Reply #1: like impeachment

[bigtree]

it's not so consequential to favor one over the other - although there are those who say the statutory contempt route is 'a waste of time' because it will be opposed.

In the inherent contempt action, there would be the obvious benefit of Congress taking responsibility for their own affairs without having to ask first.

In a statutory action, there is use and validity in challenging the administration in court where they've merely asserted some privilege and expect their opposition to fold. Most of the prosecutions that have been successful have, in the end, taken the subject down because of some obstruction. That's no accident. At every point of accountability, there will either be compliance and discovery or obstruction to protect against discovery. Every point that Congress demands accountability, there will be an opportunity to catch the administration up in their obstruction, or either, get the information we need to proceed with the prosecution.

No avenues to accountability should be left unexplored; especially in the cases where the administration asserts some unproven claim of Executive Privilege in a subpoena/contempt action where they are the subjects. Both have validity, and I can't see any reason why either should be excluded from consideration.