Today’s Headlines:
House Democrats To Unveil Sweeping Legislation To Reign In Police Misconduct, TODAY!
___________________________________________________________________________________________
House Judiciary Committee to Conduct Hearings On Police Brutality This Week — George Floyd’s Brother To Testify!
____________________________________________________________
DAY 24 Since the House Passed the HEROES Bill and Not A Peep From Mitch!
Here’s today’s schedule with the events I think may be the most interesting in bold. You can watch C-Span HERE. NOTE: Sometimes C-Span posts additional Congressional events not on my list, later in the day.
BTW — Sorry I there was no TIC yesterday, but not a lot going on (in Congress anyway) and sometimes real life gets busy and gets in the way of my posts.
Today’s Events:
House —
9:00 am — House Pro Forma Session
10:30 am — House Speaker Pelosi Holds Press Conference (House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and other Congressional Democrats hold a press conference to unveil police reform legislation.)
Senate —
3:00 pm — Senate Session (The Senate will resume work on a public lands package to permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) and establish a fund for maintenance of national parks and other public lands.)
Friday’s Votes:
House — No Votes
Senate — No Significant Votes.
Comments:
Today Topics/Events —
Police Misconduct Legislation — Today House Democrats are expected to make public their Bill to curb police misconduct and make sure Black Lives Matter. Here is a little taste of what it’s likely to cover courtesy of this NY Times Report:
The bill, which House and Senate Democrats have named the Justice in Policing Act of 2020, is a direct response to the recent killings of three black Americans by white civilians and officers that have prompted protests across the country, but it includes policies that civil rights activists have been pushing for decades to combat racial bias and excessive use of force by law enforcement. The New York Times obtained a copy of a section-by-section summary of its contents, circulated privately on Capitol Hill late Friday.
As currently proposed, it would significantly change federal law and require states and localities to make modifications of their own, such as instituting mandatory bias training, to receive federal funds. It would create a national registry to track police misconduct and require that law enforcement agencies report data on the use of force, as well as ban certain chokeholds and other practices that were used in confrontations with the police that left black Americans dead.
“Persistent, unchecked bias in policing and a history of lack of accountability is wreaking havoc on the black community,” House and Senate Democrats who assembled the package wrote in an email to colleagues on Friday accompanying the summary. “Cities are literally on fire with the pain and anguish wrought by the violence visited upon black and brown bodies.”
If adopted, the bill would rewrite key elements of the federal criminal code related to police misconduct to make it easier to prosecute law enforcement officers and for individuals who are victims of such practices to recover damages.
The federal police misconduct statute currently makes it a crime for an officer to “willfully” violate an individuals’s constitutional rights, meaning prosecutors must prove an officer acted with the intention of depriving the person of their rights. Democrats plan to propose lowering that standard of criminal intent to “knowingly or with reckless disregard.” The change is likely to face opposition from police unions and their allies.
The legislation would also alter the legal doctrine known as qualified immunity that shields police officers from being held legally liable for damages sought by citizens whose constitutional rights were violated.
There is a lot more to this soon to be proposed Bill, so I would urge you to read the entire NY Times Report for further details.
The actual first draft of the Bill is due to be marked up (amendments offered & voted up or down) by the House Judiciary Committee today in a virtual session, and will likely hit the House floor later this week in a special session. It will certainly pass the Democratic controlled House, but the thing to watch for is how much, if any support it gets from House Republicans? Will it get relatively significant support from the House GOP who sees the writing on the wall from the racially diverse protests indicating a rapidly changing public sentiment regarding police conduct, or will the House GOP oppose it en-mass reverting back to it’s traditional “law and order” platform of blindly supporting police no matter what? Why is this important? Because some support by the House GOP will make it more difficult for #MoscowMitch to keep the Bill off the Senate Floor, while a 100% GOP opposition in the House will greatly help McConnell shelve the Bill as I am sure Trump wants him to do. Stay Tuned!
BTW — I am growing increasingly concerned that the shift in focus to the important BLM protests and the better than expected (but still sh*tty) May jobs report, is making it easier for McConnell to continue to ignore the still much needed HEROES Bill passed by the House some 24 days ago. We must not lose sight of the importance of this health and economic legislation. Without it in some form, States, Schools and Local governments will be forced to cut a massive amount of public jobs to balance budgets, the Post Office as we know it may go broke and drastically curtail services, Millions of still unemployed workers will see their benefits sharply reduced (i.e., they will lose the additional $600 /week at the end of July), there will be no additional money for COVID testing and contact tracing, Federal funding for States to run Vote-By-Mail systems in November will not materialize, and many other seriously BAD situations could develop. We need to keep the pressure on Mitch and the Senate GOP!
FISA Warrant Re-Authorization — As I reported in my June 2 TIC, the House voted to disagree with the Senate’s amendment of the FISA Bill (legislation to restore expired parts of the FISA warrant program) and requested to establish a Conference Committee to work out differences with the Senate, in an effort to thwart a total defeat of the Bill on the House Floor. Now it seems the Bill may be dead or is at least on life support due to Trump’s opposition. According to this story from POLITICO:
Senate Republicans thought the debate over whether to extend federal surveillance powers was settled — and then President Donald Trump tweeted.
In a series of interviews, Senate Republicans said they were startled last week by the president’s threat to veto their bipartisan bill to renew and reform key provisions in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. And they say they still have little insight into the president’s thinking about how to salvage it.
“Surprised me,” said Sen Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who held a hearing this week on allegations that the FBI abused FISA powers in targeting a former Trump campaign adviser. “We’ve got to find out what the president wants. He’s a moving target.”
With little clarity from the White House on how to move forward, Congress is unlikely to revive the national security tools for potentially weeks to come. The episode also highlights a key theme of the Trump era that Senate Republicans know all too well by now: when it comes to policy, the president is his only true spokesman.
I fail to see why Senate Republicans are surprised by Trump opposing legislation that would give the FBI more power to conduct counterintelligence investigations of the Trump Crime Family’s Russian ties. Giving the FBI more power to investigate Presidents and other corrupt officials should be for other administrations not Trump’s.
Today’s C-Span TV Picks — Normally I don’t post Press Conferences for C-Span viewing because they are not really part of official Congressional business. But today I am making a worthy exception. Today at 10:30 am, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer will publicly put forth legislation to be introduced in the House this week designed to create systemic reforms to combat brutality and racism in our Country’s police departments. As detailed above, this will be historic legislation that you will want to watch the unveiling of.
COMMITTEE ACTIVITY:
Introduction:
NOTE #s1 — 4: To keep this diary as short as possible while still providing a means for new readers to obtain a chronological history on each Committee Activity topic/event below, I have squirreled away the Background information on these topics in other previously posted diaries. So each topic’s Background section below will include links to my September 26, 2019 Diary for Background prior to November 22, my November 22, 2019, 2019 Diary for Background between November 22, 2019 and January 30, 2020, and my January 30, 2020 Diary for Background from January 30, 2020 until today. This and other regular TIC diaries will only include Recent Developments (stuff that happened the day before) and New Developments on each Committee topic/event. Also, I will discontinue posting Committee topics/events that have been inactive for weeks, but their histories will remain in the Background Diaries. If something new happens on these discontinued topics/events, I will bring them back from the dead and post it in the regular TIC.
Now on with the show. (New and Important stuff in bold)
Senate Judiciary Committee — Past FBI Trump/Russia Investigation & FISA Warrants —
Background — None.
Recent Developments — On Wednesday (June 3), Former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. According to this CNN Report, this is what he had to say:
Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said Wednesday he would not have signed off on a foreign surveillance warrant used in the FBI's Russia investigation, but he defended his appointment of former special counsel Robert Mueller to investigate Russian election interference and President Donald Trump's associates.
Rosenstein testified Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee in Senate Republicans' first hearing taking aim at the origins of the FBI's Russia investigation. Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and close Trump ally, pressed Rosenstein on whether Mueller should have been appointed at all, given that no conspiracy was ultimately found between Trump's team and Russia.
"The whole concept that the campaign was colluding with the Russians, there was no there there in August 2017. Do you agree with that general statement?" Graham asked
"I agree with that general statement," Rosenstein responded.
But the former No. 2 at the Justice Department, who supervised the Mueller investigation, said there was "reasonable suspicion" to investigate and the probe was properly opened, even if no conspiracy was ultimately found. Appointing Mueller was the correct call, Rosenstein said.
"I believe at the time, senator, and I still believe it was the right decision under the circumstances," Rosenstein said. "I think it's important to establish that an independent investigation found that the Russians sought to interfere in the election and that no Americans conspired with them."
Notice the part I bolded. Graham asks a leading question and Rosenstein gives him the answer he wants. But what gets left out of this Q & A is the fact that Mueller never answered the “collusion” question at all as he was originally tasked to do since he viewed his task as conducting a “criminal” investigation and “collusion” although it sounds bad, is not a crime spelled out in Federal Statute. Instead he opted to investigate “conspiracy against the United States” which is a Federal crime. But what was also left out of the above Q & A was the fact that Mueller could not establish or prove a Trump/Russia “conspiracy” since much of the documentary evidence that could have proved such a conspiracy was either destroyed before his investigation began or kept out of his legal reach, as documented in the Mueller Report and reiterated in Mueller’s testimony to Congress. In the end, the truth is that although the Mueller Report listed numerous examples of Russian interaction with the Trump Campaign which “smelled” like “conspiracy”, he was denied the “smoking gun” that would provide the concrete proof needed to bring charges. Yes, there is also the fact that even if he obtained such proof, Mueller would not have charged Trump while he was in office due to adherence to the misguided and outdated DoJ policy of not charging a sitting President.
The point is that Trump was not exonerated by Mueller as the above Q & A would suggest.
New Developments — None.
House Homeland Security Committee Briefing on the President’s Stunt —
Background — None.
Recent Developments — On Thursday (June 4), Barr came out to defend his UNCONSTITUTIONAL decision to order the removal of PEACEFUL Protesters. According to NPR:
U.S. Attorney General William Barr on Thursday defended the decision to order that protesters be driven back from a park near the White House this week and said extremist groups were involved in sometimes violent demonstrations in the aftermath of George Floyd's death.
"We have evidence that antifa and other similar extremist groups as well as actors of a variety of different political persuasions have been involved in instigating and participating in the violent activity," Barr said. "And we are also seeing foreign actors playing all sides to exacerbate the violence."
Barr said the government is dealing with a "witches brew of different organizations" fomenting violence.
Let’s get one thing straight. The FBI has not connected “antifa” (I should note that there is much in dispute as to what “antifa” actually is and whether it is an organization at all) to any of the violent protests and they certainly weren’t involved in violent acts associated with the Monday D.C. protests. Furthermore, Barr failed to mention evidence that strongly suggests far right groups have been part of his been a part of his "witches brew of different organizations" fomenting violence.
New Developments — On Sunday, Barr tries to defend the indefensible. Per CNN:
The clearing, though, ultimately devolved into
a discordant and violent spectacle, with federal law enforcement agents clashing with protesters with tear gas and rubber bullets about 30 minutes before a curfew was set to take effect in the nation's capital. Barr was seen surveying the crowd shortly before law enforcement acted.
Barr, who
has sought to distance himself from the official order to clear the protesters, also claimed on Sunday that the protesters at Lafayette Square, which had become the center of attention for the ongoing demonstrations, were violent. There is no evidence of that claim, and CNN personnel on the scene reported the protesters were peaceful.
"They were not peaceful protesters. And that's one of the big lies that the media is -- seems to be perpetuating at this point," Barr claimed Sunday. "The Park Police was facing what they considered to be a very rowdy and non-compliant crowd. And there were projectiles being hurled at the police."
Ah, No! There were tons of reporters there and the cameras were rolling. There were no signs or reports of violence from the group assembled on the street in front of the White House. Since Barr is offering no proof to his claim, it’s likely he is just making sh*t up. It’s time for the Judiciary Committee to haul Barr’s A$$ in to testify under oath for his ever growing list of Trump dictated crap.
House Judiciary Committee Barr Subpoena for Mueller Grand Jury Materials —
Background — Pre-Nov. 22 CLICK HERE. Nov. 22 to Jan. 30 CLICK HERE. Post Jan 30 CLICK HERE. Also, see my May 11 , 19, 20 & June 5 TICs.
Recent Developments — None.
New Developments — None.
House Judiciary Committee McGahn Subpoena —
Background — Pre-Nov. 22 CLICK HERE. Nov. 22 to Jan. 30 CLICK HERE. Post Jan 30 CLICK HERE. Also, see my May 5 TIC for details on the April 28 DC Circuit Court (virtual) Hearing in this case.
Recent Developments — None.
New Developments — None, awaiting Court Ruling.
House Judiciary & Intelligence Committee News —
NOTE #1: This used to be the “House Intelligence Committee’s Whistleblower Investigation”. Then it was titled the “House Intelligence, & Judiciary Committees’ Impeachment Investigation”. Then it was titled the “House & Senate Impeachment Proceedings.” But since Trump’s first impeachment is over, I have changed the heading again.
Background — Pre-Nov. 22 CLICK HERE. Nov. 22 to Jan. 30 CLICK HERE. Post Jan 30 CLICK HERE. Also, see my May 11 TIC & June 5 TIC.
Recent Developments — House Judiciary panel to hold police brutality hearing next week. According to POLITICO:
The House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on police brutality on June 10 as Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic leaders push to have a police reform package on the floor by the end of the month.
House Democrats — led by the Congressional Black Caucus — are considering a number of measures to respond to the national outpouring of grief and anger following the death of George Floyd, a 46-year-old unarmed black man who died last week after a Minnesota police officer pinned his knee on Floyd’s neck for more than eight minutes. House Democrats are working with Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California on the effort, according to Democratic aides.
Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) is planning on a markup of the package by mid-June. The full House will consider the legislation on the floor when it returns to Washington in three weeks.
“The House Judiciary Committee is working very closely with the Congressional Black Caucus to determine the best path forward to address police brutality and racial inequality,” Nadler said in the statement announcing the hearing. “We are reviewing legislative proposals and will consider legislation in the coming weeks.”
The Democratic package — which lawmakers are still drafting — may include a number of measures: developing a federal “use-of-force” standard for police officers; a ban on chokeholds or other aggressive restraint techniques; a national database of police officers fired for misconduct or other offenses; and ending the “qualified immunity doctrine” that protects police officers from lawsuits, among others.
This will be something to watch in the coming days and weeks, and strongly deserves our attention. However, I hope it doesn’t provide too much of a distraction from the vital HEROES Bill and allow Mitch to quietly let it die. Although I have confidence by past performance that House Democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time.
New Developments — George Floyd’s brother (Philonese Floyd) to testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee this week! According to this report from The Hill:
Philonise Floyd, the brother of George Floyd, an unarmed black man who died in Minneapolis police custody on May 25, will testify before the House Judiciary Committee next Wednesday, June 10, sources confirmed to The Hill.
It’s not yet clear if Philonise Floyd will testify in-person or virtually now that the House has amended its procedures to allow virtual hearings in light of the coronavirus pandemic.
Last week, Philonise Floyd expressed disappointment with a conversation he had with President Trump, saying the president “kept pushing me off.”
"He didn't give me an opportunity to even speak," Philonise Floyd told MSNBC’s Al Sharpton. "It was hard. I was trying to talk to him, but he just kept, like, pushing me off, like 'I don't want to hear what you're talking about.' ”
This will be a landmark C-Span viewing event. One that you don’t want to miss. I’ll will of course keep you all posted on viewing time.
House Intelligence Committee Flynn Subpoena —
Background — Pre-Nov. 22 CLICK HERE. Nov. 22 to Jan. 30 CLICK HERE. Post Jan 30 CLICK HERE. Also, see my May 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 19, 20, 27, June 3 & 5 TICs.
Recent Developments — Judge Emmett Sullivan has filed a Brief with the 3-Judge Appeals Court Panel who will Hear the DoJ case on overruling Sullivan’s decision to not immediately grant DoJ’s petition for dismissal of the charges against Flynn. According to this CBS News Report:
Judge Emmet Sullivan has filed a brief with the U.S. District of Columbia Appeals Court defending his decision not to immediately approve the Justice Department's request to dismiss its criminal case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn. In the brief, Sullivan's lawyer, Beth Wilkinson, pointed out the unusual aspects of the case and argued for allowing Sullivan to review the request before ruling on it.
Wilkinson argued the appeals court should not "short-circuit" Sullivan's ability to review the case.
"The question before this Court is whether it should short-circuit this process, forbid even a limited inquiry into the government's motion, and order that motion granted," she wrote. "The answer is no."
You can read the Full Brief
here.
Oral arguments in the Justice Department’s motion to compel the federal judge to dismiss the case against Michael Flynn have been set for June 12 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C. Stay Tuned!
New Developments — None.
House Committees Subpoenas/Requests for Trump Banking/Financial Records & Taxes:
Background — Pre-Nov. 22 CLICK HERE. Nov. 22 to Jan. 30 CLICK HERE. Post Jan 30 CLICK HERE. Also, see my May 11 , 12 , 13 & 14 TICs.
NOTE: In previous TICs, there were 3 separate topic threads (1. Deutsche/Capital One Bank Subpoenas, 2. Mazars’ Subpoena, and 3. Trump Taxes) covering 5 different court cases. Since they are all dealing with the same general topic (Trump’s hidden financial history) and were starting to get intertwined in my brain, I have rolled them all under the single header above to hopefully make things less confusing.
Also, to further help keep things organized, below are the five (5) ongoing court cases dealing with Trump’s Banking/Financial Records and tax returns.
1. Trump vs. Deutsche Bank and Capital One — Case brought by Trump against the the two banks in an effort to block a subpoena from the House Financial Services and Intelligence Committees for the Trump Organization’s banking records, including tax returns.
2. Trump vs. Mazars (Congressional Case) — Congressional Mazar’s case brought by Trump against Mazars (the Trump Organization’s former Accounting Firm) in an effort to block a subpoena from the House Oversight and Reform Committee for the Trump Organization’s financial records, including tax returns.
3. Trump vs. Mazars (Criminal Case) — Case brought by Trump against against Mazars (the Trump Organization’s former Accounting Firm) in an effort to block a subpoena from the Manhattan DA for Trump’s tax returns. The DA has subpoenaed these takes returns in conjunction with his criminal investigation of Trump’s hush money pay off to Stormy Daniels.
4. Congress vs. the IRS & Treasury Department (Trump’s Federal Tax Returns) — This case is a lawsuit brought by the House Ways & Means Committee against the IRS and Treasury Department for their failure to turn over Trump’s tax returns upon the Committee’s request as required BY LAW.
5. Trump vs. NYS Tax Department (Trump’s State Tax Returns) — This case is a lawsuit brought by Trump to block NYS from turning over his State tax returns to Congress.
I will use these case #s below to help keep things organized.
Recent Developments — None.
New Developments — None, awaiting SCOTUS rulings.
THAT’S IT FOR TODAY! Stay Healthy All!