Another day, another act of contempt of Congress. From CNN.



Former Deputy White House Counsel Annie Donaldson did not answer more than 200 questions from House Judiciary Committee Democrats under direction from the White House, in another case that's likely to be part of the looming court fight between congressional Democrats and the White House over executive privilege and special counsel Robert Mueller's report. The House Judiciary Committee on Monday released Donaldson's 55-page written responses to the panel's questions about episodes described in the Mueller report, which included more than 200 responses that the White House had told her not to respond "because of the constitutionally-based Executive Branch confidentiality interests that are implicated."



There are none of those, by the way, but it's a nice phrase. And brigades of lawyers are going to get rich arguing about it over the next several months, unless the House folds in some way, which seems sadly possible.

Also in the news are calls for Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta to resign due to his role in letting Jeffrey Epstein skate when Acosta was a U.S. Attorney down in Florida. Even Speaker Nancy Pelosi is on board with that one. From the Washington Post:

“@SecretaryAcosta must step down,” Pelosi said in a tweet. “As US Attorney, he engaged in an unconscionable agreement w/ Jeffrey Epstein kept secret from courageous, young victims preventing them from seeking justice.”

“This was known by @POTUS when he appointed him to the cabinet,” Pelosi added, referring to President Trump.

Of course, it was known to him. That was the whole point of kicking Acosta upstairs in the first place. And there seems to be some stirring within Camp Runamuck to toss Acosta to the mob. This Bloomberg story reeks of the we-never-liked-What's-His-Name-anyway whispering that usually precedes this administration*'s firing somebody who'd grown inconvenient.

Corporate lobbyists and some White House officials have grown frustrated that Acosta hasn’t moved fast enough on deregulation and other business-friendly initiatives, the people said. No decision has been made on Acosta’s future in the administration, they added, though two people said that his time is short...The indictment unsealed Monday could be just the beginning. One former administration official said Acosta will face increasing pressure as more documents are revealed in the Epstein case, particularly if they shed new light on what Acosta knew at the time of the plea deal. The people asked not to be identified discussing Acosta’s future because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly.

That's not hardly enough, especially since it's still possible that El Caudillo del Mar-a-Lago may need to keep Acosta happy, for a while yet, anyway.

Maybe the president* has reason to keep Acosta happy. Tom Brenner Getty Images

I'm increasingly becoming enamored of a strategy floated a while back by House Judiciary Chairman Elijah Cummings. At the beginning of May, frustrated by the stonewalling of administration* officials from many departments across the Executive, Cummings suggested a new way of hitting them where it hurts the most. From Politico:

“Please be advised that any official at the Department who ‘prohibits or prevents’ or ‘attempts or threatens to prohibit or prevent’ any officer or employee of the Federal Government from speaking with the Committee could have his or her salary withheld pursuant to section 713 of the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act,” Chairman Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) said in a prepared statement...

Cummings is also using the the threat of withholding salaries to force Commerce Department officials to appear before it for interviews relating plans to add citizenship questions to the 2020 Census. In his statement, Cummings pointed to a 2016 GAO report that said a department’s budget “appropriation was not available to pay the salary of a federal officer or employee who prevents another federal officer or employee from communicating directly with any member, committee, or subcommittee of Congress.”

Time to tap those hidden assets, Wilbur. You're not getting our money any more.

It seems to me that Cummings would be on solid legal and constitutional grounds to turn off the tap on these folks. And, even if that's debatable, it's worth debating. Send those brigades of lawyers into court to fight over whether or not Alex Acosta needs to work for free for a while. And cut off Stephen Miller's paycheck, too. Just for laughs.

Respond to this post on the Esquire Politics Facebook page here.

Charles P. Pierce Charles P Pierce is the author of four books, most recently Idiot America, and has been a working journalist since 1976.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io