The executive branch of the United States government is one of the most powerful entities in the world. It consists of the President, Vice-President, Cabinet members, and various other officials who help run the country on a day-to-day basis.
But with great power comes great responsibility – or in this case, oversight. The executive branch must be held accountable for its actions, and that’s where investigations come into play.
The process of investigation begins when Congress suspects that something may be amiss within the executive branch. This can happen for a variety of reasons – perhaps there are rumors circulating about corruption or misconduct among top officials, or maybe there have been reports of questionable financial dealings.
Once Congress decides to investigate, they have several tools at their disposal. One such tool is issuing subpoenas, which require individuals to testify before committees or provide documents relevant to an investigation.
Subpoenas are often used when witnesses refuse to cooperate voluntarily. For example, during the impeachment inquiry into President Trump’s alleged abuse of power and obstruction of Congress in 2019-2020, many key witnesses were subpoenaed after refusing to appear before committees voluntarily.
Another way that Congress can exercise oversight over the executive branch is through hearings. Hearings allow lawmakers to question officials under oath and gather information related to an investigation.
One high-profile hearing that gained national attention was former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee in June 2017. During his testimony, Comey discussed his interactions with President Trump regarding an ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Hearings like these can be a valuable tool for gaining insight into how government agencies operate and uncovering potential wrongdoing by public officials.
Congress also has access to classified information that may not be available to the general public. This allows lawmakers to conduct thorough investigations without compromising national security interests.
However, investigations aren’t always smooth sailing – especially when it comes to obtaining sensitive information. The executive branch may refuse to cooperate with investigations, citing executive privilege or national security concerns.
This was the case during the Watergate scandal in the 1970s, when President Nixon attempted to block Congress’s investigation into his administration’s involvement in a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters. Eventually, Nixon was forced to turn over tapes of his conversations related to the break-in due to a Supreme Court ruling.
Even with all these tools and resources at their disposal, Congress doesn’t always get it right. Investigations can be politically charged and sometimes lead nowhere.
For example, multiple investigations were launched into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as Secretary of State under President Obama. While some Republicans believed that Clinton had mishandled classified information and should face criminal charges, no evidence was found to support those claims.
Similarly, investigations into Benghazi – an attack on US diplomatic facilities in Libya that resulted in four American deaths- became highly politicized with accusations against then-Secretary of State Clinton made by Republicans which remain disputed by Democrats until now.
That being said, oversight remains an essential part of our democratic process. Without proper checks and balances on government power, corruption could run rampant within our institutions.
So even if Congress occasionally misses the mark with their investigations or stumbles along the way (we’re looking at you Fyre Festival-level mess), it’s important for them to keep trying – because ultimately they are there to serve us as citizens who need truth about how their elected officials are running things behind closed doors.