Republicans in the House of Representatives declared war on the Biden administration, vowing to investigate "ongoing criminal investigations" at the Justice Department.
Veterans of some of the recent congressional investigations, as well as the ministry itself, are predicting they will be told to shake off the sand.
GOP lawmakers are stepping up their standoff with the administration by setting up a broad investigative team to look into what they say is "arming the government." It's a broad mandate that allows the party to investigate any government agency or program it deems suspicious, including the FBI, IRS and the intelligence community, fulfilling a key demand from a group of conservatives opposed to Speaker Kevin McCarthy. hammer bet.
And this is the first volley that promises a quick escalation. Legal experts say the Justice Department will strictly protect the best investigative cases and that prosecutors will simply not share information about an open criminal investigation. The resulting conflict promises to shatter an already strained relationship between the Justice Department and Republicans in Congress.
"It's going to be a nest of separation of powers," said former House adviser Stan Brand, who testified on January 6 before a special panel that included former President Donald Trump's top adviser Dan Skavin. "In order to protect the process from contamination, [the Department of Justice] needs to draw clearer 'lines in the sand' about what will be awarded."
The origins of the proposed commission, which would be led by a Judiciary Committee chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), raised concerns among Justice Department allies about how GOP lawmakers would use general mandates.
Notably, those seeking access to current criminal records are among the former president's staunchest political allies, whose efforts to undermine the 2020 election are the subject of an investigation by the special prosecutor's office. Several Republican members of Congress, including House committee chairman Scott Perry (R-Virginia), worked closely with Trump to get the department to investigate them.
In an interview with ABC Sunday, Perry declined to name the composition of the commission, asking, "In America, everyone is innocent until proven guilty."
On January 6, both Perry and Jordan were subpoenaed by a special committee to testify about events surrounding the attack on the Capitol by a mob of supporters of the former president. Both of them refused to obey the call.
While GOP leaders have yet to announce the members of the new task force, McCarthy told House Republicans he expects Jordan to lead it. Rep. Dan Bishop (RN.C.), who has been calling for months to create an investigative body, is considered a likely member. Rep. Thomas Massey (R-K) also said publicly that he expects to attend.
The commission gave the green light after months of lobbying by the Conservatives, which turned from a minor idea into a formal demand put forward last month by several of McCarthy's opponents. It was one of the important concessions of the Californian Republican, as he sought to appease his right wing, whose support he needed not only to pass important laws, but also in order to keep his job.
Bishop, one of his critics, told POLITICO he sees the commission as "much needed," adding, "It will bring in more resources and ensure the independence and cross-jurisdictional efforts that I see fit."
And Jordan has made it clear that he is ready to take any action against the Biden administration, including legal action if needed. Many of the areas the new commission plans to focus on are areas that Jordan has already mentioned in his letters, saying he will be forced to testify.
“The commission has absurdly broad powers that we can safely predict, if used for partisan gain, will inevitably lead to serious conflict with the Justice Department and the president,” said Daniel Richman, a lawyer at Columbia University. Professor. Richman has had his own troubles in a high-profile Justice Department investigation after he helped uncover details about former FBI Director James Comey's ties to Trump.
The Justice Department has resisted such requests for decades. In 2000, the department responded to congressional requests, known as the Linder letter, and announced its firm position against the sharing of information relating to current criminal cases. Assistant Attorney General Robert Raben wrote at the time that questions about congressional hearings "pose an inherent threat to the integrity of the Department's law enforcement and judicial functions."
This resistance dates back to the first two years of Trump's presidency, when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress. As Special Counsel Robert Mueller investigates links between the Trump campaign and Russia, Republicans in Congress investigate the origins of the investigation and look inside Mueller's office, often met with stiff opposition from the Justice Department.
Critics of the proposed investigation have pointed out that the Justice Department may have been inspired by Trump himself in responding to Republican inquiries in the House of Representatives. Of particular potential importance are the former president's attempts to prevent former White House Counsel Don McGahn from testifying before the Judiciary Committee, and the matter could take years to resolve. McGahn finally testified after Trump left office.
Lawyers warn that hasty Republican investigations could seriously harm criminal cases, especially if they gain access to compromising material or otherwise grant immunity to witnesses who may be implicated in possible wrongdoing.
Lawyer William Jeffress, who represented Richard Nixon in the Watergate trial, called the congressional committee tasked with investigating the ongoing criminal investigation "unprecedented."
Brand said he was concerned about the possible impact of the previous commission on criminal cases.
"Now the Republicans are planning to go one step further and actually intervene directly in ... open" criminal investigations, Brand said, calling it "an even more dangerous breaking down of the wall between congressional oversight and law enforcement."
Lawyers at a Jan. 6 panel said they expect House Republicans to try to use witnesses as a tool to cause contempt for Congress. But the Justice Department has also shown over the past two years that it is not necessarily moving towards change in contempt of court.
Meanwhile, Democrats in the House of Representatives are also wondering which of their friends will make the committee. New York Congressman Jerry Nadler is seen as the judiciary's top Democrat, with five more members to be appointed "in consultation with the minority leader."
On January 6, McCarthy declined to investigate after then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi overruled the decision by Jordan and Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.). Some Republicans later warned they thought the move was a mistake because it would leave them in the dark about the select committee's work.
On Jan. 6, Rep. Pete Aguilar (R-Calif.), a member of the committee, said his party learned from McCarthy that it was "a mistake" not to include people in this select group.
"Look, even if we don't agree on the issues and the agenda, I think you'll see us step in and tell the American public what exactly the Republicans are going to do behind closed doors without us." Aguilar said. .
Aguilar added that the Republican Party's proposal to investigate the ongoing investigation is "incredibly scary," and he predicted that Democrats would wait to see if a resolution to create a commission passes the House of Representatives before backing down.
Nadler defended the idea, calling the subcommittee a "weapon" and promising that Democrats would fight it "tooth and claw."
Post a Comment
Post a Comment