g5000
The Supreme Court has since ruled that Congress must confine itself to “legislative purposes” and avoid the strictly private affairs of individual citizens.
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 1The Constitution says nothing about congressional investigations and oversight, but the authority to...
history.house.gov
the brief argues that the Committees’ request plainly serves a legitimate legislative interest. The Committees heard information that Deutsche Bank may have provided more than $2 billion in loans to President Trump despite bank officials’ concerns about those loans, allegations that shell companies used illicit funds to purchase Trump properties, and numerous reports of the intersection between President Trump’s business interests and Russia-linked entities. Given this, obtaining the financial documents the Committees have requested would aid their consideration of whether and how to legislate with respect to lending practices, money laundering, and fraud at financial institutions, as well as conflicts of interest that might exist if foreign actors were to have leverage over President Trump, his family, and his businesses.
www.theusconstitution.org
The legislative angle on this sounds weak to me. Another Russia investigation is what it sounds more like, and from what I can find, it was based on testimony by Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS, who based it on Christopher Steele's investigation into Trump's financial dealings with Russians, which provided no tangible evidence and still needed to be "vetted."
I think Trump is up to his neck in this stuff, but I'm not so sure the House is on firm ground here. What makes you think differently?