House Intelligence Committee member Rep. Trey Gowdy is also weighing a response to the White House for failing to provide documents after two other recent bipartisan inquiries by the oversight committee. | Andrew Harnik/AP Democrats press Gowdy to subpoena White House for Flynn documents

Democrats pressed Wednesday for Rep. Trey Gowdy — the Republican chairman of the powerful House oversight committee — to subpoena the White House for documents related to former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Flynn has faced questions about payments from foreign governments and business interests that he failed to disclose while he sought a security clearance and helped shape the Trump administration's foreign policy plans. He resigned in February, just weeks after President Donald Trump’s inauguration and amid reports that he lied about the nature of contacts with Russia’s then-Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.


But the White House spurned bipartisan requests for details about Flynn’s background by the oversight committee in March, when the panel was chaired by then-Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah). Now, the committee’s Democrats, led by ranking member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), are asking Gowdy to force the issue.

“[T]he White House has been openly defying this Committee’s bipartisan request for documents regarding General Flynn for months without any assertion of privilege of any kind,” the Democrats wrote in a 10-page letter to Gowdy sent Wednesday morning.

“We believe that this paper trail must be pursued to answer the gravest questions of all — did General Flynn seek to change the course of our country’s national security to benefit the private interests he previously promoted?” they wrote.

Gowdy stopped short of endorsing the Democrats' request but, in a separate letter, passed along their concerns to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and to Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating whether any Trump associates may have aided the 2016 effort by Russia to influence the presidential election.

"Much of what is sought by my Democratic colleagues — if properly investigated, charged and proven beyond a reasonable doubt — would carry criminal penalties," Gowdy wrote. "Congress does not, and cannot, prosecute crimes."

"Congress may investigate matters to inform policymaking, and, in so doing, may find evidence of possible criminal actions. In those cases, Congress can do nothing except refer the matter to the Department of Justice," he continued. "I was clear in this approach in meeting with Special Counsel Mueller, and that is what I am peremptorily doing now."

Sign up here for POLITICO Huddle A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

A committee official also noted the Army's inspector general was looking into whether Flynn violated a prohibition on former military officials accepting payments from foreign governments. In addition, any potential crimes related to Flynn's security clearance form fall under the Department of Justice's purview.

Cummings rejected Gowdy's decision to refer the matter to Rosenstein and Mueller, arguing that Congress often conducts "parallel investigations" with law enforcement.

“The Oversight Committee has jurisdiction over a host of issues that are not necessarily criminal, such as the security clearance process, the influence of corporate interests over national security policy, and the adequacy of vetting procedures for White House officials who are given access to our nation’s most sensitive secrets," he said. "I urge my Republican colleagues not to contribute to a culture where the president is not accountable to anyone."

The conflict comes a day after Gowdy joined Cummings in threatening to subpoena two federal agencies for failing to respond to a separate inquiry on the use of chartered jets by senior administration officials. Gowdy is also weighing a response on the use of private email accounts by West Wing officials to conduct government business.

A Gowdy aide said Monday that he was reviewing whether the White House’s limited response to those inquiries was sufficient.

In their letter to Gowdy, the committee’s 18 Democrats detailed the March 22 request for documents from the White House regarding Flynn’s foreign contacts and business relationships. In April, they said, the White House acknowledged it had documents but declined to provide them — and also declined to assert executive privilege, which might provide a legal basis for withholding them.

Democrats also called on Gowdy to subpoena Flynn’s company — the Flynn Intel Group — as well as two affiliated companies: ACU Strategic Partners and IP3/IronBridge.

They cited reports and testimony from earlier this year indicating that Flynn failed to report a June 2015 Middle East trip in which he promoted “a U.S.-Russian nuclear energy partnership in the Middle East.” In addition, subsequent reports suggested Flynn continued to promote the deal after the presidential election.

The companies have refused to comply with Democrats’ voluntary information requests and said they would only respond to a “formal request” by the full oversight committee.

Flynn’s foreign connections were an explosive issue early in the Trump administration, particularly after revelations surfaced that he had been paid $45,000 by Russian news outlet RT to appear at a December 2015 dinner in Moscow, where Flynn was seated alongside Russian President Vladimir Putin. Flynn also retroactively disclosed a $530,000 lobbying deal on behalf of the Turkish government, which was active during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Flynn and his company have also been eyed in the various ongoing probes of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. The House Intelligence Committee has subpoenaed for documents from the Flynn Intel Group.

In the letter to Gowdy, Democrats insisted that the issues they’re pursuing won’t conflict with any of the three congressional Russia probes, or with the criminal inquiry led by Mueller.

“Your decisions on this investigation will have a profound impact on the faith that the American people have in Congress to fulfill our duty under the Constitution to exercise robust oversight of the Executive Branch,” they said, “especially when grave violations of the public trust are at stake.”

