Kellyanne Conway ignores subpoena, ditches House testimony on alleged ethics violations |

Kellyanne Conway ignores subpoena, ditches House testimony on alleged ethics violations

Getty Images
White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham, Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway and Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley walk onto the South Lawn during the Made In America product showcase July 15, 2019 in Washington.

Top Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway ignored a subpoena Monday and ditched House testimony on allegations that she repeatedly violated federal ethics law, prompting calls for her to be held in contempt.

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham issued a statement after it became clear Conway wasn’t showing up for the House Oversight Committee testimony, saying the administration considered the panel’s subpoena “purely political.”

“The Committee clearly knows that under long-standing, bipartisan precedent founded in the Constitution, a president’s senior advisers cannot be compelled to appear before Congress,” Grisham’s statement read. “Immunity has been asserted for Ms. Conway, which the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel and White House Counsel strongly reaffirmed.”

House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings responded Conway will be held in contempt if she doesn’t change her mind by July 25.

“This is a clear cut case. We are not requiring her to testify about advice she gave the president or about the White House’s policy decisions,” Cummings, D-Md., said before adjourning the hearing on Monday. “We are requiring her to testify before Congress about her multiple violations of federal law, her waste of taxpayer funds, and her actions that compromise public confidence in the integrity of the federal government.”

The U.S. Office of Special, the federal government’s own ethics watchdog, issued a rare public report last month recommending that President Trump fire Conway because she repeatedly violated the Hatch Act by dragging Democratic 2020 candidates in TV interviews and over social media.

The Hatch Act, which dates back to 1939, bars all federal employees, except the president and the vice president, from using their official positions for political purposes.

“As a highly visible member of the administration, Ms. Conway’s violations, if left unpunished, would send a message to all federal employees that they need not abide by the Hatch Act’s restrictions,” special counsel Henry Kerner, whose office is separate from Robert Mueller’s defunct investigation, said in his June 13 report. “Her actions thus erode the principal foundation of our democratic system — the rule of law.”

Kerner was appointed by Trump. Nonetheless, the president has shown no sign that he plans to act on the special counsel’s recommendation.

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.