House panel to vote Wednesday on authorizing subpoena for Mueller report

The House Judiciary Committee plans to vote Wednesday on authorizing a subpoena for special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerJeffries blasts Trump for attack on Thunberg at impeachment hearing Live coverage: House Judiciary to vote on impeachment after surprise delay Trump says he'll release financial records before election, knocks Dems' efforts MORE's full report as well as its underlying evidence.

Judiciary Chairman Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerJudiciary members battle over whether GOP treated fairly in impeachment hearings Live coverage: House Judiciary to vote on impeachment after surprise delay House passes bill that would give legal status to thousands of undocumented farmworkers MORE (D-N.Y.) said in a statement Monday that he has scheduled a markup Wednesday at 9 a.m. for the committee to vote on authorizing subpoenas for the report.

ADVERTISEMENT

Attorney General William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrJudge rejects DOJ effort to delay House lawsuit against Barr, Ross Holder rips into William Barr: 'He is unfit to lead the Justice Department' Five takeaways on Horowitz's testimony on Capitol Hill MORE told Congress on Friday that he plans to have a public version of the report ready to send to Congress and release publicly by mid-April or sooner — but after a Tuesday deadline that Democrats have demanded.

In a statement, Nadler noted what he said was Barr's refusal to provide Mueller's full report to Congress without redactions.

“The Attorney General should reconsider so that we can work together to ensure the maximum transparency of this important report to both Congress and the American people,” Nadler said, calling for the full report to be released “without delay."

The resolution will also authorize the panel to send subpoenas to five individuals who, Nadler says, have yet to turn over documents to the Judiciary Committee following his panel's requests last month asking 81 entities and individuals to provide records as part of the panel’s sweeping oversight probe of President TrumpDonald John TrumpRepublicans aim to avoid war with White House over impeachment strategy New York Times editorial board calls for Trump's impeachment Trump rips Michigan Rep. Dingell after Fox News appearance: 'Really pathetic!' MORE.

The individuals include former White House counsel Donald McGahnDonald (Don) F. McGahnRudy Giuliani's reputation will never recover from the impeachment hearings In private moment with Trump, Justice Kennedy pushed for Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination: book America has no time to wait for impeachment MORE, McGahn's former deputy Ann Donaldson, former Trump campaign chairman Stephen Bannon, former White House communications director Hope HicksHope Charlotte HicksJustice Dept releases another round of summaries from Mueller probe Former White House official won't testify, lawyer says Trump: 'Top shows' on Fox News, cable are 'Fair (or great)' to me MORE and former White House chief of staff Reince PriebusReinhold (Reince) Richard PriebusFounder of veterans group says Trump Jr. can join the military if he 'really wants to understand what sacrifice is all about' Mulvaney faces uncertain future after public gaffes Politicon announces lineup including Comey, Hannity, Priebus MORE.

"I am grateful to the many individuals who have cooperated with our initial request for documents. Regrettably, not everyone has chosen to voluntarily cooperate with the Committee at this time. I am particularly concerned about reports that documents relevant to the Special Counsel investigation were sent outside the White House, [waiving] applicable privileges,” Nadler’s statement says.

“To this end, I have asked the Committee to authorize me to issue subpoenas, if necessary, to compel the production of documents and testimony."

Republicans quickly criticized Nadler's move, arguing the law does not allow the Justice Department to share everything in Mueller's report.

“Judiciary Democrats have escalated from setting arbitrary deadlines to demanding unredacted material that Congress does not, in truth, require and that the law does not allow to be shared outside the Justice Department," Rep. Doug CollinsDouglas (Doug) Allen CollinsGOP lawmakers jockey for positions as managers Impeachment obliterates tinges of comity in House Overnight Defense: Mattis downplays Afghanistan papers | 'We probably weren't that good at' nation building | Judiciary panel approves two impeachment articles | Stage set for House vote next week MORE (R-Ga.), the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement.

"It’s unfortunate that a body meant to uphold the law has grown so desperate that it’s patently misrepresenting the law, even as the attorney general has already demonstrated transparency above and beyond what is required.”

Barr in a four-page letter to Congress last week said Mueller concluded his investigation without finding evidence that Trump's campaign was involved in a conspiracy with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election.

His letter also said Mueller did not reach a conclusion on an obstruction of justice charge, writing in his report that there is “evidence on both sides of the question.” Barr wrote that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod RosensteinRod RosensteinRosenstein, Sessions discussed firing Comey in late 2016 or early 2017: FBI notes Justice Dept releases another round of summaries from Mueller probe Judge rules former WH counsel McGahn must testify under subpoena MORE in reviewing Mueller's findings decided there should be no obstruction of justice charge. Such a charge would mean proving that an individual acted with “corrupt intent” to hinder an official proceeding.

Trump and Republicans have seized on Barr’s letter as totally vindicating the president, while also fueling their attacks against Democrats and media personalities who they say made claims there was evidence of “collusion” between the campaign and the Kremlin.

Democrats, on the other hand, have accused Trump’s top law enforcement official of possible bias for putting out his interpretation of Mueller’s findings, further fueling their demands that Barr release Mueller’s full report as well as its underlying evidence.