Congress is returning to Washington this week as a battle looms over negotiations for special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerGraham: Mueller investigation a 'political rectal exam' House progressive: Pelosi 'has it right' on impeachment Democrats talk subpoena for Mueller MORE to testify.

Mueller is in talks with House Democrats about appearing next week, which would mark his first appearance before Congress since he wrapped up his two-year investigation in March.

But President TrumpDonald John TrumpNASA exec leading moon mission quits weeks after appointment The Hill's Morning Report — After contentious week, Trump heads for Japan Frustration boils over with Senate's 'legislative graveyard' MORE threw a potential curveball into the discussions over the weekend when he said Mueller shouldn’t testify, reversing his previous position that it was up to Attorney General William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrThe Hill's Morning Report — After contentious week, Trump heads for Japan House Intelligence enjoys breakthrough with Justice Department Schiff blasts Trump's 'un-American' order to intel agencies to cooperate with Barr probe MORE to decide if the special counsel speaks before a congressional committee.


“After spending more than $35,000,000 over a two year period, interviewing 500 people, using 18 Trump Hating Angry Democrats & 49 FBI Agents - all culminating in a more than 400 page Report showing NO COLLUSION - why would the Democrats in Congress now need Robert Mueller to testify," Trump said in a pair of tweets.

"Are they looking for a redo because they hated seeing the strong NO COLLUSION conclusion? … Bob Mueller should not testify. No redos for the Dems!" Trump added. 

Trump’s tweets came as House Democrats said they were working to lock down Mueller testifying before the House Judiciary Committee next week, on May 15.

“We are aiming to bring Mueller in on the 15th, but nothing has been agreed to yet. That’s the date the Committee has proposed, and we hope the Special Counsel will agree to it,” Rep. David CicillineDavid Nicola CicillineJustice to recommend blocking T-Mobile-Sprint merger: report The Hill's Morning Report - Pelosi remains firm despite new impeachment push House Democrats press leaders to start Trump impeachment MORE (D-R.I.) said on Sunday.

Democrats are clamoring for Mueller to testify about his findings in the closely watched probe into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election and the Trump campaign. Those demands crescendoed last week amid reports of Mueller sending a letter to Barr in late March that raised concerns about a four-page memo Barr had released that outlined the main conclusions of Mueller's report.

"The summary letter … did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office's work and conclusions," Mueller wrote in his letter to Barr.

Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerCharles (Chuck) Ellis SchumerNo agreement on budget caps in sight ahead of Memorial Day recess Ex-White House photographer roasts Trump: 'This is what a cover up looked like' under Obama Pelosi: Trump 'is engaged in a cover-up' MORE (D-N.Y.) immediately pounced on Trump’s tweet on Sunday, accusing the president of trying to “silence” Mueller.

“He’s trying to silence Mueller. For a man who constantly proclaims his innocence, [Trump] is acting awfully guilty. Mueller must testify publicly before Congress,” Schumer said on Sunday.


Trump did not specify in his tweet if the White House would try to actively prevent Mueller from testifying. Some House Republicans, including Rep. Doug CollinsDouglas (Doug) Allen CollinsConservative filmmakers organizing stage play based on Strzok-Page texts: report The Go-Go's rock the stage at annual 'We Write the Songs' DC concert The Hill's 12:30 Report: McGahn inflames Dem divisions on impeachment MORE (R-Ga.), have previously called on Mueller to testify “immediately.”

Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamNew Yorker cover titled 'The Shining' shows Graham, McConnell, Barr polishing Trump's shoes Graham: 'US must be willing to intervene in Venezuela' Trump Jr. slams Republican committee chairman: 'Too weak to stand up to the Democrats' MORE (R-S.C.), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, initially indicated that he wouldn’t ask Mueller to testify, arguing that the matter was “over.” But he sent a letter to Mueller on Friday asking if he would like to testify about any “misrepresentation” about a phone call he had with Barr after the four-page memo was released.

Barr told the Senate Judiciary Committee last week that Mueller's concerns were not about the letter, but the media coverage surrounding it. He previously said he would not object to Mueller testifying.

“He was very clear with me that he was not suggesting that we had misrepresented his report,” Barr added.

The drama over Mueller appearing before Congress comes as House Democrats are continuing to battle with Barr after he backed out of a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee last week.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) sent the Justice Department a letter late last week indicating he is willing to move forward with holding Barr in contempt of Congress if the committee does not receive subpoenaed information on Mueller's report.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, also said over the weekend that he supported the House holding Barr in contempt.

"We had an attorney general of the United States who refused to come to a hearing that the House Judiciary Committee called," Sanders said at a town hall in Perry, Iowa. “If I were a member of the House, I would vote to hold Attorney General Barr in contempt.”

Disaster relief

The House is set to take up a bill this week aimed at providing additional relief for those affected by a spate of recent floods, hurricanes, storms and wildfires.

The legislation would provide $3 billion to address tornadoes in the South and flooding in the Midwest that took place after the House passed its first disaster aid bill earlier this year.

The measure includes language that would extend the National Flood Insurance Program through Sept. 30 and funding for Puerto Rico recovery efforts. It also provides aid to Midwestern and Southern farmers.

The vote this week comes after an initial disaster relief bill passed the House in January but stalled amid the government funding fight.

The House vote comes as top senators indicated last week that they were optimistic about the chances of getting a deal to revive the stalled disaster aid bill, which derailed earlier this year amid a fight between Democrats and Trump over assistance to Puerto Rico.

Sen. Richard ShelbyRichard Craig ShelbyThe Hill's Morning Report — After contentious week, Trump heads for Japan On The Money: Senate passes disaster aid bill after deal with Trump | Trump to offer B aid package for farmers | House votes to boost retirement savings | Study says new tariffs to double costs for consumers Senate passes disaster aid bill after deal with Trump MORE (R-Ala.), the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said that talks with Sen. Patrick LeahyPatrick Joseph LeahySenate passes disaster aid bill after deal with Trump GOP senators work to get Trump on board with new disaster aid package Chances for disaster aid deal slip amid immigration fight MORE (Vt.), the top Democrat on the committee, were “trending in the right direction.”

"The vibes are better than they've been," he said.

The disaster aid package fell apart in the Senate last month after Trump criticized Puerto Rico’s handling of previous disaster aid money during a closed-door meeting with GOP senators.

The GOP proposal included $600 million for food stamp aid in Puerto Rico. Democrats wanted to amend it to include additional provisions like requiring the Department of Housing and Urban Development to release block grant funding and adding money to help Puerto Rico repair damaged water systems.

Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) separately told reporters late last week that Trump was “on board,” and had called him at 6 a.m. on Thursday to discuss the issue.

“This man is involved. This man is engaged. He talked to several members. ... He wants to get it solved,” Perdue said.

Pre-existing conditions

The House is slated to bring a Democratic-backed bill that pushes back against the Trump administration's guidance issued last year loosening restrictions on states’ ability to waive certain requirements in the Affordable Care Act.  

Proponents of the Protecting Americans with Pre-existing Conditions Act — spearheaded by Reps. Ann KusterAnn McLane KusterRepublicans troll Democrats with proposals to rename upcoming health care bill This week: Fight brews over Mueller testimony GOP lawmaker draws backlash for telling Democratic colleague to 'shut up' during heated ObamaCare debate MORE (D-N.H.) and Don Beyer (D-Va.) — argue the legislation is necessary to ensure patient protections remain in place, making the case that by allowing states to promote plans that don’t require the same level of coverage as the ACA could be detrimental to patients with preexisting conditions.

“H.R. 986 blocks implementation of that guidance so as to preserve protection for pre-existing conditions and to ensure health care remains affordable,” House Majority Leader Steny HoyerSteny Hamilton HoyerSteyer plans impeachment push targeting Democrats over recess The Hill's Morning Report - Pelosi remains firm despite new impeachment push Pelosi faces tipping point on Trump impeachment MORE (D-Md.) said on the floor.

“That new guidance, Madam Speaker, undermines patient protections and threatens coverage for Americans with pre-existing conditions. H.R. 986 blocks implementation of that guidance so as to preserve protection for pre-existing conditions and to ensure health care remains affordable.”

But Republicans argue the waivers help states find ways to drive down premiums and broaden access to care.

“I would point out that the president's executive order on Section 1332 does nothing to change the protections in the law for people with pre-existing conditions under ObamaCare, as the gentleman knows the law protects people with pre-existing conditions from facing any kind of discrimination and the Section 1332 waivers have nothing to do with that,” House Minority Whip Steve ScaliseStephen (Steve) Joseph ScaliseSenate passes disaster aid bill after deal with Trump Amash storm hits Capitol Hill Trump hits Amash after congressman doubles down on impeachment talk MORE (R-La.) said on the floor Thursday.  

“What they do is allow some states, and there have been a number of states who have requested, the ability to be more innovative and focus on lowering premiums while protecting pre-existing conditions.”

The legislation will likely see little movement in the Republican-controlled Senate. 


Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellThe Hill's Morning Report — After contentious week, Trump heads for Japan Frustration boils over with Senate's 'legislative graveyard' New Yorker cover titled 'The Shining' shows Graham, McConnell, Barr polishing Trump's shoes MORE (R-Ky.) is set to escalate a fight over “blue slips” and Trump’s judicial nominations.

McConnell has teed up votes on two appeals court nominations: Joseph Bianco and Michael Park to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.

Both nominations were nominated to fill New York seats, but neither Schumer nor Sen. Kirsten GillibrandKirsten Elizabeth Gillibrand2020 Democrats join striking McDonald's workers Fox News contributor Campos-Duffy compares abortion to slavery 2020 Dems put spotlight on disabilities issues MORE (D-N.Y.) returned a blue slip, a piece of paper that indicates if they support the nominee.

The blue slip rule — a precedent upheld by Senate tradition — has historically allowed a home-state senator to stop a lower court nominee by refusing to return the blue slip to the Judiciary Committee.

How strictly the precedent is upheld is decided by the committee chairman, and enforcement has varied depending on who wields the gavel.

If they’re confirmed, Bianco and Park would be the third and fourth circuit court picks to be confirmed even though both home-state senators did not return a blue slip.

The Senate confirmed several appeals judges who were missing one blue slip last year, but the confirmation in February of Eric Miller to be a 9th Circuit judge was the first known instance of an appeals judge being confirmed without a blue slip from either home-state senator.

Senate Republicans also confirmed Paul Matey for the 3rd Circuit though Sens. Bob MenendezRobert (Bob) MenendezEnding the Cyprus arms embargo will increase tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean We can accelerate a cure for Alzheimer's The Hill's 12:30 Report: Manafort sentenced to total of 7.5 years in prison MORE (D-N.J.) and Cory BookerCory Anthony Booker2020 hopeful John Delaney unveils T climate plan Harris readies a Phase 2 as she seeks to rejuvenate campaign T.I., Charlamagne Tha God advocate for opportunity zones on Capitol Hill MORE (D-N.J.) didn’t return their blue slips.

In addition to Bianco and Park, McConnell has teed up votes on Kimberly Reed’s nomination to be president of the Export-Import Bank, former Rep. Spencer BachusSpencer Thomas BachusBiz groups take victory lap on Ex-Im Bank On The Money: White House files notice of China tariff hikes | Dems cite NYT report in push for Trump tax returns | Trump hits Iran with new sanctions | Trump praises GM for selling shuttered Ohio factory | Ex-Im Bank back at full strength Export-Import Bank back to full strength after Senate confirmations MORE (R-Ala.) and Judith Pryor to be members of the Export-Import board of directors and Janet Dhillon to be a member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.