Transcripts For CSPAN3 Attorney 20240703

The chair recognizes the gentleman reporter from georgia, mr. Johnson, there. Attorney general garland, great to see you. Thank you for your service in the nation. And the nation watches as the republicans have no answer to why they want to focus and obsess on hunter biden receiving 2 million for maurice my after serving on a board that he said he was not qualified to serve on but yet the saudi arabians gave 2 billion to Jared Kushner who conducted middle east strategy for his dear old father, donald trump, he got 2 million for something that he is not equipped to do, which is investment banking. So republicans looking at hunter biden instead of Jared Kushner, americans do not understand how that could be. They also are increasingly alarmed about the fact that republicans in control of the house only seem to have three objectives. One, is to impeach joe biden, number two is to shut down and get rid of kevin mccarthy, and the third is to shut down government and a subset of that is to defund the doj and the fbi. Just for trying to hold donald trump accountable. The American People are watching that and they also appreciate the fact that youve had a distinguished career as a prosecutor and a doj official as well as 24 years on the bench. You served on the Second Highest Court room of the land, as a judge for 24 years, the washington, d. C. Circuit court of appeals. Thank you for your service. You were for seven years the lead circuit appeal appellate george cut. You managed that precinct and office. Thank you for that. You served on the Judicial Council for number of years. So, you are steeped in the rule of law. You are a judge extraordinaire. As a judge you never had the occasion to receive a private jet travel to an exotic location by corporate billionaires, did you . No. Never . No. Did you take any vacations at exclusive resorts paid for by a billionaire . I know these are not hypothetical russians. But this is not within my purview or realm. You were a judge extraordinaire and you know the rules and ethics because revenge had to cover by code of conduct is that not correct . All of the judges are covered by the covered of conduct. Paid for your daughters tuition to private school. I dont want to enter these stupid questions. What i would say, ive said this before, quite publicly, long ago, i hold myself to the highest possible standards of ethical responsibility imposed by the code and that is really all i can say. Is require that judges and justices avoid even appearances of the proprietary. Is that correct . I know you are asking this post hypothetically and not hypothetically, all i can say is i follow the code of judicial conduct and includes avoiding appearances. Senator whitehouse and i sent a letter to you alerting you to the fact that we were asking the Judicial Council to refer the matter of Clarence Thomas in violation of the ethics in Government Act to the Justice Department and after that representative alexandria cortez along with myself and others requested that you take the matter up directly. Have you responded to either one of those letters, if not, why not . And what action have you taken . You sent the letter we will have a i will speak to where it is at this point. This may be the reason its good for me to leave the chief justice before each of us speak because you wouldve already heard all of that. I want to thank you personally for your office and engagement camp lejeune and a vast amount of litigation that is one of the many many jobs that falls at your feet. When the jobs of falls in our feet is that we are watchdogs of the executive branch. He previously said that you are not congresses attorney, and you said you are not the presents attorney. And im assuming that you are neither on prosecutor or defense attorney and you are neither the president s prosecutor or defense attorney. And, thats why is todays investigation does deal with the fact that if you are not by definition the president s prosecutor but we have an obligation to see whether or not the president or a member of his family were in concert with the president s activities in fact needs to be overseen and admonished or prosecuted. So, i have a couple of questions for you. One of them is that you have not said this very much today but you often say i cannot comment on that because is ongoing. We ask for information you very commonly say that it is the policy, not the law, of the department of justice not to provide information on pending litigation. So far, im on track is that correct . Of said more than just the policy. The letters that weve said trace to the constitutional separation of powers that rules on the federal criminal procedure. In general, yes. One of the challenges we face is that just a matter of weeks ago a federal judge found the actions of now special prosecutor to be so outside what can he agree to that he pushed back on a settlement and nullified it and sent the u. S. Attorney going back. In light of that, dont you think that is appropriate for that portion to be considered a, preongoing investigation and for congress to look at the activities leading up to that failed plea bargain rather than wait until weeks months or years from now, and the case is fully settled. If you give me a chance, first, i do not agree with characterization of what happened in the plea. The district judge performed obligations under rule 11 to determine whether the parties were in agreement, what each had agreed to and determined there were not. We fell apart, as you know. There has been another prosecution. Thats the second thing. Mr. Weiss is in the middle of the unit ongoing prosecution on the matter you are talking about. If we believe and we do at least on this side of the day, that a pattern of behaviors occurring relative to the investigation of hunter biden, particularly including while he lived in the Vice President s home, while the operated and co mingled with the Vice President and even today as he travels with the president in light of that, can you agree that in fact it should be reasonable for us to look at a number of items including and one that i want your answer on, if limited time. He supposedly had this ability to bring a prosecution anywhere. He now has that ability. However are you concerned and should we have the right to look into the fact that political appointees in california and in the district of columbia refused to, in fact, cooperate with him in those investigations that he was charged with doing in delaware but which flowed over into their jurisdictions . Is that not, in fact, an example of those political appointees of the now president that their decision not to cooperate with him, creates at least an example of those political appointees of the now president that their decision not to cooperate with him, creates at least an appearance of political interference with the investigation of the president s and his son an activity related to joe . I am happy to answer this question hypothetically but not in the specifics because i have stayed out of this matter. In the hypothetical realm, it is the normal process of the department that is a use attorney in one district wants to bring a case of another, they go and consult. Its perfectly appropriate. They do that to determine what the policies are in that district, what the practices are, what the justices are. But a u. S. Attorney in another district does not have the authority to deny another u. S. District attorney the ability to go forward and i do have assured that mr. Weiss as the authority one way or another and i think mr. Weiss completely reflects that. Thank you, to be continued. The gentleman from california for five minutes. Thank you for leading the department with such integrity. We meet today the momentous time in our history is about to go through a great trial. By this i do not mean any of the several trials of the former president but rather a trial of the proposition that we are a nation of laws committed to the rule of law and that nobody is above the law. It is essential ingredient in all democracies. We have all professed our belief in this principle but it was never truly tested, like it was today. In this committee we are engaged in a portion of that trial, the chairman would abuse the power of the committee by trying to interfere in the present of donald trump by trying to use the committees power of subpoena to compel criminal discovery and making a Committee Defense firm for the former president. In doing so the chairman would establish a different proposition. For mr. Jordans actions he would establish the principle that the rule of law should apply to almost everyone, not the leader of his party. According to the sultanate proposition, if you are the president of United States and you lose your reelection bid, you can violate the law to stay in power, and if youre successful, then maybe you get to be president for life. And if you fail, then there is no repercussions. This proposition is also well known to the world and it is called dictatorship. Mr. Jordan hopes to camouflages result by falsely claiming that donald trump is the victim of unequal justice and hunter biden has been a beneficiary. A claim that is transparently political as is is devoid of any factual basis. It is cynical. Based on the belief that the American People cannot discern fact from fiction but i am betting on america, and history shown that those who bet against her are rarely successful and more often they end up covered in ash. I end up believing in the rule of law and i thank you for the sending it. Let me turn to the false claims asserted by the former president and some of this committee. On sunday, the former president appeared on a National News sunday program and was asked about four indictment and 91 counts facing. His response was, biden indictments . Biden and political indictments. He said to the attorney general, indict him. Misty jenna general, i want you to respond. Was he telling the truth or was he lying when he said that President Biden told you to indict him . Nobody has told me to indict and in this case, the decision to invade was made by the special counsel. That statement the president made on sunday was false . Them to say again, nobody has told me who should be indicted. And, any matter like this. And the decision about any indictment was made by mr. Smith. Let me ask you this question about the prosecution of hunter biden. The prosecutor in the case, mr. Weiss, he was appointed not by joe biden but he was appointed the first instance by donald trump. Is that correct . He was continued in that position, was he not . Correct, and continued. Can you imagine the human cry that you would hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle if you remove him from that position . Can you imagine the claims that you had removed a prosecutor was diligently investigating hunter biden . You imagine the outrage they wouldve expressed . I discussed it with many senators, on that side of the aisle. The desire an actual insistence that mr. Weiss be continued to have responsibility for that matter and i said in my confirmation gary that they were permitted to stay and they would not interfere. That was exactly the right decision. That was the right decision to give the American People the confidence that even a prosecutor chosen by the former president would continue in the investigation into the son of the current president. That was exactly the right decision. Exactly the right decision. And my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would have been screaming if it were otherwise. But, the attack on you is completely devoid of facts, of principle, but i appreciate you doing the right thing for the department of justice and more importantly, for the American People. Attorney general garland, elon musk supported biden but that he became a critic of the administration and exposed censorship. Now we report the doj has opened not one but two investigations of elon musk Mark Zuckerberg spent 400 million in 2020 tilting the election secretly for democrats , no investigations whatsoever. To the American Public please look like mafia tactics. We pay the money, you look the other way. Get in our way, we punish you. The American Public sees with this is. I want to direct your attention to feel that we will play. Obviously that is a significant matter is an ongoing criminal investigation for these operable . The atf is yes. Is in on. We know that this is and there are some restrictions but we can handle classified information we fund your department. It an issue of Wealth Creation is an issue that by longstanding policy we restrict. That is not our policy. You know how im not going to. Did. Arent you in fact two to give the answer is it appropriate. Not an answer thats appropriate when we are asking questions. We are committee that is responsible for your creation, for your department. You cannot continue to give us these answers. Are you in contempt of congress when you refuse to answer. I have the greatest respect for congress and the constitution the protection of pending investigations and ongoing investigations is a briefly discussed in another dialog a few moments ago goes back to the separation of powers which gives to the executive branch the Sole Authority to conduct prosecutions. Its a requirement of due process and those respect who is under investigation and protection of civil rights. With all due respect, iran contra, and it was a investigation. The do not stop them from getting answers. You are getting in the way of our constitutional duties. Im going to decide. Its our constitutional duty to oversight. In the video, that was her answer to questions two years ago. When i said how many asians are assets of the government and agitating in the crowd to go to the capital. I do not know the answer that question. Last time you dont know how many were. I dont know the answer to either of those questions. If they were, i dont know. I think you just perjured yourself. You want to say that again . You dont know . I have no personal knowledge. What i said the last time. You had two years to find out and that was in reference to yesterday. Isnt that a wonderful coincidence. On a misdemeanor. Meanwhile you are putting away people for 20 years for filming. Some people werent there but you have the guy on video and he says go into the capital. Before the speeches. Hes at the site of the first breach. You have all of the goods on him and its an indictment for a misdemeanor. The American Public is not buying it. I yield. Me i answer the question. Lets let the gentleman speak. Go ahead. In discovery, in the cases that were filed in respect to january 6th, the Justice Department prosecutors provided whatever info they had about the question youre asking with respect to the fbi, he has said he was not an employee or informants of the fbi. Mr. Epstein has been charged and there is a proceeding going on today. Chair recognizes the gentleman from california. My colleague said that you should be held in contempt of congress and that is quite rich because the guy leaving the hearing room, mr. Jordan, is about 500 days into the dating his subpoena. 500 days. If we talk about contempt of congress, lets get real. Jim jordan, are you serious, a witness to one of the greatest crimes ever committed, a crime or more prosecution have occurred than any other, refuses to help this country and we get lectured about compliance. Jim jordan will not honor a lawful subpoena. Are you kidding me. Are you kidding me. There is no credibility on that side. You are serious, they are not. You are fair, they are not. I will commute to the law firm of insurrection llp where they work every day on behalf of the client. They do that at the expense of millions of americans to stay open, and would like to see ukraine sites we do not help russia. Thats the expense that this clown show shows, but they have real responsibilities that affect real americans. The difference between autocracy and democracy. And one side that believes in ruling. You tried to comply with this committee, and in fact, last week, what are your special agents came for an interview, brought his lawyer, and was told that he cannot have his lawyer present. Mr. Jordan, who he knows so much about the constitution, cannot afford one of your employees one of the basic constitutional rights, to have a lawyer present. Defendant to call d. C. Police. Are you going with that standoff that occurred . Generally, yes. Your office sent a letter detailing it that you are willing to comply, and i like to submit that to the record with. No objection. Will point mr. Weiss . Trump was the last person who appointed him to the position of u. S. Attorney. I pointed him to the special counsel last month. Appointed john durham . Mr. Durham was appointed by president trump. And he got appointed special counsel. These guys are upset that Donald Trumps appointed prosecutors are not doing enough of the corruption that trump wants them to do. They are either following along or they are not as corrupt as biden, thats what they are asking to have been here. Also, doesnt it seem they wanted both ways when it comes to the special counsel . A lot of questions suggested that the special counsel should be independent but when they did not like the directions, you are asked why you did not interfere more or involve yourself more. Did you get the sense that you are stuck here . When i make an appointment, for the prosecutor, the appointment is without respect of the outcome of the case. Your office is made a number of reforms 2702, targeting foreign nationals. But those forms have not been put into laws. 702 is one of the best weapons we have to go after fentanyl. Would you support putting those reforms into law so we do not have to Live Administration to administration . I would. Section 702 provides us with the greatest Justice Department leeway. The greatest amount of intelligence that we receive about dangerous threats to the u. S. From foreign nationals. I am quite aware and sensitive to Civil Liberties concerns with respect to the queries and for that reason i put into place and extended some of those at the end of his term. And i put further once in place, leading to a dramatic reduction in the number of queries and a dramatic reduction in the number of noncompliant queries. I believe those are appropriate reforms, and i would be in favor of codifying them. Thank you mr. Attorney general. Thank you for doing something which m is unwilling to do, testified to congress. Attorney general, on august 11th, 2023, you appointed david weiss, for the district of delaware as a special counsel preceding the investigation of hunter biden. I do not think the question has been asked, why did you choose to appoint him . Explanation was given , to the extent i can give. The one i gave an sense of the congress which is that mr. Weiss requested, i promise to give him all of the resources that he needed, he reached the stage of the investigation where he thought it would be appropriate and under those extraordinary circumstances, of the Public Interest would be served by making them special counsel. Who recommended him, how was he brought to you or presented to you that this would be the best person for this . Im not going to get into internal discussions. He asked that he be appointed as special counsel and i granted the request. Im not going to get into internal deliberations with the drg. You had no speculations with the white house. Is that accurate . No speculations. Nothing came from the white house. On august 2023, the Washington Post claimed mr. Weiss worked with hunter biden and Hunter Bidens late brother , bo. Was there a relationship with the biden family, that your werewolf . I dont know. He worked together on legal cases prior to the years. You were unaware . In the article, he claims it was inevitable for mr. Weiss in the present cross paths. They knew each other. You were unaware . Unaware, but attorneys that were in the practice get to know people, very difficult to not know attorneys. Mr. Weiss said the ultimate authority of the investigation of the son of the president appointing his special counsel. You stand by that . That in fact there was the ultimate authority was still there with mr. Weiss to make determinations on the case. Still as pencil counsel. It stops there and thats been determined. Im not going to talk about any individuals in the Justice Department. As i said or. Individuals has led to a serious threat to their safety. I would say the supervisor of this investigation was mr. Weiss. Hes responsible for all the decisions that were made. Many of the things youre saying occurred during the Previous Administration. I apologize. There was absolutely a discussion by leslie wolf that if they told investigators got involved with this that they would ultimately be issues. Do you still believe that at this point, that the entire investigation has moved in the correct discretion was handled by the correct discretion of the individuals involved . Mr. Weiss was a long standing career prosecutor. Was appointed by president trump. He has an outstanding reputation and have confidence that he will proceed as appropriate under the end of his investigation, he will submit a public report just like mr. Durham youre just like mr. Mueller. You will be available for you to ask him questions about why he did various things that were done. I yield the balance of my time. Esther garland, what changed . On july 10th, 2020 three he said ive not requested special counsel designation. August 11th, you announced that hes now the special counsel. What happened in that 31 days . As i said publicly several days before my announcement, i think three days, mr. Weiss had asked to become special counsel haney explained that it had reached the stage of this investigation were he thought that appropriate. What stage was that . I promise to give them the resources he needed. What stage are we in . Are we in the beginning stage, middle stage, the end stage . They keep hiding the ball stage . This when i would go back to the videotape where i said im not permitted to discuss ongoing investigations. Isnt that convenient . Something changed in 31 to 32 days from july 10th to august 11th. I think two whistleblowers keyboard and a judge called a plea bead s on the plea deal. I think thats what happened. The chair recognizes the gentleman from california. Thank you, mr. Chair. The House Judiciary Committee has a responsibility of helping to ensure the rule of law. Unfortunately, this Committee Chairman ignored a bipartisan congressional subpoena. The horrible precedent set by this chairman has damaged the credibility of all congressional committees in seeking information of witnesses and damaged the rule of law. Attorney general garland, thank you for your Public Service and thank you for being here today. I like to start by showing a video january 6th. And ask you some questions about that day. [ video played ] attorney general garland, they were charged over 1100 defendants in regard to the attack on our capital, correct . Thats correct. Im going to stay two facts are the people who showed up who attacked the Nations Capital supporters of donald trump. They attacked the capital, stopped congress from certifying the fact that donald trump lost the election. Those two facts were so horrible that some in the rightwing media and some republican members of congress could not handle that, so they made up conspiracy theories. In fact, donald trump call january 6th a beautiful day. He said the people who showed up at love in their hearts. Public and member of congress oggeri six was like a normal tourist visit, and some republicans have said there were no weapons used on january 6th. Attorney general garland, or their weapons used in the attack on january 6th . Yes, in the video, you already saw some of the weapons that were used and there were obviously many more in the many hours of video. Another Conspiracy Theory is that somehow the fbi actually orchestrated this attack appears im going to go through some cases that have gone through completion and resulted in sentencing. Joe biggs was sentence to 17 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and other counts related to the attack on our Nations Capital. Have you seen any shred of evidence that joe biggs was an fbi agent . No. In fact, joe biggs was a member of the proud boys. This is the assistant u. S. Attorney connor munro stated about joe biggs and the proud boys in court. He stated quote, they saw themselves as Donald Trumps army, fighting to keep their preferred leader in power no matter what the law or the words had to say about it. On september 4th, joe biggs stated, that he is confident will pardon him. He said quote, oh, i know hell pardon us for we are his supporters. We went there like he asked. Must now ask about the case of stuart rose who was sentenced to 18 years in prison for the attack on our Nations Capital. Have you seen any shred of evidence that Stewart Rhodes was an fbi agent . No. In fact he was the founder of the oath keepers. A far right paramilitary organization. He said donald trump called them up as militia. And then sentenced to 22 years on the attack in our Nations Capital. Have you ever seen any evidence that in recovery tori it was an fbi agent . He was not an fbi agent. He was the leader of the proud boys. What happened on january 6th is that Donald Trumps supporters showed up because he told them to. They marched to the capital because he told him to. He tapped the capital because he told him to stop the steal. That is the truth and that is how history is going to record it. Thank you for prosecuting those who attacked our Nations Capital. I yield back. The gentleman youll spectrum the chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina. Thank you mr. Chairman. I have a slide appear and ill start. In october or march of 2022, mr. Weiss was denied the ability to bring charges against hunter biden and the district of columbia. In april of that same year, you testified before the Senate Appropriations committee that mr. Weiss was free to run the investigation without interference from the doj. According to the irs whistleblower, there was a meeting in october of 2022 where mr. Weiss that he was not the deciding official on whether charges were filed and we know that because we have handwritten notes from the irs whistleblowers that was confirmed in an email to people in the meeting. Later in january, mr. Weiss was denied the ability to bring charges against against hunter biden and the Central District of california. You testified before the senate Judiciary Committee in march of this year that he had full authority. That weiss confirms that to us in a letter in june that he had been granted quote, full authority over this matter. But then he kind of backed up and june is a just kidding. My charge in authority is geographically limited to my home district. In delaware. Of course you appoint him as special counsel. So why the heck has his story changed so many times over the course of these investigations . Congressman, i have seen all three letters, read them quite carefully. They are all consistent with each other and i urge everyone watching this on television or anyone whos interested to look at those three letters. They are not inconsistent with each other and theres no change in the story. Three you agree that and you said this publicly that he had ultimate authority. Prior to the appointment of special counsel. I clean this repeatedly here and explain this in another proceeding. Mr. Weiss would have the authority to bring a case in any jurisdiction in which he wanted to and mr. Weiss has confirmed that he would have that authority. I explained that if he had to bring a case in another jurisdiction, as a matter of mechanics, it would require me or delegatee of mine to sign a 515 order that is very common. Mr. Attorney general, forgive me for a second. When you say you have ultimate when he wrote a letter on your behalf in june, i have ultimate authority. This is prior to the designation of special counsel for ultimate means you can go wherever you want to. And that particular point, but he filed charges in the district of South Carolina he would not have that ability, correct . He would have to go through that u. S. Attorney. So thats not ultimate authority. All we would have to do is ask me for 515 authority and i would sign it right away, just like when he asked me to be special counsel. Within three days i signed that. s famous we didnt have ultimate authority. He had the authority because i promised you would have the authority. But he did not have that authority. Heres where im going. He was denied the ability to bring charges in march of 22 and the district of columbia, if he was denied the ability to bring charges in january of 23 in the Central District of california, thats awful authority. These u. S. Attorneys operate as gatekeepers, so thats awful authority to do much of anything. You know whats remarkable to me . We sit here and we look at this and his story has changed so may times. You know whose story doesnt change . Mr. Shapley, mr. Ziglar. The emails that confirmed that he said im not the deciding person for charges filed. You know what the response was from his colleague at work yeah, you covered it all, gary. That is consistent with what mr. Weiss has done is this shell game and saying that he has authority. He doesnt have authority. With these gatekeepers of the u. S. Attorneys office in the district of columbia and in the Central District of california, they would have the gatekeeping authority on whether charges are brought in their jurisdictions. That designation, correct . Those words have no meaning. Gatekeepers, et cetera. Mr. Weiss said he was never denied authority. Im the one with the authority to decide who can prosecute in a different jurisdiction and i promise that he would have that authority. I do not see any inconsistency here. I was not at the meeting that mr. Shapley was referring to. I know what i guaranteed and i know what mr. Weiss has said i guaranteed. Mr. Chairman, i yield the balance of my time. Its a simple question. If he already had it, why does he need it . You said in your statement on august 11, that he will continue , continue to have the authority to bring charges. Where, when and wherever he decides. So how can he continue to have a power that you just gave him . Thats a fundamental question the gentleman from South Carolina was asking. If he already had it, why does he need it . Cartwright answered that he continue to have the authority. Did you tell him ahead of time that he could get 515 status anytime . When did you tell him he could get that if he requested it . I made absolutely clear. When . From the beginning in my statements to the senate that he would have the authority to make any decisions that he wanted to and bring prosecutions he thought were appropriate. Same the gentle lady from washington is recognized for five minutes. Thank you. Attorney general garland, thank you for your Tremendous Service to this country. Somebody who was trapped in the gallery on january 6th, i have to admit its still hard for me to look at the video and imagine that that happened at our u. S. Capital. And am deeply grateful that you have lead this nation towards accountability of all those who were involved, including the former president you have done so with full and complete attention to the fact that with a team around you that focuses on thorough investigation, and with a Clear Mission that you have stated over and over and over again, despite the asked and answered on the other side that the Justice Department works for the American People. This is a night and a transformation from a Justice Department that was constantly used by donald trump for his own political gain and it is my firm belief that we have to hold those accountable who try to destroy the country. Including the former president. Or we risk losing our country altogether. So i thank you for your steadfast leadership. It is just sad that this committee has also been transformed into a soapbox for political conspiracy theorists, instead of focusing on the really important issues that the American People care about. So thats what im going to try to do. Im going to focus on the critical crisis of reproductive freedom and efforts to try to strip reproductive freedom from people across this country. As you know, decades long project of the extreme right wing materialized last year when five republican appointed justices overturned 50 years of precedent that established the constitutional right to abortion. Of one of the one in four women who saw what it would do to poor women, for lack and brown and in just people across this country, i spoke out and shared that story. In the 22 states were republicans control the state legislature and governor midship today, all have moved to restrict reproductive rights. More than 25 million women of childbearing age now live in states where Abortion Access has been curtailed. In washington state, my home state, the Seattle Times reported that we are seeing increasing numbers of abortion patients not only from neighboring idaho, which we knew we would see, but also from other Southern States were these restrictions are enforced. Mr. Chairman, i see unanimous consent to enter the Seattle Times article into the record. She traveled 2000 miles secretly for her washington abortion. Why patients from the south are coming here. Objection. Is our fundamental freedoms are threatened by extreme republicans across the country, we trust that the doj will initiate investigations and File Lawsuits to protect reproductive rights. With respect to method kristin, what has the department done to protect access to this very safe abortion drug that women can take it home safely and to end a pregnancy . So the fda authorized the use of it as safe an effect of and they did it back in 2000. Thats been challenged first in the District Court when we defended the fda in that matter. There was an appeal to the Circuit Court which narrowed the District Courts opinion in some ways but allowed it to go forward and another. We have filed a petition which has been granted i think in the spring court of the United States. Very important work. My home state of washington has one of the highest rates of religiously affiliated hospitals in country. With her state insurance Commissioner Office reporting in 2021, there were several counties lacking even one secular hospital. This is an issue under the emergency medical treatment and labor act when patients in need of abortion care is a life saving treatment are denied services under the hospital policies. What does the department do to enforce this law, mandating that every hospital that receives medicare funds provide quote, necessary stabilizing treatment to patients, including abortion care. This is a federal law. It especially preempts any inconsistent state law. For that reason, we filed a lawsuit in idaho and one in the District Court with respect to an idaho law that impinged on the rights granted. We have filed i think a number of statements of interest and other places and are continuing to look at where it would be appropriate to intervene. You are on record stating that women who reside in states that have banned access to reproductive care must remain free to seek the care in states where it is legal. I thank you for that and you really discussed the progress made by the task force and doj to ensure that pregnant people retain the right to travel . Look, my view about this right to travel is the same as Justice Kavanaughs in his separate opinion. He said this is not a particularly difficult question. The right to travel is a constitutional right and it allows women in a state that bars abortion to travel and obtain an abortion in a state in which its permitted. Thank you, attorney general for your commitment to upholding the rule of law in our country. Appreciate your service. Three by the gentleman from oregon is recognized for five minutes. Thank you mr. Attorney general for being here. I would like to go back briefly to your remarks regarding before the senate when you are confirmed and your promise regarding mr. Weiss. Can you explain to us in him a little more detail who you promised you would keep mr. Weiss on this case . To whom was a promise made . A number of senators in my meetings with them asked me to make that promise. I think that was discussed in my interchange with the senator from tennessee, i believe. That promise that you made lead you to believe that even if if mr. Weiss displayed a leveling incompetence, that you would be precluded from asking him to step down or precluded from replacing him. Look, when someone asks me to make this appointment, they didnt ask me, depending on what the outcome was. Mr. Weiss has made his appointment. s decisions. And mr. Weiss is an experienced federal prosecutor with extensive experience and with sufficient credibility to be appointed by president trump. I just have no grounds for interviewing here. You have an answer the question. The question was really what level of incompetence displayed by a prosecutor under your control would it take for you to make a change . But lets move on. The level of incompetence im referring to and i just read this to you. This is the same weiss who was in an investigation is trashed by whistleblowers. Its the same weiss who ran an investigation which agents were allegedly prevented from asking about joe biden. Obstructed in their office to pursue questions and the same weiss that reported the statute of limitations to run out on hunters major tax offenses even though he had the option to extend it. The same weiss who did not indict on major tax felonies and cut a plea deal that brushed aside a felony gun charge for the same weiss a widely and sweetheart deal the cost federal judge to block and strap immunity grant that even the prosecutor admitted had never been seen in a previous plea deal. So theres a list of what i would suggest under many people s definition would be incompetence. Are you saying thats inadequate for you to have questioned what he was doing . Im saying all of these are allegations. I dont know the facts of them are. Has stayed out of this investigation. I was not present at any of the meetings discussed. Some of the meetings occurred under the Previous Administration where mr. Weiss was assigned to the matter by the previous Justice Department. Im not in a position to comment on them. Thats too bad. Theres a scope of investigation memo generally issued when we start these things out. Who issued that scope of investigation memo to mr. Weiss . Was it done back when he was originally appointed to take on the biden case . Is that when the memo was telling him what he was supposed to do, was issued . Is there a scope of investigation memo . Theres a scope of investigation with regard to special counsel and that has been publicly transmitted to the chairman of this Judiciary Committee and the senate Judiciary Committee. Who wrote it . Who wrote that scope . Who decided what should be within the scope of that investigation . Im sorry . Who wrote the memo . Who decided the scope . I decided what should be in the scope, if you compare that to the scope of many other special councils that basically is modeled on the form on the format weve used in the past. Not only in the Us Administration with the previous one. And your remarks delivered on august 11th of this year, concerning the appointment of david weiss a special counsel, you say, upon considering his request, as well as quote, the extraordinary circumstances relating to this matter,. Tells what those extraordinary circumstances were. Im sorry . These are your remarks back on august 11th and it says come on tuesday this week, mr. Weiss advised me im quoting for your memo. In his judgment, his investigation has reached a stage where he should continue his work as special counsel and he asked to be so appointed. Upon considering his request, as well as quote, the extraordinary circumstances related to this matter, ive concluded its in the best Public Interest to appoint a special counsel. What were those extraordinary circumstances youre talking about three met look, all the special councils including the appointment by mr. Barr with respect to mr. Jerome uses those races. The reason he uses those races is because us in the special counsel regulation. I said was much as i can say with respect to that without discussing matters relating to a pending investigation. I cant discuss matters with respect to a pending investigation for the reasons ive said. Thank you. Yield back. Three met the gentleman from california is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Garland, i want to welcome you today to this hearing. I want to turn our attention to something very interesting. More important dose the most important thing on main street today in my districts drug addiction, narcotics, trafficking, fentanyl. Im going to quote you june 23rd of this year. You said, and i , the u. S. Government continues to do everything in our power to disrupt fentanyl trafficking and to prevent more of our communities from being devastated by the fentanyl epidemic. We are targeting every step of the movement, manufacturing and the sale of fentanyl from start to finish. Mr. Garland, i believe that the only thing the cartel leaders fear is the United States prison. I want to thank you for the good job you recently extradited oviedo gomez lopez Chapel Center thank you for the good job. My question is, do you have plans to extradite additional cartel leaders from other parts of the world to the United States to face u. S. Justice in the u. S. Prison sentence . I dont want to get into that discussion, diplomatic discussions over the matter, but obviously we have indicted the other two pitots. Two pitot being the nickname given to the sons of l chapel. Any of those . How many are there . Cant remember. Maybe four more. Maybe five. Im not too sure exactly. Theyve been publicly indicted and of course we will seek the extradition and the upper tension of everyone weve indicted. The apprehension and indictment of these individuals requires that you have cooperationur office to bring these cartel leaders to justice . Theyve obviously worked with us with respect to oviedo. Is definition by the mexicans led to the deaths of a significant number of mexican marines. Ovi does people fighting back with 50 caliber machine guns and the marines having to use blackhawk attack helicopters in order to arrest him. These u. S. Marines are mexican . U. S. Marines . Sorry, mexican marines. Mexican marines played an Important Role in the apprehension of the cartel leaders. Esther garland, would you characterize corporation right now with mexicans as being good or not good . I would say cooperation can always be better. We have an enormous problem with respect to fentanyl coming from mexico from its manufacturer there, based on the precursors coming from china. Based on the cartel leaders. How can we as members of Congress Help you make sure that other countries have stronger cooperating relationship with us . How can we make sure that they cooperate to their fullest abilities with you . I appreciate that west. Ill have to think about it more. I personally traveled to mexico twice to try to get cooperation with respect to these matters. We met how important is it to your job to fighting narco fentanyl . Its very important. Fentanyl poses a National Security problem for the United States. Any work with us to make sure we put guardrails around put guardrails Safety Measures on 702 two ensure that those investigative weapons are not turned against u. S. Citizens . Absolutely. The 702 is a crucial, essential tool. But like all tools, has to be properly controlled and we would be happy to work with congress to make sure the Civil Liberties are protected. My lastminute. I wanted to turn to the antitrust area, the European Union and the digital market act. Digital markets act which is designed to protect consumers in europe. Yet it looks like most of their focus is on american firms. No European Companies or other foreign operators European Union are being targeted. It looks like its only american firms operating in europe and it looks like the doj is working to support the efforts of the europeans and implementing the Digital Marketing act. I have 18 seconds. Im going to submit a written question to your office, but my focus, my interest is making sure american jobs, American Companies are successful around the globe when there not in any way hampered from working overseas. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. I ran out of time. Three met the gentleman yields that. The gentleman from new jersey is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome attorney general. Following her confirmation, americans were promised they were getting a focused , nonpartisan to leave their federal Law Enforcement. I have my doubts back then. The last two years more and confirmed in my mind those fears are never in my life would i have thought that i would see such a politicized doj. Never in my life would i have thought i would see such a department of justice that didnt obey their own rules. Never in my life did i think i would see the egregious investigations conducted under your watch, or the blatant disregard of the First Amendment by fbi field officers under your watch. I never in my life did i think i would see our great doj tune turn into a politicized weapon to be wielded by investigation to attack lyrical rivals. I still hold the thousands of hardworking staff with high regard but unfortunately there are some within the department in my mind who have betrayed their oaths. For that, you must be held accountable. Hold you accountable the labeling of parents as domestic terrorists standing up for their proper education of their own children. I hold you accountable for the anticatholic memo. Imagine sending agents undercover into Roman Catholic churches because they were supposedly domestic terrorists. And i hold you accountable for unleashing a special counsel with a history of botched investigations on our current president s political rival. The department under your leadership, im sorry to say, and i am sorry to say, has become an enforcement arm of the Democratic National committee. If there is a perceived threat to the democratic party, this doj attacks every single time. But when there are actual threats against conservatives, this doj stays put. Protesters outside, violent protesters outside the Supreme Court justices home unpunished. Attacks on prolife centers unpunished. The two tiered system of justice is clear and its clear to the American Public. The buck stops with a man in charge. That man is you. The actions of the doj are on you. The decline of Americans Trust in our federal Law Enforcement is on you. The book little weaponization of the doj is on you. Attorney general, i need a simple yes or no to the following. Just yes or no because we dont have much time. Do you agree that traditional catholics are violent extremists, yes or no . Three met let me answer what you said in that long list and ill be happy to answer all of those. Attorney general, i control the time. s you control time by asking me a substantial number of things. I didnt ask you those things. Three met attorney general, to the chair, ask you do you agree that traditional catholics are violent extremists . I have no idea what their traditional means here. Catholics i go to church. Yes or no. Someone with my family background would discriminate against any religion is so outrageous so absurd. Mr. Attorney general, it was your fbi that did this. It was your fbi, and we have the memos and emails, or sending undercover agents into catholic churches. Both i and the director of the fbi so we were appalled. Of said we were appalled by that memo. You agree that they are not extremists. We are appalled by that memo. Are the extremists or not . Im asking a simple question. Say no if you think that was wrong. They are not extremists, no. Three met was anyone fired for drafting or circulating the anticatholic memo . You have in front of you the inspection divisions investigation. Yes or no, please. I dont know the answer to that. Siu madea reparents attending School Board Meetings should be categorized . Should parents the go to School Board Meetings that are vocal about their kids education be classified as domestic terrorists . Of course not in my memo made clear that vigorous objections to policies in schools are protected by the First Amendment. The president accused you, not the president but the staff and it was in the wall street journal and leaked out of mismanaging the hunter biden probe. Do you agree . Yes or no. It was in the wall street journal article. Do i agree with the wall street journal . The information he released that said you botched this probe. I think ive dealt with the hunter biden investigation in the way of told you. I remain mr. Chairman i yield my time. The gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you attorney general garland for your decades of service to the department of justice. To our country and your constitution. Its been truly Honorable Service and i think the American Public as a whole recognizes that. I was struck by and appreciate your Opening Statement in which you made Crystal Clear your fidelity to the u. S. Constitution and the rule of law and a reaffirmation of the attorney general is on the president s lawyer. This is a Welcome Change from the rhetoric and actions of some of your predecessors in the last administration when they appeared before us. As we all should know, the Justice Department works for the American People to prosecute crimes, uphold the rule of law and american individual rights and keep our country safe. Congress of course is a legitimate duty of oversight, but the blatantly political and misleading rhetoric which we have been subjected to today undermines the seriousness of this committees work and ultimately the legitimacy and core values of our american institutions. Its painfully obvious to anyone who cares about a constitution that are calling socalled this hearing not to conduct legitimate oversight, but to once again defend the indefensible actions of the disgraced, twice impeached and a repeatedly indicted in multiple jurisdictions, former president. And to distract from their inability to perform the most basic function of congress , to fund the federal government. So they are basically accusing the u. S. Department of justice of bias against the former president and his allies. But its important to know that those who are noisily and shamelessly trying to subvert our Justice System are the same ones who seem to have both the most to fear from those ongoing investigations and the most to gain politically and personally from impeding them. As others have noted, these attempts include trying to defund the office of special counsel, jack smiths office altogether. I, like so many americans, find his behavior contemptible and far beneath what we should expect from our countrys leaders. Mr. Attorney general, why is it so important for both upholding the will of law and maintaining public trust that our Justice System be able to conduct investigations into wrongdoing, free from political interference . The criminal law can impose incredible sanctions on people. It can take away their liberty. That means due process has to be followed during investigations and that partisan considerations not play a role. That Civil Liberties and civil rights are protected and the only way that can happen is if prosecutors are permitted to go about their work without any external, impermissible interventions or considerations. Thank you. I did want to take the opportunity, since this is an oversight hearing, to conduct some actual oversight. There was an important topic in her testimony. Safeguarding the right to vote. During the previous demonstration, asked the Department Officials in this Committee Room what actions they were taking on this critical issue and they couldnt answer me. So could you describe the efforts that your department of justice is taking to protect the right to vote . A fundamental pillar of our democracy. Yes. Congress in the form of the Voting Rights act and the Civil Rights Act authorized the department to bring cases and to enforce the constitution of the United States with respect to the right to vote. As im sure you know in the Shelby County case, the Supreme Court eliminated one of our tools. Section 5 of the Voting Rights act but we retain section 2 which the Supreme Court again endorsed in its last term. So we have brought cases in a number of jurisdictions where we felt that state laws unconstitutionally impinged on the right to vote. We have supported private parties when they brought those cases, particularly in redistricting cases that violated the requirement of section 2. We have a task force with respect to threats against election workers because threatening election workers and stopping them from going about their work is a significant way in which the right to vote can be impinged. Thats a sampling. Three met we certainly saw evidence of that in pennsylvania during the last president ial election. So we really appreciate all those efforts. I find this hearing very disturbing and that we have elected officials misleading the public, attacking the foundations of our democracy and trying to so distrust on one the most critical rollers of that democracy, the u. S. Department of justice its unacceptable and its un american. Mr. Chair, see unanimous consent to enter into the record the fact sheet on the department of justices work under mr. Attorney generals leadership to secure america cans right to vote and protect our Election Officials and workers. Without objection. I yield back. Committee will be in order. The gentleman from virginia is recognized for five minutes. Attorney general, on august 11, 2023 you appointed mr. Weiss special counsel. He wrote a letter to the house and senate Judiciary Committees were you cited extraordinary circumstances requiring the appointment. You avoided answering the question when mr. Bentz askew and all give you another chance to answer it. What were those extraordinary circumstances . Three michael had to give you the same answer i gave before. Gave us much as i can give which is that he thought it reached a stage where it would be appropriate and i promised him that i would give him any resource that he needed and that he asked for. To go further, we are going into pending investigation. Three met lets talk about that. On march 1st, you told the senate Judiciary Committee that mr. Weiss had the full authority to bring cases in other jurisdictions of he felt necessary. On june 7th, mr. Weiss wrote to the Judiciary Committee stating he had been granted ultimate authority over the matter including responsibility for designing where and when to file charges. I june 30th, he had changed his tune and said his charging authority was geographic limited and it would be up to the u. S. Attorneys office. And you to determine whether he could partner on the case. If not, he could request social attorney status from the ag pursuant to 515 and he had been assured that if necessary, he would be granted 515 authority in dc, Central District of california or any other district where charges could be brought. Let me ask you, is there some distinct Legal Authority a special attorney status . Is there some distinct Legal Authority not a special attorney status . Section 515 permits the attorney general to sign in order to authorize a prosecutor to work in another district. Of you had already decided that he had full authority, why did you feel it was necessary to sign a document . Sorry . Why did mr. Weiss feel that he would need that extra authority if you convey to him that he would have all that authority . Youll have to speak with mr. Weiss about that. I think is three letters are quite that he understood he would have the necessary authority. The note u. S. Attorney could block him. We asked you earlier about his request for this authority and we need to know who he spoke to about this authority and when. Before he asked you in august, he had discussions with others at the department. Who did he discuss special Counsel Authority with and when did he do that . Im not going to discuss internal deliberations of the department. Mr. Weiss would have the authority that he needed and the moment he asked for the authority, i gave it to him. Did he discuss it with the Deputy Attorney general . Im not going to get into discussions of deliberations with the Justice Department. Thats not a valid objection. That is. It has to do with the ability of the Justice Department to do its communications, just as your deliberations with your staff and with other members are protected by the constitution. Three madea telling who had constitution conversations and when doesnt do that. The substance of those deliberations is detailing you and when does not implicate those. Im not going to get into the internal discussions of the department or who talk to you about what. Mr. Weiss has told this committee that he well understood his ability to bring a case wherever he wanted and i have said he had that ability. To think that the extraordinary circumstances that you cited in the appointment have anything to do with the june 22nd and july 19th testimony of whistleblowers, special agents shapley and zigler . I think it has anything to do with mr. Shapely, no. I yield to the chairman. Mr. Garland, have you or are you investigating who leaked the information that appeared in the Washington Post on october 6th, 2022 about this investigation . About the hunter biden investigation . Swing youre saying there was in october 2022 three met Washington Post rights story about the hunter biden investigation. Have you investigating who the that information to the Washington Post . I dont know the answer to that. Has it been referred to the Inspector General, and you know that . I dont want my answer to suggest that there is or isnt such an investigation. I know that the Inspector General has sent a letter to congress explaining that he had an ongoing assessment with respect to the whistleblower charges. I dont know if thats what youre referring to. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from colorado. I think the chairman and the Ranking Member for holding this hearing. Thank you attorney general for your testimony and appearing before us in your service to our country. I have Great Respect for my colleague from junior. Im a bit confused as to why they have zeroed and refocused in on this particular letter in such a myopic way. What your testimony and i wrote down words sure that the moment he, meaning the chump appointed u. S. Attorney, mr. Weiss, asked for the authority, i gave it to him seems pretty straightforward. As you said, the letters that mr. Weiss has written to this committee are publicly available and i encourage anyone whos watching these hearings to certainly review those, as you said clearly, they are consistent with each other in terms of reading those letters collectively. I think its important, mr. Attorney general, to perhaps talk a bit about your record and your background in light of the various attacks unfortunately by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. My understanding is that you served as a special assistant to the attorney general of the United States early on in your career. My first job out of being a law clerk. First job. After law clerk. Fema you are later in private practice and you left private practice to become aligned attorney at the department of justice. An assistant u. S. Attorney. A federal prosecutor taking on organized crime cases, Drug Trafficking cases, violent crimes. I dont know about the organized crime of the organized Drug Trafficking, yes. We met following that, you served in the department of justice as the principal associate attorney general. Deputy attorney general. In that capacity you supervised a range of high profile cases, is that right . Yes, they were highprofile. The unabomber case. Yes. The atlanta olympic bombing. Yes. The Oklahoma City bombing case. Yes. s payment you received praise without letter investigation from the then republican governor of the state of oklahoma, is that right . He was a very good partner in the investigation with respect to oklahoma. Three met you are then nominated and appointed to the federal bench, u. S. District court of appeals here in washington dc, correct . Swing for the u. S. Court of appeals. s payment you confirmed by a bipartisan majority. Over 20 senators voted for your confirmation. Ill take your word for it. You served on the bench for a significant period of time, ultimately becoming a chief judge. Thats right. You left that position to return to the department of justice where you started your career and you are confirmed into this position in which you know hold on a bipartisan basis. Yes. I think its unfortunate, mr. Attorney general, that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have completed questions about various cases that the department has brought with impugning your integrity and i can assure you that the vast majority of the American People dont share their opinion and that my constituents had folks back in colorado are grateful for your lifetime of service that you have given to this country. And i recognize that this is i suspect a frustrating exercise in terms of this hearing because i suspect that youd like to be talking about the prevalence of fentanyl in our communities and the work the department of justice is doing in the gun violence epidemic in our country and the work that the fbi and other Law Enforcement agencies are doing to stop it. My hope is on the next oversight hearing, perhaps those can be the focus in the bulk of the hearing. Id be remiss if i didnt say one note about a rule the department of justice recently promulgated. As you recall in 2021, march of 2021, i sent a letter to the department of justice requesting that the department of justice issue a rule regulating stabilizing races. One of these braces was used in the mass shooting in my community in boulder, colorado were 10 coloradans lost their lives including one police officer. The department of justice issued a final rule earlier this year on this precise topic. Unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have made it their mission to overturn this rule. I wonder if you might be able to elaborate a bit on how the rule was drafted and deliberated within the department. Yes. That horrific event in boulder is one of several examples of the use of attachment of a semiautomatic pistol onto a stabilizing brace intended to permit its firing from the shoulder. That violates the rule, the congressional statute against short barreled rifles being possessed. Anything under 16 inches. The reason for a weapon and the ability to aim such a weapon on the shoulder. All that was done in this rule was to make clear that if you convert a pistol into a rifle, designed to be fired from the shoulder, you are subject to the registration requirements. Fema thank you, mr. Attorney general. I yield back. The attorney general has requested a short break so we will be back for the remainder of our members questions