NADLER AND CUMMINGS TO JUSTICE DEPARTMENT: “YOUR FAILURE TO TREAT US AS AN EQUAL PARTICIPANT IN THIS INVESTIGATION IS UNACCEPTABLE”

Washington, D.C.—Today, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, the Ranking Member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, and Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent a letter, below, to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein expressing concerns about the Department of Justice’s failure to provide documents to Democrats as part of the joint investigation initiated by Chairmen Bob Goodlatte and Trey Gowdy into last year’s review by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) into Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails.

“We write concerning the Justice Department’s longstanding commitment to equal treatment of the Minority and Majority in Congress with respect to document production in connection with committee investigations.  We are disappointed that the Department has not honored this tradition with respect to the joint investigation initiated by Chairman Goodlatte and Chairman Gowdy on October 24, 2017. 

“As you know, on November 3, 2017, Chairman Goodlatte and Chairman Gowdy wrote to you to request certain documents related to the FBI’s handling of its investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.   On December 6, 2017, Chairman Goodlatte wrote an additional letter to the Department referencing this investigation and requesting information involving a reported FISA warrant involving Carter Page and relating to Russian interference in the 2016 election.  In between, the Department of Justice appears to have engaged in extensive correspondence with our Majorities, produced 1,100 pages of documents to our committees, and promised to provide 1.2 million additional records to the committees by January 15, 2018

.   

“Unfortunately, we did not learn of your interactions with the Majority until after Chairman Goodlatte mentioned his efforts at last week’s Judiciary Committee hearing with FBI Director Christopher Wray.  Your failure to treat us as an equal participant in this investigation, to simultaneously provide us with copies of that correspondence, or to produce these documents to our offices directly, is unacceptable and inconsistent with House rules,” the Members wrote.

The Ranking Members requested copies of all correspondence with the Majority related to the investigation, as well as any Republican requests for documents related to the investigation. The Ranking Members also requested copies of all documents and communications related to allegations that FBI Agents in the New York office may have leaked information regarding the investigation prior to the November, 2016 presidential election.

US House Judiciary & Oversight Ranking Memebers Letter to AG Sessions and DAG Rosenstein To Release Documen... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Lisa Bloom To Represent Cynthia Martin In Conyers Sexual Harassment Allegations

Cynthia Martin, staffer accusing
John Conyers, Jr. of sexual harassment

UPDATE:  Flushing out disinfo campaign was a success.

Hey Lisa,

Lisa Bloom

I see you are to represent Cynthia Martin, the woman who is the staffer claiming to be a victim of sexual harassment by Mr. Conyers.

I thought I would assist by strong encouragment, to peruse my blog, just to get a grasp of how congress has been operating, because you seem to demonstrate a bit of a deficiency in relevant areas of law, pertinant to representing your client.

It is always a grand idea to get someone to speak out, to preserve the historic record.

Oh, and by the way, go ask Mike Cernovich where he got those docs...and how much he got paid.

Dilly, dilly!

Bees! GIF from Oprah GIFs

Lisa Bloom Calls On John Conyers To Release Accuser From Confidentiality Agreement

The high-profile attorney said “basic fairness and decency” dictates that her client should be able to speak out.

High-profile attorney Lisa Bloom announced Sunday that she’s representing a woman who filed a sexual harassment complaint against Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) in 2014.

Bloom called on the embattled congressman, as well as the Office of Compliance, to release the woman from the confidentiality agreement she was “forced to sign” so she may “have a voice to tell her own story.” The woman hasn’t yet been publicly identified.

“Mr. Conyers and his attorney have spoken to the press and said that Mr. Conyers never sexually harassed anyone,” Bloom wrote in a press release issued Sunday. “My client was forced to sign a confidentiality agreement at the time the matter was resolved, which bars her from telling her side of the story.”

“Basic fairness and decency dictate that if Mr. Conyers can speak publicly about the matter, the woman should be free to do so as well,” she continued

BREAKING: I represent the woman who filed a sexual harassment complaint against Congressman John Conyers. Here is my statement. pic.twitter.com/75wlx1AT9c

— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) November 26, 2017

Buzzfeed News broke the news Monday about a 2014 complaint against Conyers, in which the unnamed woman claimed he fired her because she rejected his sexual advances. The report also included testimony from several other female former staffers who made similar accusations throughout the years.

Conyers, who has denied all of the allegations, announced Sunday that was stepping down from his role as ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee while the House Ethics Committee investigates the allegations.

In her statement Sunday, Bloom said she and her client would “fully cooperate” with any investigation into the matter.

“Regardless of confidentiality agreements, victims may speak if they are lawfully subpoenaed,” Bloom wrote, adding that she would “be happy” to help provide her client’s testimony to the ethics committee if subpoenaed.

A representative for Conyers did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Trump’s Nixonian Comey Firing is a Clear Cover Up

Washington, DC – Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Ranking Member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, issued the following statement in response to Trump abruptly firing FBI Director James Comey:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“Today’s action by President Trump completely obliterates any semblance of an independent investigation into Russian efforts to influence our election, and places our nation on the verge of a constitutional crisis.   There is little doubt that the President’s actions harken our nation back to Watergate and the “Saturday Night Massacre.” This decision makes it clear that we must have an independent, non-partisan commission to investigate both Russian interference in the U.S. election and allegations of collusion between the government of Vladimir Putin and the Trump campaign.  Today’s actions reek of a cover up and appear to be part of an ongoing effort by the Trump White House to impede the investigation into Russian ties and interference in our elections.

“I am particularly concerned that President Trump fired Director Comey based in part on the recommendation of Attorney General Sessions--who was forced to recuse himself from the underlying investigation based on his own actions and misconduct.  This shocking decision by the President is beyond the pale and itself warrants independent inquiry and hearings, and reinforces the need for the Attorney General himself to step down given his own obvious and ongoing conflicts. 

“Though we may not have always agreed with James Comey, he was critical to overseeing the ongoing investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 election. The Administration’s after-the-fact efforts to rationalize this blatantly self-serving political firing--by complaining about the manner Director Comey handled the investigation into Secretary Clinton’s emails—is too cute by half and does not even pass the smell test.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Opening Statement on H.R. 387, the "Email Privacy Act"

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

In 2014, in a unanimous ruling delivered by Chief Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court concluded that the police may not search a cellphone without first demonstrating probable cause.

Citing an obvious Fourth Amendment interest in the vast amount of data we store on our personal devices, the Court wrote:

“The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought.

 “Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple—get a warrant.”

With that decision, the Court took a bold step towards reconciling the Fourth Amendment with the advent of modern communications technology.

Today, the House takes a similar step to reconcile our interests in privacy and due process with the realities of modern computing.  We do so for the second time.

H.R. 387, the “Email Privacy Act,” recognizes that the content of our communications, although often stored in digital format, remains worthy of Fourth Amendment protection.

And to the investigators and government agents who seek access to our email, our advice is accordingly simple:  get a warrant.

It is an idea whose time has long since come. 

This bill will allow us to move to a clear, uniform standard for law enforcement agencies to access the content of our communications—namely, a warrant based on probable cause.

H.R. 387 also codifies the right of the providers to give notice of this intrusion to their customers, except in certain exigent circumstances that must also be validated by the court.

We should note the absence of a special carve out from the warrant requirement for the civil agencies—like the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Internal Revenue Service.

Last congress, in the Judiciary Committee, we reached quick consensus that a “civil carve out” of any kind is unworkable, unconstitutional, or both.

I would have preferred to keep the notice provisions of the original bill, which are absent from the version we reported from committee.

In the digital world, no amount of due diligence necessarily tells us that the government has accessed our electronic communications. 

The government should have an obligation to provide us with some form of notice when intruding on a record of our most private conversations.

But I understand that not everyone shares this view—and I am willing to compromise, for now, in order to advance the important reforms that we will adopt today.

I am proud of the work we have done.  Last Congress, the House passed this legislation 419 to 0.  I hope that, today, we can send our colleagues in the Senate a similarly strong signal to pass this bill.

This legislation is several years in the making, and it should not be delayed any further.

Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 387, the Email Privacy Act, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

AHEAD OF CLASSIFIED BRIEFING ON RUSSIAN HACKING, HOUSE JUDICIARY DEMS PRESS COMEY TO PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE INVESTIGATION & RELEASE DOCS TO COMMITTEE

Washington, DC – Today, ahead of a classified briefing by the Intelligence Community on attempts by the Russian government to influence the last election, all House Judiciary Democrats, led by Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) sent a letter urging FBI Director James Comey to publicly acknowledge the existence of an investigation into President-elect Trump and his associates--and to release copies of all relevant investigative materials regarding the investigation to the House Judiciary Committee, in the same way it did after its investigation of Secretary Clinton's private email server.

The letter was signed by every Democratic member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, including: Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Judy Chu (D-CA), Ted Deutch (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Karen Bass (D-CA), Cedric Richmond (D-LA), Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), David Cicilline (D-RI), Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Eric Swalwell (D-CA), Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA).

U.S. House Judiciary Democrats Letter to FBI Director Comey On Trump Investigation (1.13.17) by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

House Dems: Russia hacking probe needs political 'safeguards'

Lawmakers say Trump’s dismissal of Russian hacking and his business investments could ‘threaten the impartiality’ of an investigation. 

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Top Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are demanding intelligence officials put “safeguards” in place to ensure any investigation into Russian hacking is free of political influence ahead of President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration.

The lawmakers say Trump’s repeated dismissal of the Russian hacking along with his possible business investments in the county could “threaten the impartiality” of an investigation while he’s president.

The letter, sent to Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey, also calls on federal investigators to make public additional details about Russian attempts to undermine the election, including whether there is a criminal investigation and if so, when it started.

“We strongly and urgently request that safeguards be put in place — prior to the completion of the presidential transition — to ensure that any criminal investigation into these matters is conducted in an independent manner and free of improper partisan influence,” House Judiciary Committee ranking member John Conyers (D-Mich.) wrote Wednesday.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), top Democrat on the committee’s crime panel, also signed onto the letter, obtained by POLITICO.

“To the extent that this investigation extends to any U.S. persons — including any associate of President Elect Donald Trump — we ask that you confirm this as well,” they added.

Conyers and Jackson Lee also cite Trump’s potential conflicts of interest surrounding his business holdings, including possible financial ties to Russia, as the need for an independent investigation.

The Judiciary Democrats say any probe into Russian cyber warfare should be treated with just as much importance as the controversial investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

“These and other incidents concerning investigatory actions — or lack thereof — in the run up to the recent election have deeply shaken the reputation for fairness previously enjoyed by federal law enforcement and reinforce the need to appropriately handle any pending criminal investigation,” they write, citing Comey’s decision to publicly re-open the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s email practices days before the election.

Conyers and Jackson Lee also echo calls for an “independent and bipartisan commission” to fully investigate Russia’s actions in the run-up toNov. 8. The letter comes after growing demands from key senators for GOP leaders to establish a select congressional committee to dig into the issue.

President Barack Obama and other top intelligence officials have said Russia was behind the election hacking that led to the release of thousands of Democratic documents, including Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails and personal information for lawmakers and staffers, and resulted in the resignation of Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz just hours before the Democratic convention.

But the president-elect and some Republicans have dismissed allegations of Russia’s role in the document dumps and the country's attempts to sway voters in Trump’s favor ahead of Election Day.

“If Russia, or some other entity, was hacking, why did the White House wait so long to act? Why did they only complain after Hillary lost?” Trump tweeted last week. He’s also called the claims “ridiculous” and “just another excuse.” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper announced onOct. 7, more than a month before the election, that U.S. intelligence agencies agreed that Russia had conducted the hacking operations in an attempt to meddle in the election.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) has publicly sparred with top intelligence officials, saying they have refused to brief him and other members of the panel on the issue in recent weeks. Nunes last week announced plans for committee members to visit the intelligence agencies in January to learn more about the Russian investigation.

So far, top Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), have rejected requests for a separate probe, saying the committees with jurisdiction over cybersecurity can handle the investigation.

The Senate and House Intelligence Committees are taking the lead on investigating the issue but several other committees, including House Judiciary, have some jurisdiction.

Key lawmakers, including incoming Democratic leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.), have argued that a select panel is needed to head off problems from too many committees being involved.

McConnell again ruled out the idea of a special committee during an interview with a Kentucky PBS outlet Tuesday.

"It's a serious issue, but it doesn't require a select committee," McConnell said. "We already have a committee set up to do this."

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/russia-hacking-probe-house-democrats-232855

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & JACKSON LEE Of House Judiciary Call For Safeguards From DOJ & FBI On Russian Hacking Investigation

 Conyers and Jackson Lee: Make Russian Hacking Investigation Your Top Priority & Release Investigative Docs to the Committee

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Washington, DC – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and House Judiciary Crime Subcommittee Ranking Member Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) sent a letter today to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) calling for safeguards to be put in place to ensure the investigation into Russian hacking is made a top priority and is completed in a thorough and bipartisan manner throughout the Presidential transition. Conyers and Jackson Lee also called for DOJ and the FBI to be transparent in their investigation of Russian hacking, by releasing copies of all relevant investigative materials regarding the investigation to the House Judiciary Committee, in the same way it did during its investigation of Secretary Clinton’s private email server.

Conyers and Jackson Lee Letter to FBI and DOJ on Russian Hacking by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

BIPARTISAN HOUSE COALITION PRESSES CLAPPER FOR INFORMATION ON PHONE & EMAIL SURVEILLANCE

Washington, DC – Today, a bipartisan group of ten members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee—including Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), and former Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), wrote to the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to memorialize the Director’s commitment to provide a detailed look at how the government’s phone and email surveillance affects United States citizens.  The intelligence community has promised to provide a public estimate of that impact “early enough to inform the debate” on surveillance reform in the next Congress, with a target date of January 2017.

The letter was signed by Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Darrell E. Issa (R-CA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Ted Poe (R-TX), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA), Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Ted Deutch (D-FL), Suzan K. DelBene (D-WA) and David N. Cicilline (D-RI).

U.S. House Bipartisan Coalition Letter To National Intelligence Director James Clapper for Phone & Email Su... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

FBI Completes Email Review, Recommends No Charges For Secretary Clinton

Washington, DC - Today, Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) Director James Comey sent a letter to Congress reporting that the FBI has completed its review of emails to or from Hillary Clinton when she served as Secretary of State.  Based on its review, the FBI stands by its recommendation that no criminal charges are warranted in its investigation of Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server. 

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) released the following statement:

“In the days that come, we will have many questions about the FBI's handling of this investigation. In the meantime, however, I welcome this news confirming again that no charges are warranted in this matter.”

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings (D-MD) released the following statement:

“Today’s announcement by the FBI affirms and vindicates its findings from this summer with respect to Secretary Clinton.  Over past week, Republicans have engaged in wild speculation and launched unsubstantiated accusations, but the FBI has determined—yet again—that they are without merit.  Now it is time for the American people to go forward based on the facts.”

FBI Letter To Congress On Review of Emails On Hillary Clinton With No Charges Of Private Email Server 11-06... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cummings and Conyers Request Full Disclosure from DOJ and FBI on Email Investigation

Washington, D.C. (Oct. 28, 2016) – Today, Reps. Elijah E. Cummings and John Conyers, Ranking Members of the House Committees on Oversight and Government Reform and Judiciary, sent the following letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey:

U.S. Representatives Conyers and Cummings Request Full Disclosure from DOJ and FBI on Clinton Email Invest... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Statement On FBI Letter To Congress

Washington, DC – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) today released the following statement:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“There has already been a lengthy and thorough investigation into Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email server.  Nothing in today’s letter suggests that the FBI or the Department of Justice will reach a different conclusion than the one they reached months ago, when they decided criminal prosecution was unwarranted.  

“Any inference or conclusion to the contrary would be completely speculative and unjustified.  In fact, the press has already reported that the emails in question did not come from the Secretary’s server—and were not withheld from investigators by Secretary Clinton or her campaign.

“Donald Trump and his allies seem to put their faith in the integrity of the FBI only when it serves their political purposes.  I would expect that this investigation will continue to be impartial, and that this additional step—taken only in an abundance of caution—will further clear Secretary Clinton of any wrongdoing.”

FBI Director James Comey Letter To Congressional Committees On Secretary Hillary Clinton's Email Server 10.... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Blasts New GOP Conspiracy Theory About Secretary Clinton's Emails

No factual evidence shows a quid pro quo between the Department of State and the FBI

Washington, DC – Yesterday, in a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, the House Judiciary Committee’s majority alleged that newly-released FBI interview notes “raise serious questions about whether Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy violated federal laws . . . by offering a ‘quid pro quo’ to the FBI.”  The interview notes contain no factual basis for these claims:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

§  As early as January 2016, the Inspector General for the Department of State concluded that there was no undue or inappropriate influence in the review and classification of Secretary Clinton’s emails. 

§  The FBI released a public statement that categorically rejects the accusation, noting that “[a]lthough there was never a quid pro quo, these allegations were nonetheless referred to the appropriate officials for review.” 

§  The now-retired FBI agent who spoke to Undersecretary Kennedy has told reporters that the two matters—staffing overseas posts and the classification review of Secretary Clinton’s emails—were wholly unrelated discussions, and no exchange or deal linking the matters was ever proposed.

§  FBI files released weeks ago explained that Undersecretary Kennedy “‘categorically rejected’ allegations that he attempted [to] influence FOIA markings to protect and/or mask classified information.”

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), today released the following statement:

“The FBI, the Department of State, and virtually every individual with firsthand knowledge of the pertinent facts have flatly denied allegations of any attempt to arrange a quid pro quo on Secretary Clinton’s behalf.  The FBI looked into the matter and found no evidence of any wrongdoing whatsoever.  There is no new factual information in these interview notes that would lead us to believe otherwise. 

“The majority will find few answers in unsupported and unsubstantiated speculation.  I hope that when we return to Washington in November, there is room for more substantive discussion.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Top House Dems Call for FBI Action on Trump Campaign’s Advance Knowledge of Ongoing Russian Cyber Hacking to Affect Election

UNITED STATES CONGRESS

Washington, D.C. (Oct. 14, 2016)—Today, Reps. Elijah E. Cummings, John Conyers, Jr., Elliot L. Engel, and Bennie G. Thompson, the Ranking Members of the House Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, Judiciary, Foreign Affairs, and Homeland Security, issued the following statement in response to evidence that the Trump campaign apparently knew months beforehand about the hacking of emails from the account of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta:

“Troubling new evidence appears to show that the Trump campaign not only was aware of cyber attacks against Secretary Clinton’s campaign chairman, but was openly bragging about it as far back as August.  For months, we have been asking the FBI to examine links between the Trump campaign and illegal Russian efforts to affect our election, including interviewing Trump advisor Roger Stone.  In light of this new evidence—and these exceptional circumstances—we call on the FBI to fully investigate and explain to the American people what steps it is taking to disrupt this ongoing criminal activity.  Elections are the bedrock of our nation’s democracy and a model we hold out to the world, so we must counter any foreign or domestic efforts to threaten the integrity of our electoral process.” 

Roger Stone’s Public Statements About Upcoming Podesta Attacks

This past August, Trump adviser Roger Stone sent out messages on Twitter indicating that he had been informed personally about upcoming cyber attacks on campaign chairman John Podesta.

Trust me, it will soon the Podesta's time in the barrel. #CrookedHillary

— Roger Stone (@RogerJStoneJr) August 21, 2016

This followed:

@JohnPodesta makes @PaulManafort look like St. Thomas Aquinas Where is the @NewYorkTimes ?

— Roger Stone (@RogerJStoneJr) August 15, 2016

On October 3, 2016, Stone tweeted:

I have total confidence that @wikileaks and my hero Julian Assange will educate the American people soon #LockHerUp

— Roger Stone (@RogerJStoneJr) October 3, 2016

Four days later, October 7, 2016, WikiLeaks publicly released emails illegally hacked from Podesta’s email account.

Roger Stone’s Public Statements About Backchannel Communications with WikiLeaks

Stone has stated repeatedly in public appearances that he communicates directly and through back channels with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

On August 8, 2016, Stone stated publicly that he “communicated with”Assange about the upcoming release of illegally-hacked emails.  Stone made these statements during a Republican campaign event while answering a question about a potential “October surprise.”

On August 13, 2016, Stone stated publicly that his own email accounts had been hacked “as soon as it became publicly known that I was in communication with Julian Assange.”

On October 12, 2016, Stone stated publicly:  “I do have a back-channelcommunication with Assange.”

Previous Letter to FBI About Allegations of Coordination Between Trump Campaign and Russians

On August 30, 2016, Reps. Cummings, Conyers, Engel, and Thompson sent a letter to FBI Director James Comey requesting that the FBI assess whether connections between the Trump campaign and Russian interests contributed to cyber attacks against the Democratic campaign organizations to interfere with the election.  The letter stated:  “It is unclear whether U.S. law enforcement authorities have interviewed Mr. Stone about his communications with Mr. Assange or about his knowledge of how WikiLeaks obtained the illegally-hacked documents.”

On September 28, 2016, FBI Director James Comey testified before the House Judiciary Committee, but would not directly answer questions about any investigation regarding these matters.  Instead, he stated that the FBI is examining “just what mischief is Russia up to in connection with our election.”

On October 7, 2016, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security issued a joint statement concluding: 

“The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations.  The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts.  These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process.  Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there.  We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. for the Hearing on “Impeachment Articles Referred on John Koskinen, Part III” before the Committee on the Judiciary

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  And thank you, Commissioner Koskinen, for joining us today on short notice, under these unusual circumstances.

Last week, a handful of my colleagues attempted to force a vote on your impeachment. When it appeared that they would fall short of the necessary votes, that effort was abandoned—and this hearing was scheduled instead.

I hope that my colleagues now see what I see when I look back at the history of impeachment in the House of Representatives: No matter how we feel about a particular official, no matter what we think about his or her agency, successful impeachments are bipartisan efforts—and partisan attacks cloaked in the impeachment process are doomed from the start.

Mr. Chairman, the effort to impeach Commissioner Koskinen is destined to fail both on the merits and as a matter of process. And if they somehow force this measure to the floor again, I fear it will set a terrible precedent.

On the merits, the Commissioner’s critics simply have not proved their case.  In fact, every other investigation to have examined these facts has refuted the charges against Commissioner Koskinen.

The Senate Finance Committee, in a report that serves as the only bipartisan account of the matter, found no evidence that the Commissioner had intent to mislead Congress at any time.

The Department of Justice “found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives,” and “no evidence that any official . . . attempted to obstruct justice.”

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration found no evidence to show “that IRS employees had been directed to destroy or hide information from Congress.” 

Despite these findings, some Members continue to insist that the Commissioner “ordered 24,000 emails erased before Congress could review them.”  Citing “zero evidence” to back the claim, independent fact checkers rate this statement as categorically false. There is simply no evidence that the Commissioner has acted with intentional bad faith in his leadership of the Internal Revenue Service.

           

But even if there were some evidence of wrongdoing, the push to impeach the Commissioner on the House floor without even basic due process in the Committee is wildly misguided.

According to Parliamentarians of the House past and present, the impeachment process does not begin until the House actually votes to authorize this Committee to investigate the charges.

In other words: this is not an impeachment hearing.  Merely including the word “impeachment” in the title doesn’t do the job. At an actual impeachment hearing, the Commissioner would be represented by counsel.  He would have the right to present evidence, and the right to question the evidence presented against him. 

In this case, by contrast, the Commissioner has been denied access to the transcripts of interviews conducted by the House Oversight Committee—even though we are told that those transcripts were key in forming the charges against him.  Many members of this Committee are in the same position, I might add.

I am not alone in being skeptical of short process, or in noting the importance of a full and independent investigation by this Committee.

In 2006, Mr. Sensenbrenner argued: “only after the House Judiciary Committee has conducted a fair, thorough, and detailed investigation, will Committee members be able to consider whether articles of impeachment might be warranted.”

In 2010, Mr. Chairman, you expressed confidence in our Impeachment Task Force because it had conducted “an exhaustive investigation.”

That investigation included, in your words: “reviewing the records of past proceedings, rooting out new evidence that was never considered in previous investigations, conducting numerous interviews and depositions with firsthand witnesses, and conducting hearings to take the testimony of firsthand witnesses and scholars.”

           

All of that process is missing here.  Yes, we have it within our power to skip these steps—but what kind of precedent does that set?

Never, in the history of this body, have we impeached a government official without first proving he has acted in deliberate bad faith.

Never, in modern practice, have we declined to provide the accused with the most basic due process: the right to counsel, the right to present evidence, and the right to question the evidence against him.

If the Commissioner’s critics have their way, I fear we will have a new rule going forward:

The House may impeach any government official, for any reason, without supplying evidence of deliberate wrongdoing, without an independent investigation, and without regard to basic fairness towards the accused.

Forcing a vote in this manner will certainly not result in the removal of the Commissioner.  Even if his critics succeed here, Senators of both parties have already stated their intent to bury the matter.

                                                                                                                                             

And in the process, I fear, we will have stripped our responsibilities of their weight and dignity, and turned impeachment from a constitutional check of last resort into a tool of political convenience.

I cannot accept that.  None of us should.  Commissioner Koskinen, thank you again for your willingness to be here today.  Stick to the law and the facts and you’ll be fine.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©