Intelligence

Campus notebook: Which impeachment lawyer makes more?
PCP arrest by the Capitol complex and Sen. David Perdue buys a lot of CBS, FedEx and Urban Outfitters stock

Daniel Goldman, majority counsel for the House Intelligence Committee, and Steve Castor, minority counsel, prepare to testify during the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment inquiry. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

Two lawyers with prominent roles in the House impeachment inquiry — Stephen Castor, the Republican general counsel for the Oversight Committee, and Daniel Goldman, a senior adviser for the Intelligence Committee Democrats — testified alongside one another Monday. One difference between the two, besides the parties they represent on their respective panels, is their salaries.

According to payroll records from August, Castor makes an annual salary of $165,000—that’s $3,000 more than Goldman makes.

Justices decide to wade into separation-of-powers showdown
The issue lands there just as the House prepares a floor vote on articles of impeachment

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday to weigh in on a separation-of-powers showdown between Congress and Trump over whether Congress can obtain his financial and tax records. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call)

The Supreme Court on Friday stepped into the political and legal fight over whether Congress can obtain President Donald Trump’s financial and tax records.

The justices agreed to decide two cases in the first separation-of-powers showdown between Congress and Trump to reach the high court. The issue lands there just as the House prepares a floor vote on articles of impeachment.

Photos of the Week
The week of Dec. 13 as captured by Roll Call’s photojournalists

Top row from left, Reps. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, are seen as the House Judiciary Committee hears the House Intelligence Committee’s presentation on the impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump on Monday. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

Nadler pushes votes on impeachment articles to Friday morning
Expected approval amid partisan fighting will line up a contentious House floor vote next week

House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., left, and ranking member Doug Collins. R-Ga., speak with their aides before the start of the House Judiciary Committee markup of the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, in the Longworth Building on Thursday. (Caroline Brehman/CQ Roll Call)

The House will come one step closer to impeaching President Donald Trump Friday when the Judiciary Committee is expected to approve charges of obstruction of Congress and abuse of power.

The panel abruptly recessed after 11 p.m. Thursday night after more than 14 hours of debate just before they were expected to take final votes on the articles, extending the impeachment markup into a third day.

Impeachment news roundup: Dec. 12
Pelosi defends Democrats’ approach to impeachment

House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., left, and ranking member Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., interrupt one another during the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the impeachment articles against President Trump on Thursday. (Caroline Brehman/CQ Roll Call)

As the House Judiciary Committee debated the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday again declined to explain to reporters why certain charges were left out of the articles.

On Tuesday she was dismissive when asked why Democrats did not include obstruction of justice as outlined in the special counsel report on its investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and Trump’s campaign. During her weekly news conference on Thursday, it was the exclusion of bribery she didn’t want to explain.

These Democrats helped launch the impeachment inquiry. What’s their next move?
Pelosi called for probe after op-ed by seven freshmen with national security backgrounds

From left, Reps. Abigail Spanberger, Chrissy Houlahan and Elissa Slotkin face Mikie Sherrill at a meeting in September. The four among a group of freshman Democrats who called for an impeachment inquiry that month. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call file photo)

Two months ago, seven freshman Democrats in the House published an op-ed column in The Washington Post that helped launch the impeachment inquiry. Now that the inquiry’s over, the freshmen are not saying what they will do next.

The op-ed made clear the writers, who all have national security backgrounds, thought it would be “an impeachable offense” if reports were true that President Donald Trump pressured the Ukrainian president to investigate a political rival while withholding aid to the country.

Judiciary kicks off impeachment articles markup with expected polarization
Democrats try to set the occasion as solemn, while Republicans decry that as a ruse

Ranking member Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., makes an opening statement as Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., looks on during the House Judiciary Committee markup of the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump in the Longworth Building on Wednesday. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

The House Judiciary Committee’s markup of two articles of impeachment charging President Donald Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress kicked off Wednesday with Chairman Jerrold Nadler trying to set a “solemn” tone and ranking member Doug Collins accusing that of being a ruse. 

Nadler opened the markup with a note about why he was breaking the custom of having only the chairman and the ranking member deliver opening statements to provide each panel member the opportunity to give five minutes of opening remarks.

In scrutinizing IG report on FBI, senators differ on what’s important
GOP focus on mistakes obtaining Carter Page warrant; Democrats highlight no FBI bias

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz testifies Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and his review of the FBI’s investigation into Russia and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. (Caroline Brehman/CQ Roll Call)

Horowitz also testified that neither Attorney General William Barr nor U.S. Attorney John Durham who is pursuing a criminal investigation of the origins of the FBI probe offered any new information that would alter the conclusions of the inspector general’s findings.

Both Barr and Durham have said they disagreed with the inspector general’s report, but Horowitz told Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, that the only disagreement he and Durham had was on the question of whether the FBI should have launched a preliminary investigation or a full probe. 

Passion play: Trump drags FBI ‘lovers’ Strzok and Page into 2020 race
Lindsey Graham joins president in making former feds ‘central figures’

Lisa Page, former legal counsel to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, arrives on Capitol Hill on July 16, 2018, to testify before House members. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)

This time, Donald Trump was less animated while dramatizing the pillow talk. But the president still went there Tuesday night, eager to turn two former FBI employees into characters in the 2020 campaign narrative he’s building. And some of his congressional GOP allies are happy to help.

“I love you so much, Lisa. Please, Lisa! Lisa, I’ve never loved anyone like you. We won’t allow this to happen to our Lisa,” Trump told an arena full of supporters in Hershey, Pennsylvania. “Please tell me you love me, Lisa! I love you, Peter. I love you! I love you like I’ve never loved anyone!”

House urges Supreme Court to enforce subpoenas for Trump’s financial records
Delay in subpoenas would be deprive Congress information it needs to secure elections, court filing says

People walk by the New York headquarters for Deutsche Bank in New York earlier this year. President Donald Trump is trying to keep Deutsche Bank and Capital One from acting on congressional subpoenas over his financial records. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images file photo)

The House cited 2020 election security concerns Wednesday when it urged the Supreme Court not to delay the enforcement of congressional subpoenas for financial records of President Donald Trump and his business from Deutsche Bank and Capital One Financial Corporation.

Any harm to Trump for allowing the enforcement of the House Financial Services and Intelligence committees would be less severe than Congress not getting information it needs to protect the elections from foreign influence, House attorneys argued in a Supreme Court filing.