Consider This from NPR - President Trump is changing norms of transparency. How are lawmakers responding?

Episode Date: August 14, 2026

This week, President Trump made headlines when he confirmed he was secretly removed from Air Force One in Turkey last month, following a credible threat from Iran.The confirmation came days after The Washington Post reported on an elaborate ruse to keep the president safe.This is just one of the quiet ways the Trump admin has tried to evade scrutiny. Are lawmakers doing anything to address it?This episode was produced by Mia Venkat and Jordan-Marie Smith, with audio engineering by Damian Herring. Our director is Jonas Adams.It was edited by Kelsey Snell, Sarah Handel and Tinbete Ermyas.Our interim executive producer is Courtney Dorning.Support public media with NPR+ and enjoy perks for over 25 podcasts like this one. This show’s perks include bonus episodes and sponsor-free listening. Learn more at plus.npr.org.See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

It's consider this where every day we go deep on one big news story. Today, transparency and the Trump administration. This week, President Trump made headlines when he confirmed he was secretly removed from Air Force One in Turkey last month following a credible threat from Iran. And it was really as for the military, and I just have to do what they say. That was President Trump speaking to reporters on Wednesday. The confirmation came days after the Washington Post reported on an elaborate ruse to keep the president safe. Why was it too dangerous for you to fly on Air Force One, but not too dangerous for the threat?

I think actually the plane that I flew on was at greater risk. Why do you say that? Because that would be the plane, I think, that they would be more likely to go for. This is just one of the quiet ways the Trump administration has tried to evade scrutiny. On Monday, the Justice Department released an opinion, stating that it would extend executive privilege to the president's outside advisors. Certainly the implications. here is that the administration could attempt to restrict Congress's ability to request communications with the executive branch from the private sector.

Carlos Uriarty is a lawyer and expert in congressional investigations. He says the move could change norms when it comes to oversight of the president's actions. So in the normal course, the majority of either chamber has a number of tools to increase pressure on both the administration and private parties when pursuing oversight. and that includes subpoenas, contempt, and litigation. Consider this. The Trump administration has skirted norms of transparency. How are lawmakers in Washington responding?

From NPR, I'm Emily Fang. It's Consider This from NPR. Over the past year, the Trump administration has skirted transparency norms or taken steps to evade scrutiny and official oversight in many ways, both quietly and very publicly. Now Democrats are preparing to push back. NPR justice correspondent Carrie Johnson and congressional reporter Eric McDaniel, join me now to explain. Hi to both of you.

Hey there. Hi. Carrie, let's start with you because this plane is one example. But can you explain what other steps this administration is taking to shield themselves? Absolutely. This week, the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion that would extend executive privilege to outside advisors, not just a president's inner circle. That memo says the administration can shield these private advisors so long as they're talking to the president or his direct reports and that the topic relates to presidential decision-making.

Now, the timing here is interesting. Just a few months before the midterm elections where polls suggest Democrats could retake control of at least one chamber in Congress. Senator Adam Schiff, a Democrat from California, posted on X that this should be seen as a, quote, partisan measure to insulate the president and his corrupt activities from congressional subpoenas when the majority flips. I also spoke with Carlos Uriarti. He's a lawyer and expert in congressional investigations. This opinion gives Democrats a window into how the administration is preparing on their side for a change of control in Congress. And I'm sure Democrats, similarly, are taking this opinion into account as they think about, you know, what tools and strategies they may use to try to make

sure they can get the information they need. Now, for its part, the Justice Department says this opinion simply reaffirms precedent. And a White House spokeswoman says restricting executive privilege to only communications within the executive branch would make it impossible for President Trump to rely on important outside sources. Eric, Senator Schiff is already raising red flags about what the administration is up to. Do we know what Democrats in general want to do in response? You know, I think the best way to think about Democrats' agenda in a high

hypothetical future Democratic majority isn't what they plan to start, but what they want to continue from their time right now in the minority, but with the full oomph of the full co-equal branch of the Congress behind them. Democratic staff on the House judiciary and oversight committees tell me that they want to use their oversight powers to do things like compel the Trump administration to engage over the remaining Epstein files after months of shadow hearings and to try and push for some real accountability for his victims. Let's pause for a second on Epstein because this issue has become inescapable for Trump. Congress compelled the Justice Department to release those files, but that did not end the scrutiny, as we know. Where are we today on that?

Yeah, that's right. Sponsors of that Epstein Transparency Act in Congress are not at all satisfied with what DOJ has done so far. This week, Judge Emmett Sullivan and D.C. said he was frustrated that the Justice Department might be holding back some materials, and he says the public has a right to know what's going on. Right. And Democrats have made clear that this is going to be a major focus. Okay. So what else is on their list, Eric? Well, they also want to investigate the president's business dealings. Remember, he's investing right now in companies that have major business before the federal government, from AI to the Paramount Warner Brothers merger. And this is at a time when 90% of Americans feel that the government is corrupt, according to polling data out this summer from the

Brennan Center for Justice. And Democrats see that kind of accountability work is a winning issue, especially if they can tie that perceived corruption back to things like a high cost of living. And many voters actually do make that connection, something like because politicians are focused on themselves, they're not acting on the things that matter most to me. And there's no question that Democratic leaders are frustrated by this DOJ opinion that Kerry's been reporting on. They see that as an effort to further block them from their constitutionally guaranteed role or their constitutional guaranteed responsibility of overseeing the executive branch. Carrie, turning to you, I'm drawing on my high school civics classes here, but isn't overseeing the executive branch what Congress is supposed to do? In part, yes, but we have not seen Congress work like it was supposed to work in a long time. There is very little legislation, very little groundbreaking oversight on Capitol Hill right now.

But I remember even a few decades ago, Congress exposed a lot of new information about accounting scandals at major companies that actually led to criminal prosecutions. Lawmakers exposed lies by big tobacco companies. And they uncovered new information about mistreatment and torture of detainees by the United States after the attack. on September 11th. And look, I imagine our audience might be receiving that point carries making in two pretty different ways. Either that the Intel Committee's torture report happened in pretty recent memory just during the Obama administration or that it was a lifetime ago. You know, in my reporting, I think a lot about how much Congress is shaped by its staff. And right now, the average staffer is 32 years old, according to an analysis by Legistorm. And the average career on the

hill for a staffer is just three years per the New America Foundation. And so that means, in practice, it's pretty safe to assume that more than half of staffers might not remember 9-11 and certainly weren't working during the last real vestiges of muscular congressional oversight. And as excited as some Democratic lawmakers are like Jamie Raskin of Maryland for a return to form and the January 6th committee, which Raskin was a part of, was rigorous. There's definitely some rebuilding of capacity that needs to happen to do this at the scale that folks like Raskin are pushing for. Are these efforts about scoring political points or is there something bigger behind it? This does have real-world implications. Congress has subpoena power and the might to go to court and enforce those subpoenas. People in our business as reporters, we don't have that kind of power. And the other parts of the government that are designed to root out fraud and waste and abuse, they've been hurting. President Trump fired some inspectors general last year. Other jobs have been vacant a long time. Just this week, the president nominated Dennis Kirk, an author of the Project 2025 report, to be Inspector General at the Interior Department. that's the office that would investigate ineptitude with contracts and repairs at the reflecting pool. And Emily, I think it's probably also worth noting that this is going to be the most visible and probably the most impactful thing Democrats will do if they retake both or just one chamber of Congress.

Remember that the president still has veto power over their legislative efforts. And the president's effort to obstruct them is going to be a major point of frustration, if not a big surprise to lawmakers. But the Justice Department opinion that Carrie's been talking about is just more digging in on the part of the administration for what was already set to be a major clash with congressional lawmakers. And ultimately, all these fights between Congress and the White House are going to go to the courts and eventually the Supreme Court, which has a very strong view of executive power. Thanks for breaking that down. That's NPR's Carrie Johnson and Eric McDaniel. Thanks so much, both of you. Thank you.

Thank you. This episode was produced by a media. Mia Venkat and Jordan Marie Smith with audio engineering by Damian Herring. Our director is Jonas Adams. It was edited by Kelsey Snell, Sarah Handel, and Timby Armius. Our interim executive producer is Courtney Dorney. Before we go, a word of thanks to our Consider This Plus listeners who support the show. You make it possible for NPR journalists to report the stories you hear on this show.

Supporters also hear every episode without messages from sponsors. To learn more, visit plus.npr.org. It's considered this from NPR. I'm Emily Fang.