Attorney General Merrick Garland struck a blunter tone with the House Judiciary Committee, challenging Republican rhetoric that he has, at different times, called “false” and “dangerous.”
This resistance from the mild-mannered attorney general came as Republican interest has reawakened in investigations into former President Trump, especially those led by district attorneys.
Garland has also been criticized for his decision not to release tapes of President Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur — although it is unclear when the Republican Party will vote on a pending resolution to censure him.
Fighting over Trump’s conviction
Trump’s recent conviction by a New York jury on charges related to concealing hush money payments before the 2016 election was a major focus for Republicans during the hearing, despite the fact that the Justice Department had nothing to do with it. to do with the state-level prosecution of the former president.
Garland took a strong stance against Republicans who have been critical of the Justice Department following the verdict, calling such allegations a “conspiracy theory” that serves as “an attack on the judicial process itself.”
“The case in New York was brought by the Manhattan district attorney independently, on his own volition, on his own determination of what he believed to be a violation of state law,” Garland said.
“I don’t control the Manhattan district attorney. The Manhattan District Attorney doesn’t report to us. The Manhattan district attorney makes his own decisions about the cases he wants to bring under state law. “
But Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Florida) said Garland was not doing enough to meet his requests to search for records for any coordination between the Justice Department and state prosecutors.
“You come here and present this attack that it is a conspiracy theory that there is a coordinated war against Trump. And then when we say, ‘Okay, just give us the documents, give us the correspondence,’ and then if it’s a conspiracy theory, that will become evident,” Gaetz said.
“But when you say, ‘Well, we’ll accept your request and then we’ll work through the DOJ accommodation process,’ then you’re actually advancing the very dangerous conspiracy theory that you’re concerned about.”
On the other hand, Rep. Cliff Bentz (R-Ore.) has complained about the numerous state and federal cases against Trump.
“I don’t think that’s fair. I don’t think that the people of the United States think it’s fair for a former president to be attacked, if they will, by both the federal government and the state government. That doesn’t seem right.”
But Democrats on the committee said Trump faces numerous lawsuits as a result of his own behavior.
Rep. Jerold Nadler (DN.Y.), the top Democrat on the panel, said Republicans were using Garland’s appearance to “create an outlet to spew more ridiculous conspiracies.”
“That’s why they held a hearing on what they called ‘lawfare’ – the ridiculous claim that the Department is somehow orchestrating state prosecutions against the former president for criminal activity that has been well documented,” Garland said.
Garland responds to Trump assassination allegations
Garland also addressed Trump’s false claims that the Justice Department green-lighted his murder, including its standard use-of-force policy in preparing for a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago.
The use of force policy that has been criticized by Trump as permission to “get me out” is something Garland said is “routinely part of the package for search warrants.”
“The document that is being discussed is our standard use of force protocol, which is a limitation on the use of force, which is routinely part of the package for search warrants and was also part of the package for searching President Biden’s home,” During its investigation of classified documents, Garland said.
The statement Trump pointed to allows deadly force “only when necessary,” such as when someone “poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical harm to the officer or another person.”
Even so, Trump raised funds through the use of force policy, claiming at various times that both the Justice Department and even President Biden “were authorized to shoot” him.
Addressing the allegation directly, Garland said “the allegation is not true.”
During his opening remarks, Garland also covertly attacked Trump’s claims, saying that “baseless and extremely dangerous falsehoods are being spread about the FBI’s law enforcement operations.”
Contempt in balance
Garland appeared before the committee just weeks after its members voted to hold him in contempt of Congress after refusing to turn over audio of Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur during his investigation of classified documents.
Biden claimed executive privilege over the audio files on the eve of the committee meeting, which was followed by another from the House Oversight Committee on the same topic.
And the Justice Department has resisted turning over the tapes, arguing that Republicans already have a transcript of the conversation, which shows it does not overlap with the many areas of the impeachment inquiry for which they say they need the audio files.
Garland called the effort to censor him “just the latest in a long series of attacks on the work of the Justice Department.”
“Releasing the audio would chill cooperation with the Department in future investigations. And it could influence witnesses’ responses if they thought the audio of their police interviews could be broadcast to Congress and the public,” Garland told lawmakers.
GOP lawmakers gave several reasons why they needed the tapes.
Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) said he would show “behavioral evidence” of Biden’s character during the interview.
And Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) said the audio could offer revealing insight into whether the pauses lasted “one minute, two minutes” and whether Biden stumbled over his words.
“The transcript may be accurate. But you know what? The audio will tell us much more,” he said.
Biggs was later rebuked by Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), who said his interest in seeing whether Biden repeated words was a way of mocking the president’s difficulty with stuttering.
At several points during the hearing, Garland told lawmakers that he had not yet seen a valid legislative purpose behind the alleged need for audio.
“I understand why you would rather listen to the audio than listen to and read the transcript,” Garland said in one of the most diplomatic exchanges of the hearing, with Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.).
“I still don’t understand the legislative purpose. I don’t see how listening to the audio will make any difference, as far as whatever legislation you have in mind… There is no element of the impeachment resolution that will change as far as the information in the audio is concerned. The words are the same and the transcription of the audio, that’s my explanation,” Garland said.
Although both the Oversight and Judiciary have marked the resolution to hold Garland in contempt of Congress, the effort has been persistent as it is unclear whether the Republican Party has the support to pass the resolution with such narrow margins.
House GOP leadership has not yet announced a timetable for a vote on the issue.
This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story
