Democrats say House Intel Committee Republicans are trying to thwart Russia probe

Erin Kelly | USA TODAY

Show Caption Hide Caption Schiff: Impossible to say Russia tilted election The top Democrat on the House intelligence committee says the United States is "marginally better prepared" to prevent Russian interference in U.S. elections. But, Rep. Adam Schiff cautions that "the Russians are a very capable cyber-adversary." (Nov. 7)

WASHINGTON — Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee say their Republican colleagues are trying to thwart the Russia investigation by refusing to issue or enforce subpoenas for documents that could prove whether witnesses are lying.

"If we're not willing to force them to give us the documents we need to question them, then we're essentially taking these witnesses at their word — and most of them are not worthy of being taken at their word," said Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif.

The dispute over obtaining documents is part of a larger split between Republicans and Democrats on the committee, which was once known for its bipartisanship but has struggled to remain unified as it investigates Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the senior Democrat on the committee, raised objections about the Republican majority scheduling witnesses to testify before members have had a chance to see any documents that could corroborate or refute the testimony.

"I think there is a rush on (Republicans') part to bring the investigation to an end," Schiff said. "They're adhering to a political deadline rather than one set by the demands of a proper investigation."

Neither Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., nor Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, who is heading the panel's Russia investigation, would comment for this story.

However, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., who, like Schiff, is a former federal prosecutor, said he agrees with Democrats that committee members would be much better prepared to question witnesses if they could get their hands on relevant documents beforehand.

"Yes, Adam's right on that," Gowdy said, referring to Schiff. "I always want the documents first because it makes your questioning much more effective and on point."

But Gowdy said he can't help but laugh at the "unmitigated hypocrisy" of the Democrats, who "didn't give a damn" when he was complaining about the same issue as he was leading investigations of the Obama administration.

"Where were they then?" asked Gowdy, who led investigations into the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, and the controversial "Fast and Furious" operation in which federal agents funneled guns to illegal buyers to try to track the weapons back to Mexican drug cartels.

Democrats said the recently released transcript of a closed-door interview the committee conducted with former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page shows why documents are so important in pressing witnesses to tell the truth.

Page was subpoenaed to testify but did not turn over documents requested by the committee before he came in for his interview, Swalwell said.

Fortunately, Swalwell said, the committee had access to emails it had obtained from the Trump campaign. He said Democrats used those documents to "pound Page like a piñata" to get him to admit that he traveled to Moscow in July 2016 with the knowledge of key Trump campaign officials and met Russian deputy prime minster Arkadiy Dvorkovich. Page had previously denied meeting with any senior Russian officials.

In contrast, the committee brought in former Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone for an interview in September without obtaining any documents ahead of time that could verify or contradict his statements, Swalwell said.

Read more:

House Republicans launch two new investigations tied to Hillary Clinton

Top Democrat fears House Intelligence Committee may split on Russia probe findings

Congress struggles to figure out which Russia investigation trumps the others

Stone was questioned about his advance knowledge of the release of embarrassing emails from the account of Hillary Clinton campaign chief John Podesta by WikiLeaks during the presidential campaign. Stone made cryptic references on Twitter about the expected publication of damaging information related to Podesta just two months before the emails were released.

Democrats haven't been able to convince Republicans to subpoena Twitter to get Stone's private messages to whomever he was talking to about the email leaks, Swalwell said.

"If there's no curiosity or drive by the (GOP) majority to do that, it's hard for us in the minority to do anything," Swalwell said.

Democrats say Nunes effectively destroyed the panel's chance at bipartisanship on Russia last spring when he took a secret trip to the White House grounds to review information gathered by White House staffers purporting to show that Trump had been under surveillance by the Obama administration.

Nunes told reporters at a news conference afterward that he had discovered evidence to support the president's claim that he was wiretapped at Trump Tower. However, the Justice Department confirmed in a court filing in September that there was no evidence that Trump Tower was targeted for surveillance.

Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., said Nunes' behavior stunned her and other committee members of both parties.

"I think it was disturbing to the staff as well, because it changed the entire dynamic of the committee," she said.

After the news conference, the House Ethics Committee began investigating whether Nunes mishandled classified information, prompting him to announce in April that he was temporarily stepping aside from the Russia probe. He tapped Conaway to lead the investigation.

However, Nunes has set the parameters of his own semi-recusal, and he has continued to disrupt the committee by issuing subpoenas on his own, Democrats said. Nunes recently announced that he was launching a new investigation into why the Obama administration allowed a Russian company to acquire U.S. uranium mines.

"It's supposed to be Mike Conaway who is in charge," Swalwell said. "But Nunes keeps coming back in to disrupt the process, usually timed around when we're making progress."

Schiff blames House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., for condoning Nunes' behavior and his "investigations for show" of the Obama administration. Ryan has said in public statements that he trusts Nunes, who served on Trump's presidential transition team.

"At the end of the day, it's whatever the speaker allows," Schiff said.

He said there are "a considerable number" of key witnesses who still haven't been called in for questioning by Republicans. He would not name the potential witnesses.

"I'm not saying the majority won't bring them in," Schiff said. But he said the committee hasn't even sent out initial letters to those witnesses letting them know that the panel wants to speak to them.

Gowdy said he'd like to see Schiff's list and would support bringing in the witnesses if they are relevant to the investigation. But he suspects that Democrats just want to keep bringing in more witnesses to keep the investigation going for political reasons.

Gowdy believes that special counsel Robert Mueller's criminal investigation, which has already resulted in two indictments and a guilty plea, will ultimately have more credibility with Americans than any of the Russia probes being conducted by Congress. In addition to the House Intelligence Committee investigation, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee are conducting probes.

"What (special prosecutors) do is a very different — and in my judgment much better — investigation," he said. "Ours is an investigation in a very politically charged environment."

But Speier said it's crucial for committee members to work together to prevent Russia from interfering in another U.S. election.

"We've got to remember that we're here to protect the country," she said. "That's getting lost in all this."