A federal judge has cast doubt that US courts would intervene to limit Congress's ability to investigate Donald Trump saying that it would be highly unusual for such an intervention, as the first case over House Democrats' subpoenas for evidence was heard on Tuesday.
Judge Amit Mehta with the US District Court for the District of Columbia was in charge of that Tuesday hearing, which concerned whether House Democrats can obtain financial records held by an accounting firm representing the president. In their arguments, the case quickly centred around the American government's separation of powers.
“Am I right there isn't a single Supreme Court case or appellate case since 1880 that has found a congressional subpoena overstepped its bounds?” Mr Mehta, who will not issue a ruling until next week, asked Mr Trump's lawyer during questioning. “I agree there are outer limits, but it's not clear to me what they are.”
The court battle over those financial documents came as other controversies in Washington continued to smoulder. Before those arguments were heard, it was reported the Trump administration planned to have Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents round up and arrest thousands of Central American migrant families in cities across the US last month, as a brutal show of force before it was blocked by ex-Homeland Security secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and former ICE director Ron Vitiello.
Mr Trump also oversaw an escalating trade war with China on Tuesday, after the president imposed further tariffs on billions of dollars in Chinese imports.
On the 2020 campaign trail, a new poll has meanwhile put both of the leading Democratic presidential challengers, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, ahead of Trump in hypothetical 2020 matchups, with either man projected to beat him by an eight percent margin at the ballot box.
Please allow a moment for our liveblog to load
Kirstjen Nielsen – then-secretary for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – and ICE director Ron Vitiello both objected before being forced out of office. The pair "instinctively thought it was bad policy and that the proposal was less than half-baked," a DHS official said.
The sprawling operation included an effort to fast-track immigration court cases, The Post says, allowing the government to obtain deportation orders against those who did not show for their hearings - officials said 90 percent of those targeted were found deportable in their absence. The subsequent arrests would have required coordinated raids against parents with children in their homes and neighbuorhoods.
But Vitiello and Nielsen blocked the measure, expressing concern about a lack of preparation by ICE agents, the likelihood of public outrage and worries that the undertaking would divert resources away from the border.
Senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller (who else?) and ICE deputy director Matthew Albence were reportedly especially keen on the idea, eager to execute dramatic, high-profile mass arrests that they believed would help deter the growing influx of families.
Barr has appointed John Durham, the US attorney in Connecticut, to conduct the inquiry.
Durham's appointment comes about a month after Barr told members of Congress he believed "spying did occur" on the Trump campaign in 2016. He later said he didn't mean anything pejorative and was gathering a team to look into the origins of the special counsel's investigation.
Barr provided no details about what "spying" may have taken place but appeared to be alluding to a surveillance warrant the FBI obtained on a former Trump associate, Carter Page, and the FBI's use of an informant while the bureau was investigating former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos.
Trump and his supporters have seized on both to accuse the Justice Department and the FBI of unlawfully spying on his campaign.
The inquiry, which will focus on whether the government's methods to collect intelligence relating to the Trump campaign were lawful and appropriate, is separate from an investigation by the Justice Department's inspector general. The agency's watchdog is also examining the Russia probe's origins and Barr has said he expects the watchdog report to be done in May or June.
Congressional Republicans have also indicated they intend to examine how the investigation that shadowed Trump's presidency for nearly two years began and whether there are any legal concerns.
The recently concluded investigation from special counsel Robert Mueller did not find a criminal conspiracy between the campaign and the Kremlin to tip the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.
Durham is a career prosecutor who was nominated for his post as US attorney in Connecticut by Trump. He has previously investigated law enforcement corruption, the destruction of CIA videotapes and the Boston FBI office's relationship with mobsters.
In nominating him, the White House said Durham and other nominees for US attorney jobs share Trump's vision for "making America safe again."
Durham was unanimously confirmed by the Senate in 2018. At the time, Connecticut's two Democratic senators, Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, called Durham a "fierce, fair prosecutor" who knows how to try tough cases.
In addition to conducting the inquiry, Durham will continue to serve as the chief federal prosecutor in Connecticut.
Orban was an early Trump advocate in 2016 and is known for building a razor wire fence at Hungary’s southern border to stop refugees travelling from Serbia and Croatia during the peak of the refugee crisis.
Last week David Cornstein, the US ambassador to Hungary, suggested Trump's was envious of Orban's "illiberal democracy".
"We have noted the statement," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call, saying such statements had been made before, but that there had been no talks about such a meeting let alone an agreement about one.
Peskov noted that the last planned meeting between Putin and Trump had been cancelled at Washington's initiative.
The revisions were ordered by hard-liners led by John Bolton, Trump’s hawkish national security adviser, who previously pushed for conflict with Tehran under George W Bush. The similarities with the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 were there for all to see and ominous indeed.
"I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time," she continued before saying she loves "the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that [safe haven], in many ways."
US district judge Amit Mehta in Washington will hear oral arguments on whether Mazars, Trump's long-time accounting firm, must comply with a House Oversight Committee subpoena seeking financial records for Trump and his company.
In an aggressive response to congressional oversight, Trump is refusing to cooperate with any of the probes. Their targets range from his tax returns and policy decisions to his Washington hotel and his children's security clearances.
The House Oversight Committee claims sweeping investigative power and says it needs Trump's financial records to examine whether he has conflicts of interest or broke the law by not disentangling himself from his business holdings as previous presidents did.
Lawyers for Trump and the Trump Organization, his company, last month filed a lawsuit to block the committee's subpoena, saying it exceeded Congress' constitutional limits.
Trump's lawyers argued that Congress is on a quest to "turn up something that Democrats can use as a political tool against the president now and in the 2020 election".
On Monday, the president's attorneys objected to Mehta's plan to fast-track the lawsuit by holding a trial on Tuesday, saying that would deny Trump a "full and fair" hearing.
Either way, Mehta will likely issue a written decision at a later date, although he may indicate on Tuesday how he intends to rule. Whatever the outcome, his ruling will almost certainly be appealed to a higher court.
Mehta was appointed in 2014 by Barack Obama, who was investigated almost non-stop by Republicans in Congress during his two terms in office.
Mazars has avoided taking sides in the dispute and said it will "comply with all legal obligations."
Trump's challenge of the Mazars subpoena was his first effort to quash the multiple House inquiries. He has also sued over subpoenas for his financial records sent to Deutsche Bank and Capital One.
Some legal experts have said Trump's lawsuits are unlikely to succeed. They said Congress has broad power to issue subpoenas, so long as documents requested can help it legislate, and that courts are reluctant to second-guess its motivations.
Some Democratic Party leaders have argued that Trump's stonewalling represents a "constitutional crisis" and could force them to begin impeachment proceedings to remove him from office, even though such an effort would likely fail in the Republican-controlled Senate.







