Raskin takes aim at GOP effort to censure Garland as ‘just ridiculous’

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, called Republican arguments for censuring Attorney General Merrick Garland “simply ridiculous” as the GOP moves forward with an effort to keep it for disrespecting Congress.

The House Rules Committee is expected to meet Tuesday to introduce such a resolution. Republicans are seeking to condemn Garland for not sharing audio files of President Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur, a conversation of which they already have a transcript.

“Republicans fabricated the allegation that Attorney General Garland obstructed their impeachment inquiry by withholding the tape of President Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Hur,” Raskin wrote in a memo to his Democratic colleagues.

“No new evidence of an impeachable offense will emerge from an audiotape of an interview of which Republicans already have a complete transcript. And to be clear, Republicans know the entire contents of this interview because the DOJ gave them a transcript that records precisely how President Biden responded to each question he was asked.”

Republicans have struggled to link Garland’s subpoena to the Biden impeachment investigation.

So far, the party has failed to demonstrate that Biden took any official actions that would benefit his family’s business ventures, and the FBI informant who raised allegations that the president accepted a bribe has been arrested on charges related to fabricating the allegation.

The interview transcript also makes clear that none of the topics related to the Republican Party’s impeachment investigation were discussed.

And Biden gave Garland more legal cover, claiming executive privilege over the recordings. Democrats reflected that Republicans want the recording to be used only in campaign commercials.

“The full transcript of the President’s voluntary interview recounts every word he said, and these words do not show any evidence that the President abused his office – or committed any serious crime or misdemeanor. The Republicans’ claim that verbal nuances that a written transcript cannot capture could reveal evidence of impeachable conduct is simply ridiculous,” Raskin wrote.

“Listening to the President’s words, rather than reading them, will not change his words and certainly will not reveal any new evidence of an impeachable offense.”

Garland, during an appearance before the House Judiciary Committee last week, defended his decision, noting that GOP lawmakers provided no legislative purpose for the need for the tapes, giving him little justification for taking action that he said was could diminish the Justice Department’s ability to secure future interviews.

Garland noted that lawmakers already had five hours of testimony from Hur, while calling the effort to censure him “just the latest in a long series of attacks on the work of the Justice Department.”

“I see contempt as a serious matter. But I will not jeopardize the ability of our prosecutors and agents to do their jobs effectively in future investigations,” he told the panel.

Raskin also complained that the Republican Party had failed to present a convincing case.

“Committee Republicans have provided no reasonable explanation for how receipt of information in audio format would provide any evidence relevant to the Committee’s impeachment inquiry that is absent from the written transcript,” he wrote.

If the House Rules Committee approves the Garland resolution, it could proceed to a vote on the House floor, with the measure expected to be considered this week.

The legislation essentially serves as a referral to the Department of Justice, which would then be tasked with determining whether it believes a crime has been committed and whether charges should be filed.

It’s unlikely that Justice Department officials would reach a different conclusion than Garland when weighing whether he should be prosecuted.

This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story