WASHINGTON – Attorney General Merrick Garland rebuked Republicans for what he described as unprecedented attacks on the Justice Department on Tuesday, telling lawmakers that tried to hold him in contempt that he “will not be intimidated”.
Appearing before a House panel led by allies of former President Donald Trump, Garland decried what he called a “conspiracy theory” that the department was behind Trump’s New York state court case in which former President republican was convicted of 34 criminal charges. And he pushed back against “unfounded and extremely dangerous falsehoods” being sold on law enforcement.
Garland’s unusually fiery testimony represented a forceful defense of the Justice Department’s independence and integrity amid an onslaught by Trump and his allies against the U.S. criminal justice system. Republicans have alleged that President Joe Biden turned the department into a weapon to go after Trump, even as Biden’s son Hunter is tried on federal charges in Delaware.
Garland described the baseless claim that the Justice Department was involved in the New York case against Trump as an “attack on the judicial process itself.” And he called dangerous Trump’s distorted claim that FBI agents who searched his Mar-a-Lago property in August 2021 were “authorized to shoot” him and were “locked up & loaded ready” to take it out.
Garland said the attacks on the Justice Department “have not and will not influence our decision-making.”
“I won’t be intimidated,” Garland said. “And the Department of Justice will not be intimidated. We will continue to do our work free from political influence. And we will not give up defending our democracy.”
His appearance came as Republicans moved to dismiss him as disrespectful over the Biden administration’s refusal to turn over audio of President Joe Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur, which focused on the president’s handling of classified documents.
A transcript of Biden’s interview was made public, but the president asserted executive privilege over the audio last month to block its release. The White House said Republican lawmakers only want the audio so they can cut it up and use it for political purposes.
The Justice Department argued that witnesses may be less likely to cooperate if they know their interviews could become public. Garland told lawmakers he would not “jeopardize the ability of our prosecutors and agents to do their jobs effectively in future investigations.”
Rep. Jim Jordan, the committee’s top Republican, criticized Garland in his opening statement for a wide range of what he described as politically motivated decisions by federal authorities — including the conclusions of different special counsels that Trump criminally manipulated classified documents while Biden did. no.
“Many Americans believe there is now a double standard in our judicial system. They believe in it because it exists,” Jordan said.
Rep. Matt Gaetz, who has been investigated by the Justice Department but not charged in a sex trafficking probe, had a tense conversation at the start of the hearing when he demanded to know whether the department would produce records related to the New York state case in which Trump was convicted last week.
Garland disputed as false Gaetz’s claims that he had “dispatched” to the Manhattan district attorney’s office a Justice Department lawyer who later became part of Trump’s prosecution team, insisting he had nothing to do with that.
Garland strongly rejected Republican issues that he said were underpinned by false premises, and Republicans appeared exasperated at some points with his refusal to engage in extensive back-and-forth. When, at one point, Garland asked if he could finish his response, Rep. Andy Biggs, a conservative Republican from Arizona, said no because he was being “indifferent.”
But the attorney general also seemed uncomfortable with some friendly questions from Democrats, who tried to underscore the Justice Department’s independence by discussing specific cases. Garland has repeatedly refused to answer questions about specific investigations. For example, when a lawmaker asked Garland whether Trump had been interviewed by federal prosecutors before his indictments, he refused to answer, even though the answer was known to be no.
