Transcripts For CSPAN3 Attorney 20240703

Welcome to the hearing on Oversight Department of justice. Chair recognizes the gentleman from california to lead us in the pledge. Please stand. Please face whichever flag is most appropriate for your direction. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god with liberty and justice for all. Chernow recognizes himself her Opening Statement. The fix is in. Even with the facesaving indictment last week of hunter biden, everyone knows the fix is in. 4 1 2 years the department of justice has been investigating mr. By the, an investigation run by david wiess, an investigation that limited the number of witnesses agents could interview, an investigation a prohibited agent from referring to the president as the big guy in any interviews they did get to do. An investigation that curtailed attempts to interview biden by giving a heads up. An investigation that noted run by mr. Weiss where they told the congress three different stories in 33 days. They told this committee on june 7, david wiess said, i have ultimate authority to determine when, where and whether to bring charges. 23 ds later, he told this committee, actually, i can only bring charges in my u. S. Attorney district, district of delaware. To further confuse matters, on july 10, he told senator graham , i have not sought special counsel status, rather, i have had discussions with the department of justice. An investigation run by mr. Weiss that negotiated a plea deal that the Federal District court declined to accept. A plea deal so ridiculous that the judge asked this question, is there any precedents for agree not to prosecute crimes that have nothing to do with the charges being diverted . The response from the doj lawyer, i am not aware of any, your honor. A plea deal so ridiculous that the judge also asked, have you ever seen a diversion agreement with an agreement not to prosecute was so broad that it encompasses crimes in a different case . The response from the doj lawyer, no, your honor, we have. Not only was a sweetheart deal rejected, but according to the near times, there was an even sweeter deal, an earlier deal, a deal in which mr. Biden would not have to plead guilty to anything. 4 1 2 years, and all that, and that we get a special counsel. Now we get a special counsel. Who does the attorney general pick . David wiess, the guy who let all that happen. He couldve selected anyone. He could have picked anyone inside government, outside government, but he picks the one guy he knows will project joe biden. He picks david wiess. Here is what the ag said in his august 11 announcement of david wiess as special counsel. I am confident that mr. Weiss carry out his responsibility in an evenhanded and urgent matter. Urgent manner . Every witness we have talked to, the two f. B. I. Whistleblowers that came forward , the two f. B. I. Agents on the case, they have all said this thing was anything but urgent. The f. B. I. Said this was frustration at the pace. Of course, the irs agents, they said the investigation was slow walked. Evenhanded . A limited the number of witnesses that could be interviewed. They tipped off the defense counsel about a subpoena. The judge says the plea deal was a joke. All that is just half the story. There is one investigation protecting President Biden, theres another one attacking President Trump. The Justice Department has both sides of the equation covered. Look at the classified documents case. Spring and early summer of last year, the department of justice asked President Trump to turn over boxes of documents. He does just that. In the process, President Trump finds 38 additional documents, he tells the department of justice, very next day the f. B. I. Comes to his home and he turned them over. Then they asked the president to put any boxes he brought from the white house to his home in a storage home and secure it by locking it. He does that as well. Everything they ask him to do, he did. Them what does the Justice Department do . August 8 of last year they rate his home. According to the f. B. I. Agent, the assistant director in charge of the Washington Field office, the search was a complete departure from standard protocol. When we interviewed him, he said, first, the Miami Field Office did not do the search. Instead, they said folks from d. C. He said there was no u. S. Attorney signed to the case. Instead it was run by d. C. , in particular, jake pratt, who is now on the special counsel team. He said the f. B. I. Did not get President Trumps Council Approval before they did the search. And that he told us, he had recommended that when the f. B. I. Got to the home of mr. Trump, they waited for counsel to do that together. But the doj said no. Who does the attorney general name is special counsel and that case . Jack smith, the guy who a few years ago was looking for with the prosecute americans, looking to prosecute the very victims of the weaponized government, the weaponized irs. Jack smith, the guy who prosecuted governor mcdonald, only to have the Supreme Court overturned that prosecution in a unanimous decision. That is the guy the attorney general of the United States selects as special counsel. Any wonder why four out of five americans believe there are now two standards of justice in our great country. I anticipate a number of questions on these two investigations. Later in the hearing i expect from republicans you will also get questions about the many other concerns the American People have with the department. The School Board Memorandum, catholics, the memo that said prolife catholics are extremists, the fifth circuit decision, great decision, on the department of justice and other agencies censoring speech. And of course, the fisa law and how that process has been abused and infringed on privacy rights of American People. Americans believe that today in our country there is unequal application of the law. They believe that because there is. Republicans are committed to making a change. With that, yield to the gentleman from new york, the Ranking Member, for Opening Statement. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, at the outset let me make two comments. Just about every a surgeon you made in your Opening Statement has been completely refuted by witnesses who have testified before this committee. Number two, far from being favored, many commentators have noted that people accused of simple gun possession while under the influence of a drug in which the gun was not used in the commission of a crime are rarely, if ever, prosecuted the way hunter biden is being prosecuted. Mr. Chairman, one of her most important duties is conducting oversight of the department of justice. We are called upon to ensure the doj uses the enormous amount of power granted in a fair and just manner that respects the civil and human rights of all americans. The attorney general of the United States overseas issues that affect the lives of each and every american. Violent crime, Drug Trafficking, attacks on civil rights, threats to National Security, and environmental crimes all fall under his purview. That is why we regularly request that he or she appear before this committee to speak about the work the department is doing for the welfare of the country. This is how we ensure the department stays accountable to the American People. If it were up to the republicans, americans would hear nothing about any of the substantive issues today. They would hear nothing about the rise in domestic terrorism and what the Justice Department is doing about it. They would hear nothing about what the department is doing to stop hate crimes and prevent gun violence. They would hear nothing about how the department is disrupting efforts by russia, china and others to interfere in our elections. Extreme accomack the republicans have poisoned vital oversight work the day of the ignored legitimate responsibilities and use their power to stage i political stunt after another. They have with the countless taxpayer dollars on baseless investigations into President Biden and his family, desperate to find evidence for an absurd impeachment and desperate to distract from the mounting legal peril facing donald trump. They have fought tirelessly to stop efforts to fight for actors manipulating americans through social media. They have unconstitutionally appeared in criminal litigation an attempted to bully state and local Law Enforcement own offices. They publicize the names of witnesses, leading to threats of death of physical violence against those witnesses and their families. They have caused any number private institutions and Companies Millions of dollars in legal fees as they struggle to respond to ridiculous and overbroad requests for information and transcribed interviews. They have issued subpoenas for show without making meaningful attempts to get the information they seek by consent. They have levied low, baseless personal attacks on any prosecutor to bring charges against donald trump or january 6th writers. They have attempted to discredit investigators were not hard enough on Donald Trumps political opponents. They supported the attack on january 6. They have justified conduct we all know to be wildly illegal, like the theft of classified materials and incitement of violence. And through it all, rather than try to unite the country or solve the problems that affect us all, they have sought to exploit our division for cynical, personal political gain. That is their goal, division. They want to divide this country and make our government appear like it is broken, because that is when theyre broken broken Political Parties rise. Today i implore the public to see through the sham. I have no doubt you will hear a deluge of conspiracy theories and baseless accusations. They will quote freely from so called whistleblowers who have been broadly discredited or contradicted. They will viciously attack federal Law Enforcement. They will tell you that all 91 criminal charges against donald trump are part of the conspiracy, despite overwhelming evidence of each of his crimes. They will attack special counsel david wiess, who was appointed by donald trump, lets not forget, for being not hard enough on hunter biden. They will continue with they have been doing for years, discrediting anyone who does not serve their Political Goals at any cost. The shame of it is that in this hearing room, like on the house floor where we are barreling towards a government shutdown, we could be working together to put people over politics and to solve any number of problems affecting the American People. More than 30,000 americans have died from gun violence so far this year alone. Guns have become the leading cause of death for children ages 1 through 17. Surpassing car accidents. Domestic violence extremism and White Nationalism are on the rise. We are seeing active clubs and other white supremacist groups pop up around the country. Antisemitism is at an alltime high. Maligned foreign actors like russia, china, i ran, and north korea are attempting to influence our elections. Political rhetoric is causing threats against Law Enforcement officials to skyrocket. The Immigration Court system is in desperate need of reform. Our election workers received Death Threats from Conspiracy Theory driven extremists. Fentanyl is filling the streets of poisoning children. This list goes on and on. And we the people in this groom are in a position to do something about it. In fact, it is our duty to do something about it. Consistent with the oath we took when we were sworn in as members of congress. We could work with the department of justice and attorney general garland to address any number of real substantive problems facing the American People. Instead, House Republicans will use their time today to talk about long discredited conspiracy theories and Hunter Bidens laptop. They will do it because they care more about donald trump than they do about their own constituents. I hope my colleagues will see reason and at least attempt to work with the attorney general in good faith. Sadly, on the other side of the aisle, reason and good faith seem to be in short supply. In any event, mr. Attorney general, i thank you for your testimony and thank you in advance for your patience. I yield back. That will yield back without objection. All other Opening Statements will be included in the record. We will now introduce the witness. The honorable Merrick Garland is the attorney general of the United States. He was sworn in on march 11, 2021. We welcome our witness at they can for appearing today. Will begin by swearing you in. Please rise and raise your right hand. Do you swear and affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief still help you god. I do. Let the record show the witness answered in the affirmative. Taking. Please note your written testimony will be entered into the record in entirety. You know how this is done, you have been here before. Again, thank you for being here. You are welcome to give your Opening Statement. Is this working . You got it. Thank you. A morning chairman jordan, Ranking Member, and distinguished members of this committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you on behalf of the more than 115,000 employees of the department of justice. Since the Justice Department was founded, it has been tasked with confronting some of the most challenging issues before the country. Today we are handling matters of significant Public Interest that carry great consequences for our democracy. A lot has been said about the Justice Department, about who we are and what we are doing, about what our job is, and what it is not. And about why we do this work. I want to provide some clarity. First, we are made up of more than 150,000 men and women working every state and in communities across the country and around the globe. They are f. B. I. , dea, atf, and United States marshals who risk their lives to serve their communities. They are prosecutors and staff who work tirelessly to enforce our laws. The overwhelming majority are career Public Servants, meaning, they were not appointed by the president of any party. Second, i want to provide clarity about what the job of the Justice Department is and about what it is not. Our job is to help keep our country safe. That includes working closely with local Police Departments and communities across the country to combat Violent Crime. In fact, today were announcing the results of a recent u. S. Marshal operation conducted with state and local Law Enforcement. That operation targeted violent fugitives and resulted in 4400 arrests across 20 cities in just three months. Our work also includes combating the drug cartels that are poisoning americans. Last friday we extradited guzman lopez, a leader of a cartel from mexico to the United States. He is a son of el chapo and one of more than a dozen Cartel Members we have indicted and extradited to the United States. Our job includes seeking justice for the survivors of child exploitation, human smuggling and sex trafficking. That includes protecting Democratic Institutions like this one by Holding Accountable all those criminally responsible for the january 6th attack on the capitol. Our job is also to protect civil rights. That includes protecting our freedoms as americans to worship and think as we please, and to peacefully express our opinions, our beliefs, and our ideas. It includes protecting the right of every eligible citizen to vote and to have that vote counted. In includes combating discrimination, defending reproductive rights under law, and deterring and prosecuting attacks such as hate crimes. Our job is to uphold the rule of law. That means we apply the same laws to everyone. There is not one set of laws for the powerful and another for the powerless, one for the rich and another for the poor, one for democrats and another for republicans, or different rules depending upon ones race, at the city, or religion. Our job is to pursue Justice Without fear or favor. Our job is not to do what is politically convenient. Our job is not to take orders from the president , from congress, or from anyone else about who or what to criminally investigate. As the president himself has said, and i reaffirmed today, i am not the president s lawyer. I will add that i am not the prosecutor for congress. Justice Department Works for the American People. Our job is to follow the facts and the law, and that is what we do. All of us recognize that with this work comes public scrutiny, criticism, and legitimate oversight. These are appropriate and important given the matters and gravity of the matters before the department. Singling out individual career Public Servants who are just doing their jobs is dangerous, particularly at a time of increased threats to the safety of Public Servants and their families. We will not be intimidated. We will do our jobs free from outside influence, and we will not back down from defending our democracy. I want to explain why we approach the job in this way. The Justice Department was founded in the wake of the civil war and in the midst of reconstruction with the first Principal Task of bringing to Justice White supremacists and others who terrorized black americans to prevent them from exercising their civil rights. The Justice Department job then , and now, is to fulfill the promise that it is at the foundation of our democracy that the law will treat each of us alike. That promise is also why i am here. My family fled religious persecution in Eastern Europe at the start of the 20th century. My grandmother was one of five children born in what is now belarus who made it to the United States. Two of her siblings did not. They were killed in the holocaust. There is little doubt that, but for america, the same thing would have happens to my grandmother. But this country took her in, and under the protection of our laws, she was able to live without fear of persecution. That protection is what distinguishes this country from so many others. The protection of law, the rule of law, is a foundation of our system of government. Repaying this country for the debt my family owes, for our very lives, has been the focus of my entire professional career. That is why i served in the Justice Department under five different attorneys general, both democratic and republican administrations. That is why i spent more than 25 years ensuring the rule of law as a judge, and that is why i left a lifetime appointment as a judge and came back to the Justice Department 2 1 2 years ago. And that is why i am here today. I look forward to your questions. Thank you, mr. Attorney general procurement, america is the greatest country ever. We on the site are very concerned about the equal application of the law that you talked about in your Opening Statement. With that, we will move to five minute questions. We will start with the gentleman from louisiana. Thank you. Mr. Weiss, the rule of law does distinguish our country, but not appel that. You allow the rule of law to erode. That is why 65 of the people in this country have no faith in the department of justice under your leadership. They dont trust it, they dont trust you. The reason is because a witness every day politicized Justice Department and a twotiered system of justice. For example, they see the doj, of course, aggressively prosecuting President Bidens political arrival, mr. Trump, while the same time seeing special treatment to his son. I want to focus on that investigation of the biden family. We have many important questions for you today about that. Let me get right to the chase. Has anyone from the white house provided direction at any time to you, personally, or to any senior officials at the doj regarding how the hunter biden investigation was to be carried out . No. Have you had personal contact with anyone at f. B. I. Headquarters about the hunter biden investigation . I dont recollect the answer to that question, but the f. B. I. Works for the Justice Department. I am sorry. You dont recollect whether you have talked with anybody at f. B. I. Headquarters about an investigation into the president s son . I dont believe i did. I promise to the senate when i came before for confirmation that i would leave mr. Weiss in place, and that i would not interfere with his investigation. I havent kept that promise i have kept that promise. Have you had personal contact with anybody at the Baltimore Field Office on hunter biden . No. U. S. Attorney david wiess told senator Lindsey Graham i had discussions with departmental officials regarding potential appointment under 28 section 550 which would have allowed me to file charges in the district outside my own without the partnership of the local u. S. Attorney. With whom did he have those discussions . I will not get into the internal deliberations of the department. But you must, this is important. We have oversight with possibility over your department and need these answers. It is appropriate for mr. Weiss to have conversations with the department. I made it clear if you wanted to bring a case, he would be able to do that. The way you do that is to get an order signed by the attorney general called a 515 order. I promised he would be able to that, and he made clear he understood he would be able to do that. Okay. Can you tell us about any briefings or discussions you personally have had with mr. Weiss regarding any and all federal investigations of hunter biden . I will say it again, i promised the senate i would not interfere with mr. Weiss. Under oath today, your testimony is that you have not had any discussions with mr. Weiss about this matter . Undergoes, my testimony today is that i promised the senate i would not intrude in his investigation. I do not intend to discuss internal Justice Department deliberations whether or not i have them. Okay. So your testimony today is that you will tell us whether weve had discussions with mr. Weiss. My testimony today is that i told the committee that i would not interfere. I made clear that mr. Weiss would have the ability to bring cases he thought were appropriate. For a second time, are you aware f. B. I. Officials have come before this committee and stated there was a cumbersome bureaucratic process that mr. Weiss had to go through to bring charges in another judicial district . I am not aware. That is not true. Theres nothing cumbersome about the process. So they are lying to us under oath . They are description of the process as culberson is an opinion, not a fact. Only have to do that let me get to the fact. Mr. Weiss has been the lead prosecutor on the hunter biden cases 2018, correct . He is been the lead prosecutor since he was appointed by President Trump. Let me after, why has the Justice Department drag this out for so long . Is it really take years to determine if hunter biden lied on the federal form related to purchasing a firearm . Mr. Weiss is a long time career prosecutor. President trump appointed him. Youre not answering the question. Is that standard procedure . Should it take that long to make such a simple determination . I am answering the question if you give me the opportunity to do so. He was charged with that investigation under the Previous Administration. He has continued. He knows how to conduct investigations. I have not intruded or attempted to evaluate that, because that was the promise i made to the senate. The whistleblowers gave us testimony about serious misconduct at the Justice Department in regards to the preferential treatment afforded hunter biden. Has your office requested an investigation into that . There are wellknown processes for how whistleblowers make their claims. I am a strong proponent of whistleblowers and a strong defender. We have an Inspector General, we have the office of professional responsibility. That is the way in which complaints from whistleblowers should be, and are, appropriately handle. I yield back. The chair recognizes the making member. Thank you. Mr. Attorney general, thank you for being here today. It is no secret that some of my colleagues across the aisle has threatened to shut down the government unless, and until, the f. B. I. A department of justice are defunded. One trump like candidate said we should abolish the f. B. I. Altogether. What would be the impact on america of defunding the f. B. I. . Defunding the f. B. I. Would leave the United States naked to the influence of the Chinese Communist party, to the attacks by iranians on american citizens and attempts to assassinate former officials, to the russian aggression, to north korean cyberattacks, to Violent Crime in the United States, which the f. B. I. Helps to fight against, to all kinds of espionage, to domestic violent extremists who have attacked our churches, our synagogues, our mosques, and who have killed individuals out of racial hatred. I just cannot imagine the consequences of defunding the f. B. I. , but they would be catastrophic. Thank you. I wanted to turn to the investigation by mr. Weiss and the authority he has been granted to conduct the investigation without interference. You testified to the Senate Judiciary committee on march 1 of this year that david wiess had full authority over any investigation concerning hunter biden. Was that a true statement at the time . Yes. Mr. Weiss has full authority to conduct his investigation however he wishes , and mr. Weiss has confirmed that in letters to this committee. Thank you. This authority included ensuring that he would be able to bring charges in jurisdictions outside of delaware, if necessary, is that correct . Assured mr. Weiss publicly that he would have the authority to bring a case outside of delaware if he thought that was appropriate. Does that remain true today . Yes, that is true today. Hasnt ever been the case of the course of this investigation that mr. Weiss would not of been able to bring charges outside of delaware if warranted by as a matter of my authority, i promised he would be able to do that. I think , as a parent in the letters exchanged with the committee and in my last testimony, in order for United States attorney or special counsel or anyone else to bring a case outside this jurisdiction, he requires me to sign a paper called section 515, the statute that permits bringing cases outside the jurisdiction. I promised i would do whatever was required to enable mr. Weiss to bring a case outside his jurisdiction, if that is what he thought was appropriate. I assume it was your understanding that mr. Weiss is fully aware that he could bring charges outside of delaware if necessary. Mr. Weiss has said so in letters sent to this committee. Did he ever do or say anything that might make him unsure of where he can bring charges . Mr. Weiss , his own letters reflecting never asked me to be special counsel and understood the process for asking for a signature on section 515. There been accusations that this is an example of a two tiered system of justice. What is your response to that allegation . The Justice Department treat everyone alike regardless of party, regardless of ethnicity, regardless of wealth. Everyone is treated alike. I understand that people may not understand why particular investigations are conducted in particular ways until all the facts come out. That is what we have the courts for. All of the explanations will come out with respect to mr. Weiss, for example, at the end of his period as special counsel. One of the requirements is that he file a report, which i have promised to make public to the extent that is lawful and consistent with the department policy. He will explain his decisions to prosecute and not prosecute thank you. One of the impacts of members of congress and making such accusations against doj, does this make it more difficult to do your job . Members of the Justice Department are strong and tough and able to understand that their job is to do the right thing regardless of any pressures from any quarter. What is dangerous, and i am not talking about the committee, but what is dangerous is when anyone singles out a career prosecutor or a career f. B. I. Agent, and we know as a matter of fact, that that kind of singling out has led to threats. This is a concern across the board. It is not a concern about anyone in particular. I think you would have been justified in referring to the committee but my time is expired. I yield back. Chair recognizes during the gentleman from North Carolina. Mr. Attorney general, you are the only person who can ensure that mr. Weiss had all the Necessary Authority. I am the only person who can sign the agreement with respect to special counsel. The authority to do section 515 can be assigned by other people in the department. Ultimately, the authority is yours. You dont take orders from the president about such things, you decide what the Justice Department will do. I announced at the beginning, i promised he would be able to bring whatever cases he wants, and i have followed through on that promise. I am permitted to make that kind of promise, and i have made that. Did you undertake to inform yourself to interact with hymns sufficient to ensure that he knew he possessed that authority or that you would see to it that he had all Necessary Authority . I dont think theres any doubt he knew. He has written three letters to this committee indicating he understood he had that authority. Arent you also aware that a senior irs investigator, whistleblower, came forward and testified publicly that mr. Weiss stated he did not have such authority. He was not the decider. Are you aware of that . I will aware the testimony. I was not present at any point during that statement. Mr. Weiss , who was present, has indicated that he had the authority and knew he had it. Subsequent to those developments, though, you decided to make mr. Weiss special counsel, what you had not done before. Mr. Weiss made clear he did not ask me to be special counsel until last month. Last month i made him special counsel. Did you have some lack of information that you should have had that would have caused you to act earlier to make him special counsel . Mr. Weiss do not asked to be special counsel. I understand that. You have said that. Did you take the necessary steps to inform yourself what authority he understood he had for what obstacles he was encountering . Mr. Weiss, as i said, from the beginning, he had authority over all matters that pertain to hunter biden. Have you learned that he was, in fact, deterred by decisions of the United States attorneys and district of columbia and Northern District of california from proceeding as he thought best . With respect, congressman, mr. Weiss has not said he was deterred. He said that he followed the normal processes of the department , and that he was never denied the ability to bring a case to another jurisdiction. What changed . What made you decide that it was sufficient to leave him in the situation he was until you decided to make him special counsel . Mr. Weiss asked for that Authority Given his extraordinary circumstances of this matter, and given my promise that i would give him any resources he requested, and i made him special counsel. Until that time, was it just a matter of his predilection, or did you undertake to investigate and discern what he was doing with his authority and whether he faced any obstacles . I did not endeavor to investigate, because i had promised that i would not interfere with this investigation. The way to not interfere is to not investigate an investigation. Once he requested to be named special counsel, having not done so over month of her tenure, did you ask him what had changed that made him now need to be in special counsel . Mr. Weiss asked to be special counsel. I promised i would give him all the resources he needed, and i made him special counsel. When did the Justice Department permit statutes of limitations to expire on some of the prospective charges against hunter biden for tax violations . I dont know anything about the statute of limitations here. The investigation was in the hands of mr. Weiss to make the determinations that he thought were appropriate. Are you unaware that the statute of limitations have been allowed to expire after having the agreements in place . Linda fagan, termination of where to bring cases in which kind of cases to bring was left to mr. Weiss. I understand you said that. That is part of the problem. The question is, are you will bear the statute of limitations has been allowed to expire while the matter was under investigation . The investigators were fully familiar with all the relevant law. Im not asking for excuses, i am asking whether you are aware of that fact. I will say again, again and again if necessary, i did not interfere with, did not investigate, everybody in the country now knows who is paying attention to this, that the Justice Department permitted statute of limitations to expire. Every lawyer who is ever practice understand the implications of allowing statute of limitations to expire. Do not even know as the city or whether this occurred or not . Prosecutors make appropriate determinations on their own. In this case, i left it to mr. Weiss whether to bring charges or not. That would include whether to let the statute of limitations to expire or not, whether there was sufficient evidence to bring a case subject to the statute of limitations or not, whether there were better cases to bring or not. Time has expired. The chair recognizes the gentle lady from california. Thank you attorney general for being here with us this morning. You know, as much as we see dirt being thrown in the air, there is a lot of misinformation i think is intended to confuse people. I would like to ask unanimous consent to put into the record three letters from mr. Weiss that he sent to congress on june 7, june 30, and july 10. Without objection. He said over and over again he has full authority over this case, including the ability to seek special counsel or special attorney status, if needed. Trying to imply otherwise is simply false. Mr. Weiss was appointed by then President Trump. Your decision was to leave the trump appointed attorney completely in charge of this, hands off from you. He makes all the calls without interference from the attorney general. Is that correct . That is correct. And so, the idea that you would interfere is completely wrong. I would also like to ask, you talked about your independence from the president , but also your independence from the congress. Have you ever come across, historically, an instance where the congress of the United States tried to interfere with a prosecution initiated by the department of justice based on the facts and the law . I want to be gentle about the word interfere, but just as a historical example, in the case of irancontra, the consequences of action by the congress were that the special counsel investigation of oliver north were dismissed. Correct. Before i go into another question i have, i just would like unanimous consent to put into the record the annual statistical transparency report dated april 2023. It indicates that the duplicated counting method for f. B. I. Queries of u. S. Persons under section 702 database numbered over 119,000. I would like to note, and we will work with you, this committee on a bipartisan basis is very concerned about the query of the 702 database for u. S. Persons without a warrant. We are not suggesting the law does not permit that, but we are going to visit this issue. It is my view that querying the 702 database that has been collected without due process because it relates to foreign individuals is completely wrong in terms of the privacy rights of americans. I am hoping we could work successfully with you as we craft requirements for a warrant to do that querying. I would like to ask, as we know, and has been mentioned by the Ranking Member, the proposal is basically to defund the police by the republicans, to defund the f. B. I. I am concerned that if we defund the police, as a majority has adjusted, that really doesnt have an impact on the statute of limitations. So if we were to defund the department of justice, defund the f. B. I. And the police, as has been suggested, what would happen with the statute of limitations for cases you are pursuing if you are not able to actually do that . Would they be suspended in any way, with the criminals get off scott free . I know in my experience as a judge, if i was asked a legal question i dont know the answer to, i would go back to the office and study. I would have to do that in this case. I think i do. There is nothing in the statute that allows for the statute of limitations to be suspended, because the government has been shut down, or because the police have been defunded through the budget process. I just think we ought to take the implications of a shutdown, it could allow criminals to get off. I see my time has expired. I yield back. Chair now recognizing himself. Mr. Weiss is full authority to bring cases to other jurisdictions if he feels it is necessary. That was your response to the question on march 1, 2023. The only problem is he had already been turned down by the u. S. Attorney in the district of columbia. So he did not have a full authority. I had an extended conversation with senator grassley at the time. We briefly touched on section 515 and how that process went. I have never that you said he had complete authority, but he already was turned down. The u. S. Attorney they are said no you cant. You tell the senate under oath that he has complete authority. I will say it again, no one had the authority to turn him down. They could refuse to partner with him. You can use what every language. It is not the same under a will know Justice Department practice. Here is why the statute of limitations question is important. You let the statute of limitations lapse for 2014, 2015, those were the years with the felony tax charges were hunter biden was getting income from breweries my. Here are facts that are so important. Hunter biden was put on the board of burisma and made a lot of money. Up kate a lot of money over those years. He was not qualified. Back over to, he was not qualified. Not my words, his words. He said he got on the board because of his last name. The brand. Fact number three, burisma executives told hunter biden, we are under pressure, we need help. Fact number four, joe biden ghost ukraine, leverages our tax money to get the prosecutor fired who was applying the pressure. Interestingly enough, that fact is entirely consistent with what the confidential human source told the f. B. I. And they recorded in the 1023 form. The same form. That all happened. What im wondering is, why you guys let the statute of limitations lapse for those tax years that dealt with burisma. One more fact that is important, and that is that this investigation was being conducted by mr. Weiss , an appointee a President Trump. You will have the opportunity to ask mr. Weiss that question, and he will no doubt address it in the public report that will be transmitted to the congress. I dont know the answer to those questions. To the lawyers just , darn, were they careless . But i expect that wont be what he says, but because that you know that is not the case. As mr. Bishop pointed out, they had an agreement. They talked to the hunter biden defense counsel. At some point, they made an intentional decision to say, we are going to let the statute of limitations lapse. I want to know who decided that and why they did. Mr. Weiss was a supervisor of the investigation at that time. He made the appropriate decisions, and you can ask him that question. You know why they did it. Everyone knows why. They may not say it, but everyone knows. Those tax years, that dealt with that involved the president. Is wanting to have a gun charge in delaware, that doesnt involve the president of the United States, but burisma, oh my, that goes right to the white house. We cant have that. We can slow walk this and even extend the statute of limitations, then we can intentionally let it lapse. We know this investigation was low. Heres whatever was a. Doj slow walk to the investigation, slow walking the approvals of everything, this happened at doj taxable and delaware. I would have liked to see things move faster. Everyone as we have talked to said this was slow walked. And we know why. It was slow walked long enough to let the statute of limitations run out so they would not have to get into burisma. Tell me why i am wrong. Will the gentleman healed . I am asking the pressure. I have tried to make clear i dont know the specifics of the investigation. Much of what youre describing occurred during the Trump Administration with a Justice Department appointed by President Trump. Were talking about the last few years. Your statement was just this year, march 1. I am sorry, i was trying to respond to your descriptions of what the irs agent said about certain that the statute of limitations is six years. That lapsed in the Biden Administration. I will say again, the explanation for why the statute of limitations was lapsed, if it was, has to come from mr. Weiss. Let me ask one last question. Who decided that david wiess would stay on as u. S. Attorney . This occurred before i came. Mr. Weiss was kept on. I promised that i said, who decided . The white house decided joe biden decided to keep david wiess as u. S. Attorney. You were not sworn in until march. Your time has expired. Pretty fundamental question. Who decided david wiess would stay as u. S. Attorney in delaware . Your time has expired. Im waiting for an answer. Your time expired already. Gentlemen can respond. Mr. Weiss was u. S. Attorney from the district of delaware when i came on. He was appointed by President Trump. I promised he would be permitted to stay on for this investigation, and that is what happened. Gentlemen from new york recognize. Mr. Chairman, i believe you misquoted from the transcript of the senate hearing. I asked for consent to enter into the record the entire transcript of the hearing. Without objection. I did not misquote. None of the republicans goals today include solving american problems. There are many reasons that prosecutors declined to bring charges. One of those reasons is that they dont have any evidence for a conviction. That is the justice way. That is just in america. Let me raise these questions and concerns with you today. As we all know, republicans have repeatedly alleged that the doj and f. B. I. Are conspiring to shield the biden family from public criticism and giving hunter biden special treatment in its investigation. They have demonized Law Enforcement officials working with this case at every turn, which has directly led to increased threats against f. B. I. Officials, Law Enforcement of which they pretend to support. I want to place into the record excerpts from recent transcribed interviews. I would ask a copy be made available to you. The first is from a june interview with jennifer moore, the former executive director for Human Resources for the f. B. I. She said it the f. B. I. Received so many threats that had to stand up an entire 10 unit just to deal with them. She said it is unprecedented. It is a number they never had before. The second excerpt is from an interview earlier this month with the special agent in charge of f. B. I. Baltimore field office. Here is what he said. I joined the f. B. I. 25 years ago for a reason, to protect the American People, uphold the constitution. I have been through war. My family has been in bad places, mike is a bit evacuated from war zones. I been a bad things. I have accepted that. I am solely focus on two things, and they are not mutually exclusive. The first is is that i want to get to a resolution in a fair way. The second thing, it is becoming more relevant, is keeping my folks to safe. Out that part, i never to be concerned about keeping family save. For me, this is becoming more and more of a job i have to do a take away from what i was assigned to do, which was to investigate and do these things. When you talk about potential frustrations with communication , i am personally frustrated with anything the places employees and families in enhanced danger. Their children did not sign up for this. Do you agree that politically charged rhetoric claiming that Law Enforcement agents contribute to this onslaught of threats . As i said in my Opening Statement, we have had an astounding number of threats against Public Servants over the last several years. I think when career Public Servants in the Justice Department and election workers and airline crews, when they are singled out, this can lead to threats of violence and actual violence. We have the actual example of an attack on and f. B. I. Office by somebody who was incensed by political rhetoric. This does happen. We must not allow that to happen in this country. Does the rhetoric regarding the biden case have any basis in reality . I did not hear the first purpose has the rhetoric regarding the biden case have any basis in reality . It does not. How does this impact f. B. I. And doj employees ability to do their work . As ive already said, the agents of the f. B. I. And prosecutors understand that criticism comes with their job. They will continue to do their jobs without fear or favor, but the idea of threatening their safety or that of their families is important. Thank you. I assume that provisions have had to be in place to protect these agents and their families. I did not hear the first part. I assume the provisions or protections have had to be in place to protect ages and their families. That is correct. Let me move on to the fentanyl crisis. Let me put on the record so you can summarize. I asked for the indulgence of the chair. In any event, the f. B. I. , the doj are focused on the crisis of fentanyl. I want to raise that for you and followup with one or two other questions. I am dealing with the crisis of Human Trafficking and the prioritizing of america children. They are under siege. The level of child sexual abuse materials generating into Human Trafficking, and i want to put hr 30 on the record, indicates that there are 99,000 cases where they are enticing children, and maybe only 1 being investigated. I would like your comment on that. Finally, to emphasize the work that is hopefully still being done with antisemitism, attacks on immigrants, and African Americans and latinos. We are fighting the fentanyl scourge in every possible way, starting with the precursors in china, to the labs in mexico. The cartels that are bringing the drugs into the United States, networks in the United States, the streets of america. We will continue to do that with every resource that Congress Gives us. Human smuggling and trafficking, absently abhorrent. They have tax forces on both of these subjects and have brought many cases on the subjects. The idea of putting sexually explicit material about children on the weather is another area that we are continuing to investigate and prosecute, and as the social media to take down from their site. Time has expired. The floor has recognized your five minutes. Im wondering, mr. Attorney general. Has anybody told President Biden to knock it off . With hunter . I mean, you guys are charging hunter biden on sometimes, investigating him on others. President bringing hunter around to state dinners. Our job in the Justice Department is to pursue cases without reference to whats happening in the outside world. Yes or no . Is it a no . Nobody has spoken to the white house about hunter biden. s maximizer biden paying for a 15,000 per month rent in malibu. How can you guarantee that the people buying that are not doing so to gain favor with the president . The Justice Department is investigating criminal allegations, somebody who bought Hunter Bidens art ended up with a prestigious appointment to a federal position. Does not look weird, hes become this immediate success in the art world . Is father as president of the United States . Im not going to comment hunter Biden Associate devon archer told us that he so the appearance of access to then vice President Biden. Are you confident that he has stopped doing that . I do not understand the question. Devon archer sold the appearance of access to then vice President Biden. Are you confident he has stopped . I want to say again that all of these matters are within the purview of mr. Rice, i have not interviewed with them. If you are confident that i do not intend to interfere with them. It was a lot of chinese money working its way through the Shell Companies into the accounts of the biden family. So the China Initiative was set up during the Trump Administration at the department of justice to go after the influence of the Chinese Communist party, and the biden Justice Department dissolved the China Initiative. It so, does the department have any documents that would detail the basis for why you got rid of the China Initiative that President Trump had signed . They gave a long speech which explained that. He has testified before Congress Several times. We will provide you with tell us now. Why was that initiative dissolved . What the general said was that we face attacks from four nationstates. North korea, china, russia, and iran. We must focus our attention on the broad range of these attacks, are you saying that north korea has the same influence risk to the United States as the chinese, his party . Are you trying to represent parity . Because heres what it looks like. It looks like the chinese give all this money to the bidens and then you came and got rid of the China Initiative and it was successful. I saw one rationale that you guys got rid of it because it was racial profiling. One of the people you convicted was a guy named childs labor, taking 50,000 a month to do whatever research was being done. Are you aware of the millions of dollars that moved through rob walkers Shell Companies from Chinese Communist parties into biden family Bank Accounts . Are you aware of that . There are a lot of questions that you just estimated let me start with the first one. North korea is a dangerous genetically and with respect to cyber. Not on par with china. May i answer your question . Answer the question about the millions of dollars. You dont want me to answer but north korea . I know the answer, so does everyone. Lets get on to the serious questions and serious answers. Did you know about the Shell Companies to rob walker . I have left these matters to mr. Rice, i have not interfered. Blissfully ignorant. Youre looking the other way on purpose because Everybody Knows this is happening. People do not pay bribes do not get something in return. The China Initiative resulted in the convictions of harvard professor, someone in monsanto, we were working against the chinese, they paid the bidens, and we are getting told that north korea is the big threat. Does the fbi lose count of the number of paid informants on january 6 . Let me answer your question about china. I only get five minutes. January 6th. Did you lose count of the number of federal assets . Your time is expired. Let him answer the question. The attorney general can respond, but the time is expired. The most aggressive and dangerous adversary the state faces and we are doing everything within our power to rebut that, to stop them come to prevent invasions, both kinetic, and through cyberspace. If somebody give that answer in your courtroom when you were a judge, you would tell them they were being we need some order here. We are adjourning the witness. Stephen time has expired i know that. Your honor, would you like to stick with that . Point of order either way. Understand that. Before his time expired, the attorney general do not expire to the question. I want him to respond to that question. Im sure we will get into the elevator. Now recognizing the gentleman before that, he was not given a chance to answer. The witness might have thought mr. Chen min, the witness does not control the time. Numbers control the time. If they want to switch the question and focus on a different question, i want to give the witness a chance to respond to that final question. Thats all. He did not respond to it. We now recognize the gentleman from tennessee for five minutes. Thank you sir. I want to follow up on a few questions. The devon archer, thing, did he say that hunter biden did nothing wrong . Clear. I only know about mr. Archer from newspaper reports, i want to be clear that i kept my promise to not involve myself in this. Secondly, did you say that President Trump, President Trump appointed rice, within you appointed . Yes. President trump appointed him as the United States attorney. That you take care of that issue. In the department has been westernized. Wasnt there an investigation, you did not prosecute him . We do not make comments about it. If we were weapon eyes, we wouldve done it. That was a Beautiful Exchange there. You are the nations chief Law Enforcement officer and i appreciate that. Law enforcement is one of the fundamental functions of the government. Crime is growing too much in this country and my city of memphis. We need Law Enforcement, effective, swift, and fair. I need to focus my questions on what affects the American People. Crime. How do we get smarter Law Enforcement, requiring smart resource of allocations, not about funding or listening with the right funding for the right programs and see that this happens . Memphis is hiring, but its become more difficult. We lowered standards to get more officers. Thats not the way to do it. But we are desperate. I think you do the cops program for helping us. But, what can the department of justice do to help see that Law Enforcement program is more efficient and effective . So, the key to this is our partnership, with the fbi, dea, marshalls, atf, the entire alphabet soup. And, the task forces. And discussions to target the most dangerous criminals in those communities. But, at the same time, to engage the communities, to help engender Community Trust in Law Enforcement. Everybody who is prosecuted, Violent Crime cases, that includes me. They know that they need the trust of the community in order to get witnesses. And, we in the Justice Department are helping our state and local colleagues do just that. The funding you described from the cops office and the office of Justice Programs allows us to get money to state and local Police Organizations that are having trouble with recruitment and retention and promotion of law versus. And they will help them make their departments respectful of the Constitutional Rights and at the same time, effective, investigation and prosecution of criminal law violations. Thank you for those programs the cops are you also reinstituted practices investigations of certain Police Departments. Memphis is one of them, thank you for doing that. Can you share with us how important those pilot programs are and how they can improve policing . Yes, congress has authorized the Justice Department to conduct practice investigations, when we have a reasonable belief that there has been unconstitutional patterns of behavior in the Police Department. We are careful to select his cases where we think there is a such a pattern. We make those investigations, and we then work with the Law Enforcement agencies in the cities. We hope to come to a dissent decree that will lead to a better and more efficient and more Constitutional Police department. We have been successful in all of our cases to date in reaching a Consent Decree. Thank you, sir. You are part of what was announced, bringing federal charges against the five officers who killed tyre nichols in memphis. Thank you for that. We need that federal charge and we need that department looked at. If there is a shutdown of the federal government, how will that affect the doj . I have not done a complete calculation on the effects of a shutdown on the difference between which employees are indispensable under the statute and which ones are not. It was only disrupt all of our normal programs, including our grant programs, to state and local Law Enforcement. And to our ability to conduct normal efforts, with respect to the entire scope of our activities including helping state and locals fight Violent Crime. Thank you, sir. Happy new year. I yelled back. Thank you so much. Thank you mr. Chairman. Looking at the appointment of jack smith, and david weiss. This double standard here, of justice, could not be more glaring. If they didnt have a double standard, they would have standards at all. He was targeting political groups to harass, has malicious progress of the former governor mcdonald was unanimous overturned by the u. S. Supreme court chief justice roberts, for attempting to criminalize political activity. You appointed him to prosecute mr. Joe bidens chief rival, for the presidency. And then, we have the apartment of david weiss. He deliberately allowed the statute of limitations to run out on any charges that could have a dated joe biden and influence peddling. He hunter biden a sweetheart deal that was ultimately upended by the courts, and he is the one that you appointed to pursue the charges that could implicate joe. That leaves means only two explanations. Corruption or incompetence. Which is it . Those of the questions that judges would rule out of order. Im sure you would. Look, i said it before, ill say it again. Mr. Weiss was the republican you stated states attorney. You at least see the obvious double standard . Its ridiculous they are so applied to these two appointments. He was a republican appointee. Mr. Smith is a not registered to either party, i dont care what their registrations are. On thats not what im asking you. Im asking about their records, and how the records are related to the appointment you made. This is a question of judgment and motors. What was motivating you to do this . Mr. Smith had a nationwide reputation for integrity, and for what the heck has work is filed. You can see the indictment. How can you say that after he was so heavily implicated in the irs scandal . Or the reboot Supreme Court case . Let me go on. Weve had to have a couple of whistleblowers informing senior Justice Department officials obstructing investigation and millions of dollars of ill gotten and undeclared income to hunter biden. They noted several deviations by Department Officials from normal process and provided preferential treatment, to hunter biden. Including allowing the statute of limitations to last, requesting fbi Management Levels , investigating communications, for referring in the big guy or dad and witness interviews. Excluding the investigating teams with the meetings with the defense counsel and notifying them of the pending search warrants. They even set off a bidens of impending searches. That sounds an awful like obstruction of justice is that coming from you or somebody else . I do not understand the question. You never understand the question. All of the actions that your employees take to obstruct the investigation of hunter biden and the earnings that he made, and the taxes that he failed to declare, their source and ultimately, they were paid to. Ramona sagan respect. It is in the hands of mr. Rice. The appointee present from. I dont know about all of these allegations. Some of them from the. Where the attorney general appointed by the attorney general. Mr. Weiss 11 opportunity to explain the decision. I have intentionally not involve myself in the facts of the case, not because im trying to get out of responsibility, but because i am trying to pursue my responsibility. Your fbi director testified before the committee of an uptick in known or suspected terrorists coming across the southern border. He told us that represents a massive security risk. Those were his words. Massive security risk. You agree . I am perfectly to align myself with the director of the fbi. Well, why is it, then, that the senior ministration rescinded the trump era orders, that had secured that border . The exponential increase. The witness can respond. But the time is expired. The answer to the question about about immigration law, its an extremely long answer. I will to defer to the department of Homeland Security which is responsible at the border. We tried to get answers from him, he doesnt give them to us. I understand mr. Attorney general, he requested a short break. We will resume in five minutes. Okay thank you. 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 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 mr. W 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 cooperation from foreign countries, especially mexico since thats where a lot of these cartels are operating. When you say right now mexico is cooperating with us in terms of working with your 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. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Sir, is it the policy of your office for u. S. Attorneys to use prosecutorial quotas . I will get right on top of this, is it the policy of your office for u. S. Attorneys to use prosecutorial quotas, do you have any quotas systems in place . No. That is a method to your office, it is not policy . Correct, we do not have quotas. Would it be consistent with that when you have a prosecutors say he wants to prosecute at least 2000 people who are alleged to have committed a certain type of crime . I think you are referring to the january 6 question. Im just asking you, would that be consistent with your offices policy if somebody says we are going to get up to 2000 people on a particular crime, is that consistent with your policy . I think that was referring to a prediction for how many more cases would still be brought because the court asked how many more people have we were looking at upwards of 2000, we have 1200 more that we think we are going to get, so you dont do that for anything else, right . You are not saying we are going to have so many people we want to get for tax fraud, for federal firearms applications. The court asks us what the likely workload will be based on prosecutions and investigations that are pending, the u. S. Attorney is obligated to respond. Providing any reference to the number of people you thought you would prosecute who were involved in the 2020 summer riots of the burning of the courthouse, while they were people still inside, you didnt file anything with the court saying we thought there were going to be 300 or 400 or whatever it might be. Im sorry, im not following. Im sure youre not. Let me ask you this question lets switch topics. Maybe this will be easier to follow i suppose, is it the policy of the doj to provide advanced notice to subjects before conducting a search for evidence . It totally depends on the circumstance. If the circumstance where that you had a guesthouse where the u. S. Attorney deputy u. S. Attorney said we know, we suspect theres a lot of evidence but we are not going to really follow that up, we are going to enclose the attorney from the other side saying we are going to do search warrant. Would that be consistent with your policy . I know this is no hypothetical and i dont know the facts of this case and i dont know what happened and i believe the events you are talking about as reported in the press occurred under the Previous Administration. No, no, no, that event didnt happen on the Previous Administration, lets talk about it, you keep saying this happened in the Previous Administration, lets talk about this for a moment. You keep saying i dont know what happened but im going to opine when it happened, do you see the fallacy of that, the inconsistencies . I dont know what happened, because im not involved but it happened under the Previous Administration. That is so logically fallacious. Im sorry, im not following yeah, i know youre not following. The question is, youve got one of your deputy u. S. Attorneys calling this attorney on this side and saying look, we are going to go to these two places, probably go in the next couple of days and of course and ultimately the search warrant is called off. Is that, i just want to know, is it consistent to call up people who you know theyve got boxes of information, or you suspect, thats why youve got the warrant and thats why you are going to look and you give them a heads up so they can move those boxes of information, would that be consistent with doj policy . You are asking me to comment on allegations about a particular case no, im not, is that consistent with your overall policy . Forget delaware and what they did, lets just talk about generic policy. I thought you were talking about maralago. Is your policy acceptable when you suspect there are movable items to call up and say we are going to be there to look . Theres no policy on this question, there is strategy and tactics to be used to preserve evidence that is left up to the investigators and the office on the ground. Sometimes it can be a serious mistake to call up, and sometimes and once again, you dont know what happened in the hunterbiden case, but you can be sure of the timing of when this took place. That is one of the biggest oddities of your testimony today, i yield back to the gentleman from colorado. The gentlemans time has expired, the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. Thank you mr. Attorney general, thank you for your decades of faithful service to our country, to our constitution and the rule of law, thank you for putting up with us today. The American People are watching. They know what is going on here. This is a gross misuse of your time, your teams time and our time. It is a shameful circus. It has a goal, to spew lies and disinformation ultimately to tear away at the confidence of our independent institutions in your case today, very Important Department of justice. That is the exact ammo of a former president. Tear away at the confidence of our independent institutions, whether it is the electoral system, the department of justice, the judiciary, and independent news media. The American People are watching this sham, but its not just a circus, it is dangerous and you know that and you have mentioned that. I believe that these fictions and fantasies are dangerous, dangerous for you and the 115,000 Public Servants with whom you work. Dangerous for National Security. Dangerous for communities security. Dangerous for the rule of law and our constitution. All at the same time of a looming shutdown, the other side of the aisle cannot govern , so they had this hearing which was supposed to be oversight and use it as a big distraction because they are failing to govern. Imagine if we are going into shutdown, what does that say to your members of your department . What does it say to our servicemembers, u. S. Troops who would be training, fighting without pay . And without confidence in this countrys governing ability. It is a great distraction. So, let me today to something i care about and i know you and your department cares about. It is recovery month and for families like mine with a member in recovery, every month is recovery month, so thank you for what you are doing on the sentinel crisis, the overdose crisis, that has claimed 110,000 lives in a single 12 month period. Souls that have died while we were in this hearing every day. What is the department doing to combat the trafficking, to combat the amount of sentinel on the ground as dea has said theres enough sentinel on the ground right now to kill this entire population multiple times over. Tell us about your important work in fentanyl. Well, congresswoman, let me begin by saying i share your personal concern and grief over this, i have met with the families of children, teenagers, elderly people who have become addicted to fentanyl and who have died from sentinel. I know everything you are saying is correct. And it is a catastrophe for the country. As a consequence, the Justice Department has poured its resources particularly from dea with fbi assistance as well, and with fugitive arrests by the Marshall Service and with fundraising by the atf, into the entire process by which fentanyl reaches the United States. So, we have sanctioned the precursor companies in china. We have indicted some of them for their violations, we have arrested some as far off as in fiji and brought them back to the United States. We have traced the precursors to mexico, where they are made into the fentanyl pills, sentinel cost about 10 cents to make, you can see what the enormous profit motive is here, so we must stop the cartel themselves, and as i have said, i have traveled to mexico twice in order to work with our counterparts in military and Law Enforcement. Thank you for that, i want to pit it wants and i want to do anything i can to partner with you on this issue. So that we stop losing people. I traveled recently with the Foreign Affairs committee, met with the extraordinary folks, the top prosecutor and his team. They were very complementary of the department of justice and your work. Can you tell us about your Important Role or americas Important Role in war crimes, especially in light of your powerful history . Yes, im happy to. So, i have traveled to ukraine twice, to meet with the prosecutor general there. And im going to meet with him again this week here, he has met with me several times here. The Justice Department is pursuing the war crimes from russias unlawful and unjust invasion of ukraine, to help investigate war crimes over which we have jurisdiction, to help the prosecutor general in ukraine and investigate those prosecutions. I believe the first cabinet member ever to visit the International Criminal court of justice to meet with the chief prosecutor to talk about our cooperation in respect to the investigations that they are doing. I have assigned a Justice Department prosecutor to the investigatory body that has been set up in the hague for the crime of aggression, which she is there now working with the icc, and with an assigned prosecutor to the embassy in kyiv to work with our ambassador and to work with Prosecutor Generals Office there. Thank you for allowing that answer to go on because it is critically important. America is indispensable in your work is indispensable. The gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. Mr. Attorney general, do you support that this Consent Decree that i believe was put in place in the city of minneapolis . Do you support the Consent Decree that was put in place with the Police Department of minneapolis . The one that was put in place by the federal government, yes. You support fewer cops on the street . No, i dont support fewer cops on the streets. That is what is happening as a result. I dont think that is a consequence of the Consent Decree. They have been losing Police Officers for many years. Do you support more crime . No, i dont. They had a hearing in a suburb of minneapolis, just this last week where they were just beside themselves with the amount of crime that continues in minneapolis, since the riots of 2020. And i would point out to you that i had an officer in my district, i live right across the border in wisconsin, that is where my district begins. A Police Officer was shot to death as a result of a week on crime prosecutor on st. Paul and minneapolis, minnesota. The guy served only four years for a Violent Crime. Do you think that is a problem . The officer was shot to death, that is certainly not an appropriate sentence, that is outrageous. Let me be clear, we are doing everything we can to assist minneapolis, we have a very aggressive u. S. Attorney, he has brought another of cases. I have a very short time here, in regards to disrupting drug networks, why do you think there is so much fentanyl coming into the country . Because it cost 10 cents to make and it can be sold for 30. Under oath, he said the reason there is such a drastic increase in fentanyl coming into the country is because on january 20th of 2021, open borders policies were announced by President Biden. Have you expressed concern about those open borders policies that have led to this rapid increase in the amount of sentinel coming into the country . I cant associate myself with the conclusion reached by the sheriff, although i can certainly commiserate with so, the sheriff is incorrect . The cartels in mexico are causing this drug to be transmitted into the United States and we are doing everything we can to eliminate that incentive. You are not going to do it, by doing that. Just so we are clear, this is the same answer we received from the secretary a couple months ago when he was in denial about a sheriff who lives at one of the most reputable sitting down on the southern border, he sees it every day, he saw it working in 2020, and now he says it is not working and it started january 20th of 2021, you can pretend youre dealing with fentanyl, you are not. Because the borders are wide open. Im going to shift to combating gun violence. Do you believe that a prohibitive person acquires a gun illegally and disposes it in a dumpster where a criminal or an innocent child can gain access to it should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law . This is no longer a hypothetical question, you are referring to a specific case which is now in judicial determination before the court of law, it is not appropriate for me to comment in that case. So for the record, lets understand that the same prosecuting attorney who is now the special counsel gave a sweetheart deal to that person and yes you are correct, we are referring to the president s son, he got a sweetheart deal, and the judge was smart enough to smell a rat when she saw it and she said you guys go back to the drawing board. That same special counsel is in charge of this investigation, isnt that correct esther chairman . Absolutely. I will close real quickly with this. There is a bike ride in madison, wisconsin just a couple months ago and i sent you a letter two months ago asking if you had a problem with that, because it exposed a 10yearold girl by the race organizer, to pedaling around madison, wisconsin naked. Do you think that is a problem . And why did you not answer our letter from two months ago . Im sorry, i will have to ask the office of legislative affairs to get back to you on this. Does it typically take two months to be able to answer questions about this . It sounds like you are asking questions about state and local Law Enforcement, we get hundreds and hundreds of letters, i will ask where the letter is. State law and local Law Enforcement would not act, i was hoping you would, it is obvious you are not, i yield. Thank you mr. Chairman and thank you again mr. Attorney general for joining us and for your patience with this questioning. Im honored to represent a Diverse Community in North Carolina. Wake county has worked to welcome people of all backgrounds, ethnicities, and religions. The growth and success of my district in the Research Triangle park depends on our commitment to celebrating the many cultures that contribute to our community. Unfortunately over the past few years, these very communities that have contributed so much to my state and my district have found themselves under attack. Jewish leaders in my district have received threats to themselves and their synagogues as recently as last month. Hbcus across our state have locked down in response to bomb threats. Asian americans in North Carolina and throughout the country have found themselves facing slurs and threats, spurred in large part by the racialized language about the covid19 pandemic. The Southern Poverty Law Center reported in late 2020 that the number of White National groups grew 55 from 2017 and 2019. Noting that the rise in hate based attacks coincides with the growth of the White Nationalist movement. And the Antidefamation League relatedly found that white supremacist propaganda incidents occurred over 14 times per day on average in 2020 with a total of 5125 reported cases. Nearly twice the number of cases reported in 2019. And the highest number the adl has ever recorded. This dangerous trend has continued in the last few years and has recently included as active clubs have been increasing in their number and prominence. These active clubs started popping up in late 2020 and are a network of White Nationalist groups that see themselves as fighters in training for an ongoing war against a system they claim is deliberately plotting against the white race. As attorney general, i am deeply interested and concerned about the rise of these clubs, threats of violence, and actual violence. And i wanted to know if you are familiar with these activities and what your department is doing to counteract them. Im not familiar with the specifics of those clubs and i will certainly look into what the department is doing in that respect. Very soon after i came into the department, i saw the spike in hate crime threats that were being made and the acts of violence. I directed the department to develop a strategy for responding to that 30 days later that was pretty much coexisting with the passage of the covid no hate act, and we have now fulfilled i think all the applications under that act. We have taskforces set up to investigate and prosecute a hate crime, and where they satisfy the requirements as domestic violent extremism or domestic terrorism. We have brought dozens of cases against people who have made these threats as well as in particular those who have attempted to carry them out. And as you know, we have prosecution pending in buffalo with respect to the horrendous killing of black americans in the tops grocery store. Thank you very much and thank you for your efforts in this regard. On a different subject, for my last 45 seconds, North Carolina also saw the impact of cybercrimes with the colonial pipeline. And i would like to know how your office is counteracting any Cyber Attacks and dealing with people who perpetrate them. Yes, so we are vigilant to the risk of these Cyber Attacks, in that case, these were criminal gangs affiliated in russia. Fortunately we had available intelligence from section 702 which we were discussing a little bit earlier today, i have to say that is one of the principal sources of our ability to fight these kinds of Cyber Attacks, whether they are criminal or whether they are launched by nationstates, whether they are attempting to get ransomware, whether they are simply trying to filtrate our information or whether they are trying to prevent our computers from working at all. The Justice Department has established a Cyber Task Force for this purpose, a Ransomware Task force, and we are recently working on cryptocurrency in exactly the same way. The time has expired, we are trying to move quickly because we have votes and we have the majority conference, the gentleman from colorado is recognized. Welcome, and my friend and colleague from colorado outline your biography, i thought very well. But he left out two points i would like to mention, one is not only did you lead the prosecution of the Oklahoma City bombing case, but in that case, the Death Penalty was asked for and actually received and Timothy Mcveigh was executed, not exactly a democrat priority to seek the Death Penalty but you did so because of the rule of law, you did so because the facts and the law demanded that you did so and you followed the facts and the law in that situation. The other issue i wanted to point out is my understanding that in your conference room, you have a portrait of elliott richerson and the reason you have a portrait its because he demanded that the department of justice stay independent from the nixon administration, he had the backbone to stand up to the president of the United States and make sure that the department of justice would not become the governments lawyer. You put that portrait there soon after he became attorney general because it was a signal to the world that you wanted to be known in the same way that others that had come before you were known. And frankly, one of the reasons i respect the attorney general so much is because after january 6, he made the very difficult decision to walk into the president s office and tell the president the election was not stolen. And for that reason, he resigned before january 20th when power was turned over. But, mr. Attorney general, you are unable to answer some questions but i will answer them for you, do you know what people would have said if you asked for u. S. Attorney weisss resignation when you became attorney general . They would have said that you were obstructing the hunter biden investigation and you were firing an appointee so you could appoint a democrat to slow walk this investigation and lose the leadership of that investigation. If you had made the same decision a year later because you are frustrated that the prosecution wasnt moving fast enough, they would have again said that you were interviewing with the prosecution. If u. S. Attorney weiss asked to become special counsel, if you made the decision to appoint somebody else to special counsel, people would have criticized you because you would have been taking somebody out of the investigation that knew the facts and could lead the investigation and put someone in who would have had to come up to speed on the investigation and would have allowed major decisions to be made until they came up to speed. So, three different opportunities where you could have acted, you would have been criticized either way whether you acted or did not in that situation. Far from slow walking, really wants the Trump Administration decided that was the person leading the investigation, your hands were tied. You didnt have the opportunity to make a decision on the leadership of that investigation. But, speaking of slow walking, i appreciate your reference in your opening remarks to the department of justice, strongly supporting effort by congress to promote competition in Digital Markets passing legislation to prohibit certain anticompetitive practices by dominant online platforms. You cant say who they are but i can, apple, amazon, facebook and google are monopolies and they have been harming this country and harming competition in that particular market for years and congress for five years has been investigating and offering bills on that subject. They spent 250 million according to reports in the last congress to defeat those bills. And now we do nothing in this congress to try to deal with that very serious issue. In fact, there are efforts, im told over in the senate, and i use those words very carefully in the same sentence, but there are efforts in the senate, to take 50 million in funding for the department of justice and i trust this division, and it would be an 18 cut and to move that money to the General Department of justice Operations Fund to try to further cripple the efforts that are going on in court. The state attorney generals and the antitrust division and federal trade commission are doing a great job jointly and trying to combat the scourge of these monopolies. My question to you is, will you make sure that the antitrust division is properly funded so it can continue this very serious effort at stopping these monopolies from harming our children, from harming competition and from further strengthening chinas position in this area . Yes, i absolutely will and one of the first things i did was to ask for more money for the antitrust division than i had ever been given in quite a long time. And ask for the fees that are paid for purposes of merger analysis be given to the antitrust division directly rather than to go into the general fund. I will point out for the record that attorney general barr left the Trump Administration december 3rd, 2020, not between january 6 and january 20th, 2021. Im sorry, since he mentioned monopoly, can i also enter into the record this article about the mastercard visa duopoly by proactive and their target of a bipartisan bill to reform this monopoly. Yes, that is accepted, and the lady from missouri is recognized. Thank you for being here, attorney general garland. We are here to make clear what it means to promote equal justice for every person in this country. Attorney general garland, you often speak about your commitment to supporting civil rights and the rule of law. But i have concerns about whether the department under your leadership is doing the absolute most it possibly can to advance these goals. In the limited time i have, i want to share my concerns about specific issues with you directly and to make clear the steps that i believe that the Department Needs to take. First off, as this hearing has shown, a small number of the departments cases get an outside level of attention and politics, but the reality is, you preside over most of the federal system of mass incarceration. And in courtrooms around the country, prosecutors who report to you are continuing to disproportionately prosecute them, and on your watch, it has increased for the first time in nearly a decade. Meanwhile, corporate crime enforcement is lower than it was during the Trump Administration. The Department Needs to rethink its entire approach to prosecution but let me also say thank you for what you are doing with the insurrections. And i urge you to take specific steps towards ending mandatory minimums and prosecutorial misconduct waivers and actively supporting alternatives to incarceration, funding federal public defenders, use of clemency power and reporting on disparities in federal prosecutions. Im also deeply concerned about the bureau of prisons. Director peters is not doing enough to address the rampant issues of abuse and mismanagement, which affects correctional staff and people in custody, it is shameful that solitary confinement has increased in the prisons during the Biden Administration despite the president claiming he supports ending it. We need to see more from the department across the board on bureau of prisons oversight. And you should implement the president s commitment to end the torturous practice of solitary confinement once and for all. Im also incredibly disheartened that the department has continued to pursue the Death Penalty despite the president pledge to end it. I urge the department to reverse course including by dismantling the federal Death Chamber in indiana and advocating for the sentences of everyone on federal death row. Im also still waiting to see any meaningful progress on the commitments that is of the associate attorney general around the enforcement of title six and the safe streets act. Im taking my time, i also would like an update on when the department will respond to the Oversight Committee democrats letter from june 2021, about the memo issued by the Trump Administrations office of Legal Counsel concerning the equal rights amendment, that deeply flawed memo is preventing the United States from publishing the equal rights amendment as the 28th amendment. I know that llc issued a short clarification after you took office but the wording was not clear, i urge you to fully withdraw the trump memo which is baseless and obstructing constitutional gender equality for all. Finally, i cannot overstate how shocked i am by the targeting of protesters who oppose the constructions of the Atlanta Public Safety Center and i urge the department to investigate these obvious violations of civil rights. These may seem like unrelated issues but to me and my constituents and to the people who are most impacted, they are interconnected and they all speak to whether the department will advance justice or simply Pay Lip Service to it. Given the limited time that we have, i dont expect you to comment on all of these issues but, i have a question, will you commit to working with me at my office on these issues including having your staff promptly, by writing your position and sending that to us, reaching out to us about all of the issues that we just spoke about . I would be happy to have the office of legislative affairs work with your staff, and i want to say i could not be prouder of the civil rights record of this department. It is the fundamental basis for why the Justice Department was founded. We have a history of also being involved in the 1960s, when i came to the justice im going to stop you, im not disagreeing with that, i just want you to understand where im coming from and the things i want to see. Finally, i want to remind everyone yet again that this is what the good faith oversight looks like, not the republican playbook. Thank you and i yield back. The gentleman from texas is recognized. Thank you. On october 21st, 2021, i asked about mr. Scott smith, the father in Loudoun County virginia who was arrested at a School Board Meeting where he questioned the rape of his daughter. Are you familiar with it now . I sent a memo to address violence and threats of violence in connection with School Personnel. Directed at School Boards . Directed at School Personnel, administrators that followed a letter on september 29th, 2029, for the National School Board Association to President Biden and emails from the National Director to the white house in which the white house asked for specific threats. One of the examples was scott smith. Subsequent to our hearing two years ago, 26 states left the national School Boards association and resigned on november 23rd of 2021, last week mr. Smith was pardoned by governor youngkin. You have an opinion on whether the governor was correct . I dont know the facts of the case. Have you resend the memo that you issued in 2021, yes or no . What we are discussing here is the memo still going, yes or no . The memo is intended to have meetings within 30 days. When the 30 days have finished, nothing has happened in more than a year and a half. It has not been resend it. Despite evidence that has come out from the National School Board Association Commission Report that white house officials discussed this with doj more than a week before the letter was sent, have you apologized, yes or no . I have testified seven times since that original this is the first time you are back here since we talked about it. Have you apologized for putting up memo out that implicated scott smith as a domestic terrorist, something the governor of virginia has now pardoned him from these accusations . The memo said nothing about him, nothing about the parents being terrorist, nothing about attending the schools the memo hasnt been resend it and you have an apologized for it. In a memo that is built on the back of that, but now we have this complement driven to the Civil Rights Division, lets talk about a father in pennsylvania that was arrested for heavily armed local Law Enforcement in front of his wife and children. His lawyers said he would appear voluntarily, local authorities found no case. He was arrested by the fbi for face act violations. The jury met for an hour, he was acquitted. When i was in federal court, i dont remember that being my result very often. I dont remember it happening at all. We took it to the jury and it was acquitted after one hour. Did you investigate this or question the United States attorney for why they resisted resources and can you explain whether that was a good use of the department of justices authority . The Justice Department respects the jurys verdict, and the decision was made by agents and prosecutors on the ground. We are asking information to be able to track down the information of such prosecutions but 126 times against prolifers versus four times for people who dare to question the issue of life. So i will leave that out there just to say, that is the Civil Rights Division at play, meanwhile we got the very liberal progressive groups being targeted as well. The senator sent a letter to you asking about information about the prolife meeting and yet, we didnt get any response from you. I would ask if you would respond to our letter that we sent in march asking about the fbi infiltrating such a meeting. I dont know what you are referring to but i will ask the office of legislative affairs to look into this letter. Our fact cases require approval, no matter what district, yes or no . It depends on the circumstances and the example generally speaking, yes. The main justice runs the tax division, yes or no . In the hunter biden case, i assured mr. Weiss thats not what im asking about, i have not mentioned his name. I asked a very simple question, do tax cases require approval by main justice, as a general matter . Most of the time but not when the attorney general has granted authority to the u. S. Attorney to do what he thinks is best. Mr. Chairman, point of order. The gentlemans time has expired. The chair recognizes the lady from texas. Thank you mr. Chairman and attorney general garland, thank you first and foremost for your Public Service and your dedication to justice. Im delighted to see you here today, thank you for appearing before us. I represent el paso, texas, a community on the u. S. Mexico border, we have been witnessing firsthand the abuses at the hands of Governor Greg Abbott through operation lone star which began in 2021. Governor abbott has deployed state resources and Texas National guards members to the states border with mexico and operation lone star has created order management challenges, it has resulted in countless humanitarian and due process violations for migrants. It has harmed guardsmen assigned to the mission, it has cost the state billions of dollars and it has completely undermined the federal Governments Authority over immigration. I sent you a letter, my colleagues and i from texas sent you a letter from july about greg abbotts floating barriers. I know that case is going through appeal. But, we have also learned that the National Guards shot at a Mexican National across the rio grande and in september, on september 1st, i sent you a letter asking that the doj investigated that. We also know that governor abbott, we have learned from whistleblowers that he has ordered National Guardsmen to prevent migrants from turning themselves in to cbp, has even ordered that they push people back into mexico. Mr. Chairman, i would like your unanimous consent to enter into the record an El Paso Times article from earlier this week, Texas National guard orders hundreds of asylumseekers on u. S. Territory back into mexico. This, in addition to governor abbett separating fathers from their children and their families, its just egregious what is happening on the border the operation lone star. Attorney general garland, are you able to speak to any responses the department has had to governor abbotts blatant undermining of federal Immigration Authority . I can speak on the question, when we brought suit on the rivers and harbors act with the interference of navigable waters, that case is still under adjudication in the District Court. I understand that, there are other issues and i want to make sure i flagged them for you today at this hearing, but would also like for your folks to take a close look at the investigation i have requested, and i will be sending a follow up letter of what we have learned just this week from the El Paso Times. Switching gears, i do want to offer you an opportunity for some rebuttal. Because what we have seen is their pension performance for twitter and other news programs. We have heard from u. S. Attorneys offices, not partnering with mr. Weiss and hypotheticals about what that means. Can you clean please explain the difference between partnering with the u. S. Attorneys office and acting as a special attorney or special counsel . I can talk about it in the stack abstract of the theoretical. As a case that has significance in another to speak with the u. S. Attorney and the other district, to find out the policies of the district to find out what the practices are, to see how judges and the district react to different kinds of charges. Sometimes a decision is made to partner together in those investigations. Myself for this purpose. It is just a mechanical question of what courts require in order to make an appearance. Thank you so much, mr. Garland, appreciate your Public Service to the American People. Mr. Chairman, i yelled back. Thank you, mr. Garland, for being here today. Every time i am in my district, constituents are concerned about the weaponization of government because they happen to be conservatives command i think on your watch now, the doj actually is a mid30s percent approval rate print and every time the doj goes after trump, he goes up in the polls. I think the American People are starting to wake up to what is going on, i think it is fairly obvious but the first question i have is we understand now, thanks to an fbi whistleblower, that the fbi received information on americans from bank of america, specifically bank of america sent the fbi a list of customers who made transactions in or around january 6th, 2020 10 the department of justice require any data around that time . Yes or no . Geo locational data. I believe everything that was done with respect to geo locational data was disclosed in the public filings in the january 6th cases, i dont have that at my fingertips. Lets do you remember any specific analyses that you may have done with that data . Any specific analyses, was there anything particular you were looking for, mr. Attorney general . The right to maybe buy a firearm. Thanks i understood the location data was to determine whether people claimed they went inside the capitol and actually wear inside the capitol. I guess the question is, to your knowledge, the geolocation data from other organizations, did you receive that from external sources or are you buying that data . I dont know the exact answer in general, but i believe with respect to january 6th, a subpoena issued to telephone companies. So, you subpoenaed the telephone companies. But this requires orders authorized by the court. Does it concern you that we talk about he said the fbis activities were somewhat sobering. Does that worry you on your watch that the activities of the fbi have been called sobering now . I didnt understand, will cause it sobering . John doran. I did read the report put all those events had to do with a crossfire hurricane investigation. Were you concerned when you said it was a sobering what the fbi was doing . I think mr. Drum, and i just want to make sure that he understands, mr. Durham, i promised him he would be able to go forward without interference, just as i promised mr. Weiss. I do not interfere with his report. His report had a lack of analytical and a number of other problems with respect to the investigation. I think both of the Inspector General made a similar comment, and director ray has made the same. I dont have a lot of time, i will yield a little bit to the chairman, but is it a crime in the u. S. To question an election . Is that a crime . Is it a crime for the u. S. Citizens to say we want to ask about this election, we want to actually look into this election . Is that a crime . I think you are asking not hypothetical, but something specific. I think that is just general. I dont think thats the specific predilections have been questioned for decades past. Is that now a crime in america . It is not a crime to question an election. No. And there are a lot of people in america that do, they question the weaponization of the government attacking american citizens. And so, if you, sir, i have an issue with trustworthiness of the American People and congress at this point mr. Garland, did you consider anyone else when david weiss requested special counsel designation on august 8th . Mr. Weiss asked if he made special counsel and i do not consider an alternative. I, of course, but in an alternative, was greatly disrupted in the investigation already. I want to be clear, he was the only one under consideration . There was either no special counsel or if there was, it was going to be the guy for the previous five years. I thought about what the consequences would be of both not appointing him and trying to find somebody else at that time. And you have no concern. I mean, the whistleblowers have brought forward all kinds of concerns. Earlier, when someone brought this up, they said those are allegations. They have been crossexamined for four hours by democrats in Oversight Committee. But there are two facts that can be questioned. Factor number one, they let the statue of limitations run, they let it expire. Factor number two, the plea deal fell apart. So, i just want to make clear that the guy who presided over all of that was the only guy under consideration for special counsel designation, is that right . Mr. Weiss is a person known for high integrity, for great experience in the prosecutorial realm, and he is appointed by the president. Thats fine. I have no doubts about his ability is. The only one under consideration . The question was whether to appoint someone and i thought, i will say what the consequences will be of trying to switch horses in midstream, but i do not consider any other. On july 10th, you said i have had discussions with officials, and i dont know if this was asked earlier, who did he talk with then . I am sorry, you are talking about the letter that you sent to senator graham . I am not going to get into internal deliberation. Mr. Weiss is now subject to the special counsel regulations, which required urgent reporting under certain circumstances, requiring him to consult with numerous places within the Justice Department. Thats fine, you follow the statute, god bless you. You said there was reporting, who did you report to . Is it you . Mr. Weiss does not have to report to anybody, he was a supervisor and decisionmaker in these matters. Okay. We have votes on the floor, we have to take another break. We will get back to this as soon as we can and we will start with the democrats. The house Judiciary Committee here taking a break. Todays hearing is attorney general Merrick Garlands first appearance before the committee since a special counsel brought two criminal indictments against former President Donald Trump and the Justice Department appointed a special counsel into the investigation of Hunter Bidens tax base. Testimony will return soon life here on the fix is in. Even with a facesaving indictment last week of hunter biden, everyone knows the fix is in, 4. 5 years, 4. 5 years, the department of justice has been investigating hunter biden, and investigation run by david weiss, an investigation that limited the number of witnesses. Prohibited agents from referring to the president as a big guy and any of the interviews. An investigation that curtailed attempts to interview mr. Biden by giving them a heads up. An investigation that notified mr. Bidens defense counsel about a pending search warrant, an investigation run by mr. Weiss, where they told the congress three Different Stores in 33 days. They told this committee on june 7th, david weiss said i have authority to determine when, where, and whether to bring charges. 23 days later, june 30th, he told this committee. Actually, i can only bring charges in the district of delaware. And to further confuse matters, on july 10th, he told senator graham, i have not sought special counsel status, rather i have had discussions with the department of justice. An investigation run by mr. Weiss that negotiated a plea deal that the Federal District court declined to accept. A plea deal so ridiculous, the judge asked this question, is there any precedents for a grand not to prosecute crime that have nothing to do with the charges being diverted . The response from the doj lawyer, i am not aware of any, your honor. A plea deal so ridiculous that the judge also asked, have you ever seen a diversion agreement where the agreement not to prosecute was so broad that it encompasses crimes in a different case . The response from the doj lawyer, no, your honor, we havent. An investigation run by mr. Weiss that not only had a sweetheart deal rejected, but according to the new york times, there was an even sweeter deal, an earlier deal, a deal in which mr. Biden would not have to plead guilty to anything. 4. 5 years, and all that, and now we get a special counsel. Now we get a special counsel, and who does the attorney general pick . David weiss, the guy who let all that happened. He could have selected anyone, he could have picked anyone inside government, outside government, he could have picked former attorney generals, former special councils, but he picked the one guy, the one guy he knows will protect joe biden. He picked david weiss. And here is what the ag said in his august 11th announcement of david weiss as his special counsel, i am confident that mr. Weiss will carry out his responsibility in an evenhanded and urgent manner. In urgent manner . Every witness weve talked to, the two fbi whistleblowers that came forward, the two fbi agents on the case, they have all said this thing was anything but urgent. The fbi said they were frustrated at the pace. Ms. Holly said she was frustrated at the pace. And of course, the irs agents, they said the investigation was slow walked and evenhanded. They limited the number of witnesses that could be interviewed, they tipped off the defense counsel about a subpoena. There is one investigation protecting President Biden, there is another one attacking President Trump. Justice department has got both sides of the equation covered. Look at the classified documents case. Spring and early summer of last year, the department of justice asked President Trump to turn over boxes of documents, he does just that. In the process, President Trump finds 38 additional documents, he tells the department of justice. Very next day, the fbi comes to his home and he turns them over. And then the department of justice asked the president to put any boxes he brought from the white house to his home in a storage room and secure it by locking it. He does that as well. Everything they ask him to do, he did, and then what does the Justice Department do . August 8th last year, they read President Trumps home. And according to the fbi agent, stephen, the assistant director in charge of the Washington Field office, the search was a complete departure from standard protocol. When we interviewed mr. Dan, he said first, my new field office i didnt do the search. They had to send folks in d. C. He said there was no u. S. Attorney assigned to the case, instead it was run by d. C. , in particular jay, now on the special counsel team. He said the fbi didnt get President Trumps counsels approval before they did the search. And dan told us he had recommended when the fbi got to mr. Trump some, President Trumps home, they contact counsel, wait for them to get there, and did a search together. Of course, the doj said no. And then who does the attorney general name as special counsel in that case . Jack smith. The guy who a few years ago was looking for ways to prosecute americans, looking to prosecute the very victims of the weaponizing government, the weaponizing irs. Jack smith, the guy who prosecuted governor mcdonald, only to have a Supreme Court overturned that prosecution in a unanimous decision. That is the guy, that is the guy that the attorney general of the United States selects as special counsel. And you wonder why four out of five americans believe there are now two standards of justice in our great country. Mr. Garland, i anticipate a number of questions on these two investigations. Later in the hearing, i expect from republicans, you also get questions about the many other concerns the American People have with the department. School boards memorandum, a memo that said prolife catholics are extremists, the fifth circuit decision, great decision on the department of justice and other agencies censuring american speech, and of course, defies the law up for reauthorization this year, and how that process has been abused and infringes on the privacy rights of the American People. Americans believe that today in our country, there is unequal application of the law. They believe that because there is. Republicans committee committed to making that making that change. With that, i would yield to the gentleman from new york, the Ranking Member. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to make two comments made one, just about every assertion you made in your Opening Statement has been completely refuted by witnesses who have testified before this committee. Two, far from being favored, many commentators have noted that people accused of simple gun possession while under the influence of drugs and that ghana was not used in the commission of a crime are rarely, if ever prosecuted. The way hunter biden is being prosecuted. Mr. Chairman, what is this committee is most important duty is is conducting oversight of the department of justice. We are called upon to ensure that the doj uses the enormous amounts of power it is granted in a fair, just manner that respects the civil and human rights of all americans. The attorney general of the United States overseas issues that affect the lives of each and every american. Violent crime, Drug Trafficking, threats to civil rights, threats to our National Security, and environmental crimes all fall under his purview. That is why we regularly requested he or she appeared before this committee. To speak about the work that apartment is doing for the welfare of the country. This is how we ensure that the department stays accountable to the American People. But if it were up to the republicans, americans would hear nothing about any of these subs attend and she is today. They would hear nothing about the rise in domestic terrorism and what the Justice Department is doing about it. They would hear nothing about what the department is doing to stop hate crimes and prevent gun violence. They would hear nothing about how the department is disrupting efforts by china, russia, and others to interfere in our election. Extreme matter republicans have ignored our oversight ability and used their power to stage one political stunt after another. They have wasted countless taxpayer dollars on baseless investigations into President Biden and his family. Desperate to find evidence for an absurd impeachment and desperate to distract from the legal peril facing donald trump. They have fought tirelessly, trying to influence and manipulate americans through social media. They have unconstitutionally of the interfered and attempted to bully local state and Law Enforcement officers. They have publicized the name of witnesses, leading to threats of death and physical violence against those witnesses and their families. They have caused any number of private institutions and Companies Millions of dollars in legal fees as they struggle to respond to ridiculous and overbroad requests for interviews and information. Without making meaningful attempts to get the information they seek by consent. They have levied a low, baseless personal attacks on any prosecutor to bring charges against donald trump or january 6th rioters. They have attempted to discredit investigators who knock hard enough on Donald Trumps alleged political opponents. They have supported the deadly attack on our capitol on january 6 in the attempt to overthrow a lawful election. They have justified conduct that we all know to be wildly illegal, like deceptive classified materials and incitement of violence. And through it all, rather than try to unite the country or solve the problems that affect us all, they have sought to exploit our division for senegal, personal political gain. That is their goal, division. They want to divide this country and make our government appear like it is broken, because that is when the broken Political Party thrives. So today, i implore the public to see through this. I have no doubt you will hear a deluge of conspiracy theories. They will quote freely from so called whistleblowers who have been broadly discredited or contradicted. They will viciously attack federal Law Enforcement. They will tell you that all 91 criminal charges against donald trump are part of the conspiracy, despite overwhelming evidence of each of Donald Trumps crimes. And they will attack special counsel weiss, who was appointed, let us not forget, by donald trump, for not being hard enough on hunter biden. The republicans will continue doing what they have done for years, discrediting anyone who does not serve their Political Goals at any cost. The shame of it is that in this hearing room, like on the house for where we are barreling towards a government shutdown, where my republican colleagues call each other names, we could be working together to put people over policies and to solve any number of problems affecting the American People. More than 30,000 americans have died from gun violence so far this year alone. Guns have become a leading cause of death for children ages one to 17, surpassing car accidents. Domestic violence, extremism, and White Nationalism are on the rise. We are seeing active clubs and other white supremacist groups pop up around the country. Antisemitism is at an alltime high. Foreign actors like russia, china, and north korea are attempting to influence our elections. Political rhetoric is causing threats against Law Enforcement officials to skyrocket. Our Immigration Court system is in desperate need of reform. Our elected workers received Death Threats from conspiracy driven extremists. Fentanyl is stealing our streets and poisoning our children at historic rates. This list goes on and on, and we the people in this room are in a position to do something about it. In fact, it is our duty to do something about it. Consistent with the oath we took when we were sworn in as members of congress. We can work with the department of justice and attorney general garland to address any number of real substantive problems facing the American People. Instead, most republicans will use their time today to talk about long discredited conspiracy theories and Hunter Bidens laptop. They will do it because they care more about donald trump than they do about their own constituents. I hope my colleagues will see reason and at least attempt to work with the attorney general in good faith. Sadly, the other side of the aisle, reason and good faith seemed to be in short supply. Many of them, mr. Attorney general, thank you for your testimony, and thank you in advance for your patience, i yelled back. A gentleman yells back without objection. We will now introduce todays witnesses. The honorable Merrick Garland, the attorney general of the United States and on march 11, 2021, thank him for appearing today. We began by sparing you in, will you please rise and raise your right hand . Do you swear that the testimony you are about to get is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, and believe so, help me god. Affirmative. Thank you, you can be seated. Please know that your written testimony will enter into the record in its entirety. We ask that you summarize your testimony. We want to again thank you for being here. You are welcome to give your Opening Statement. I am sorry, is this working . Yeah. Good morning, chairman jordan, Ranking Member nadler, and distinguished members of this committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you on behalf of the more than 115,000 employees of the department of justice. Since the Justice Department was founded, it has been tasked with confronting some of the most challenging issues before the country. Today, we are handling matters of significant Public Interest that carry great consequences for our democracy. A lot has been said about the Justice Department, about who we are and what we are doing about what our job is, and what it is not. And about why we do this work. I want to provide some clarity. First, Justice Department is made up of more than 115,000 men and women who work in every state and Community Across the country and around the globe. They are fbi, dea, atf agents, and United States marshals who risk their lives to serve their communities. They are prosecutors and staff who work tirelessly to enforce our laws. The overwhelming majority are career Public Servants, meaning they were not appointed by the president of any party. Second, i want to provide clarity about what the job of the Justice Department is and about what it is not. Our job is to help keep our country safe. That includes working closely with local Police Departments and communities across the country to combat Violent Crime. In fact today, we are announcing u. S. Marshals operation conducted with state and local Law Enforcement. That operation targeted violent fugitives and resulted in 4400 arrests across 20 cities in just three months. Our goal also includes combating the drug cartels that are poisoning americans. Last friday, we extradited a video, lopez, a leader of the cartel from mexico to the United States. He is the son of el chapo and one of more than a dozen Cartel Members we have indicted and extradited to the United States. Our job includes seeking justice for the survivors of child exploitation, human smuggling, and trafficking. And it includes protecting Democratic Institutions like this one, by Holding Accountable all those criminally responsible for the january 6th attack on the capitol. Our job is also to protect civil rights. That includes protecting our freedoms as americans to worship and think as we please, and to peacefully express our opinions, our beliefs, and our ideas. It includes protecting the right of every eligible citizen to vote and to have that vote counted. It includes combating discrimination, defending reproductive rights under law, and deterring and prosecuting hate crimes. And our job is to uphold the rule of law. That means we apply the same laws to everyone. There is not one set of laws for the powerful, another for the powerless, one for the rich and another for the poor, one for democrats and another for republicans, or different rules depending on race or ethnicity or religion. Our job is to pursue Justice Without fear or favor. Our job is not to do what is politically convenient. Our job is not to take orders from the president , from congress, or from anyone else about who or what we criminally investigate. As the president himself has said, and i reaffirm today, i am not the president s lawyer. I will add, i am not congresses prosecutor. The Justice Department works for the American People. Our job is to follow the facts and the law, that is what we do. All of us recognize that with this work comes public scrutiny, criticism, and legitimate oversight. These are appropriate and important, given the matters and the gravity of the matters that are before the department. By singling out individual career Public Service workers who are just doing their jobs is dangerous. Particularly at a time of increased threats to the safety of Public Servants and their families. We will not be intimidated. We will do our jobs free from outside influence and we will not back down. From defending our democracy. Third, i want to explain why we approach our job in this way. The Justice Department was founded in the wake of the civil war and amidst a reconstruction, and the first Principal Task was bringing to Justice White supremacists and others who terrorized black americans to prevent them from exercising their civil rights. The Justice Departments job then and now is to fulfill the promise that it is at the foundation of our democracy. That the law will treat each of us alike. That promise is why i am here. My family fled religious persecution in Eastern Europe at the start of the 20th century. My grandmother was one of five children, born in what is now belarus, made it to the United States, as did two of her siblings. The other two did not. Those two were killed in the holocaust. This country took my grandmother in, and under the protection of our laws, she was able to live without fear of persecution. That protection is what distinguishes this country from so many others. The protection of law, the rule of law, is the foundation of our system of government. Repaying this country further that my family owes. For our very lives. Has been the focus of my entire professional career. That is why i served in the Justice Department under five different attorneys general, under both democratic and republican administrations. That is why i spent more than 25 years ensuring the rule of law as a judge, and that is why come to order. The gentleman from maryland is recognized for five minutes. Next thank you, mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, general, how are you . Very well, i thank you. I want to point out three things that you said today, i want to emphasize these for the Committee Going forward. One, you said we will not back down, we will not be intimidated, and the other thing you said, too, was the way to not interfere with an investigation is to not investigate the investigation. Now, i thought that was particularly apropos here, because this committee has been doing exactly the opposite. We have been, under the chairmans leadership, investigating prosecutors all over the country in the middle of criminal investigations, and sometimes postindictment, sometimes preindictment. I think in an effort, frankly, to derail the prosecutions in those cases and i will start with the one, this is a alvin bragg effort. A chairman and two other Committee Chairs sent a letter, i think two actually, that d. A. Brad at the time, he was still investigating former President Trump for potential prosecution. And then after he was indicted, they raised the issue again. And the concern i had on that front was multiple. One was one of the letters that the Committee Chairs sent was demanding information that potentially would have violated state law in new york, similar to the federal grand jury secrecy laws that we have in some of the matters that you got. If he had complied with what the committee had demanded, but more importantly, i thought it was pretty clearcut that it was an effort to undermine and derail d. A. Braggs investigation. There was a similar investigation to that with d. A. Willis. What the gentleman yield for just a second . And not at this point, although i would be willing to make your letters a part of the record at the end of this. D. A. Willis in georgia faced similar cause. In fact, there are a number of prosecutors across the country, frequently in blue jurisdiction city is in red states, where they face pressure from usually estate officials to curtail the way they are doing investigations, and in some instances, the state ags have stripped them of their authorities, even though they have been duly elected by citizens in those states. And with respect to the jack smith investigation, at the beginning of the hearing, the chairman brought up trump did everything the doj asked him to do. This is with respect to the search warrant. And i was appalled at what was said. Frankly, as the record bears out, both in the indictment and frequently in statements made by mr. Trump himself, there were multiple efforts by the department of justice to reach out through the attorneys that represented mr. Trump and have him comply and turn over documents, he refused to do so. In fact, the allegations are he in fact moved documents and tried to hide them, so the department of justice couldnt get them. And i also led to the issue where mr. Trumps lawyers ended up having to provide information and testimony about what has happened, which is highly unusual, but this scenario is highly unusual, and we know that is the case, but former Vice President pence and current President Biden had similar issues, but they complied with the request by the department of justice, turned over the documents, so you didnt need a search warrant. But the news here is i guess, if you dont comply with subpoenas from the department of justice, they will go get the information they will get a search warrant and go get it. And i know that because i have seen that in multiple cases in my career. There is no surprise and no justice with respect to what was done in that instance. In fact, the fact that they took so long to do it, i think is based entirely on the fact that he had been president. And with respect to mr. Weiss, because this is the most recent version, and i get why theyre doing it, they want to try and build a case to impeach President Biden, the weiss angle seems to be one of the ways they are trying to do that, but as congressman buck said, everything that the department had with respect to mr. Weiss was correct. Because the Biden Administration had removed him when it came into power, there would have been house from the republican side that you were derailing the investigation because weiss was already on it, and if you brought in somebody new, they would have to start over again. And in fact, the senate republicans, as you testified earlier, sawyer assurances that he would let him continue Going Forward and as you testified to make me have done exactly that. So, i want to be clear, i know the committee is talking about bringing mr. Weiss the testimony, they brought all these other people to testify who were part of an active investigation, but it is a horrible precedent to be bringing in prosecutors in the middle of an investigation that is about to go to trial and has already been indicted, that is not the way this committee should be doing business. We should allow prosecutors to move forward. If weve got questions after the fact, we can raise them, as you pointed out. Mr. Weiss is going to issue a report at the end. Lets let them do their jobs and stop politicizing these cases. With that, i yield back. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield the chairman to clear the record. My friend from maryland said they will get a search warrant and go get it, unless it is hunter biden. Then they tip off the defense counsel. We know that happened. Second, relative to mr. Bragg, mr. Bragg sued me and it went to court, and guess what the court . They said we were right, and the guy we wanted to talk to, one of his prosecutors, came here and testified in this room. So, the court was on our side there. I yield back to the gentle lady from indiana. I didnt get to my question, sorry. Attorney general, you had a very moving statement about your grandparents coming here from belarus to live in the country without fear of prosecution. I grew up in a very similar country, ukraine now, and when i came here as a young person, i believed in the value as an american not to be afraid of my government. But i wanted to tell you and i want to share with you and get your thoughts on that, are you aware that a lot of americans are now afraid of being prosecuted by your department . Are you aware of that . I just want to know if you are aware or not. I think that constant attacks on the department and saying not attacks, let me give you an example. Talk about january 6. There probably were some people that came on january 6th here, had bad intent. But a lot of Good Americans from my district came here because they are sick and tired of this government not serving them. They came with strollers of kids, and proper security wasnt provided. You did not stop the debate after people broke into the capitol. But these people came, they were throwing smoke bombs into the crowds with strollers of kids. Fbi agents showed up to peoples houses. You have in my district and my time, fbi phone numbers all over, police call them. People are truly afraid. I just want to make sure. This is a big problem, people are afraid of their own government. We are talking about justice. You are probably not a bad person, i dont know you. But you are head of the department and people now feel you have a nice playbook. First, lets have a special counsel, and then you dont have to answer any questions here. Then an investigation on hillary clinton, on hunter, you are very quick on donald trump. By the time the investigation expired and all of the agents nobody recalls anything. You should probably have as part of your hiring policy. So no one is held accountable, which was egregious what happened in that report. I cant believe it happened in the United States of america. This is my frustration, i will be honest with you. Its very interest in, you know, people in the Obama Administration raise concern. Do you understand . Obama administration didnt do anything about it these people are dying right now and americans dont trust this president. So, i dont need answer because i know you are not going to, but i think you are probably a Good American and you care. And a lot of these people cover up the stuff in your department because they are embarrassed with what we became as a country, to say what our department of justice began. That allows russians and chinese to destabilize our country, that is danger to our republic. It is significant danger. I have just one more question for you. I agree on corporate crimes, even with democrats, we need to do a better job. One more question for you, do you believe you talk about rights to vote, but do you believe that only u. S. Citizens should be voting in this election, and doing anything to make sure that only eligible people vote in the election . Yes, and yes. I would like to see that is what you do. Thank you, yield back. The lady from vermont. A general garland, thank you so much for being here today, i know it has been a long day for you. I am relatively new to the committee and i am still getting my feet under me, but as far as what i can tell, what we are doing here today is talking about a lot of conspiracy theories and it is frustrating and tedious for those of us in the committee, but i can tell you, it is absolutely maddening for my constituents back home in vermont. We have so much important work to do to keep the government open, we are days away from a shutdown. I just want to remind folks that we are in this situation because my colleagues across the aisle are going back on a deal that majority of the conference meet with her speaker, thats why we are in this situation. If they are six us all in shutting down the government, seniors who rely on Social Security benefits will be impacted, thousands of medicare recipients will be impacted, veteran services will be curtailed. Those are the grim consequences from republicans inability and unwillingness to govern. I needed to start with that. Lets do some level setting here. Now, lets get to the real work of the doj and how congress can help the agency better serve this mission. Gun violence continues to plague our nation. We see the records every day on our television sets, our computers, and our communities. As a member of the Gun Violence Task force, this is important to me and so many of my constituents. Now, i believe there is actual room for bipartisan action on gun violence. At least in some areas. One of those areas, red flag laws. It is a great place to start. Vermont is one of 21 states that was able to pass red flag laws, these laws are working to keep guns out of the hands of people who are in crisis. And yet, many states do not even apply for funding from the bipartisan saver communities act to better implement red flag laws and to raise awareness about the program. In june 2021, doj published model legislation to help states craft their own extreme risk protections order. Now, republicans continued to make unfounded accusations that these laws violate civil rights by taking guns away from americans without any due process. Can you explain the due process protections that are put into place and a model legislation that doj proposed . I would start by saying, of course, there is room for a bipartisan agreement. That is a very good example. And that includes the ability to have funding for states that want to craft and put into place red flag laws. The requirements include due process protections. So, i dont know every element of the model legislation, but the general idea is relatives or friends of the person have to go to a court and get some kind of adjudication that the person is a danger to themselves or to others. This normally relates to Mental Illness problems, it may relate to some others. And so, if a gun is taken away under the circumstances, there is then a right to appeal. If they have a full hearing, in order to adjudicate the question. I cant say i know every technicality, but i think thats about it. I appreciate that. It is especially important to states like mine, rural states that have real issues with the silent killers, Domestic Violence and also suicide. And so, these are instances in which a red flag laws can really make a difference. Shifting gears here, i along with senator warren and 20 of our colleagues recently submitted a comment letter applauding the Draft Guidelines and urging agencies to finalize them. Corporate concentration remains a pressing problem for the u. S. Economy, and i fear that we are falling behind in this area and American Consumers continue to feel the pain because of this how does the Department Plan to ensure that future mergers and acquisitions do not stifle competition or harm consumers . Because that is often the pushback that we get. Obviously, the intention of merger guidelines is to set forth the enforcement policy of the department. Different generations of the guidelines, which i hate to say it, go all the way back to the time when i was in law school. Has been adopted and or been helpful to generations of judges. I have seen at least two or three of merger cases myself where we have used some of the learning and the merger guidelines and the current guidelines reflect really an adjustment to the current technology. That simply did not exist at the time the merger guidelines were passed. Guidelines. Thank you, attorney general. Just briefly, in closing, last year, you spoke on the subject and said the dojs enforcement against corporate crime has waxed and waned, but its waxing again. That is news to my ears. Thank you so much for your service. Lady yields back. Gentleman from texas is recognized. Mr. Garland, what is a confidential human source . Well, its a, a, its an fbi term. I dont know all the technicality. Is in your own policy here. An individual who is believed to be providing useful and credible information to the fbi for many authorize Information Collection activity, and from whom what the fbi expects to obtain additional, useful, and credible information in the future, all right . And whose identity information relationship with the fbi once confidential handling. So these guys are individuals, you pay them 42 million a year, did you know that . The ig said youre paying the sources 42 million a year. Did you know that . Its 42 million a year. So you do you believe that theyre credible, theyre valuable, the fbi is using these guys, were paying them a lot of money. Would you agree with that . Were paying them a lot of money, you got a lot of them out there. So let me paint the picture for america. Hunter biden, george charisma, in 2014, perez mike, very very corrupt Ukrainian Energy company. He has no experience in oil and gas. He admits it. I dont have any experience. I know i am there. I have a dad. I have with me a document called the sd 1023. Have you seen this . Youre familiar with that . Okay, its used by the fbi, everybody in america. Its used by the fbi. It is a confidential human source reporting document dated june 2020. Youre familiar with it . In this document, the fbis confidential human source says, boersma, now the corrupt company, needed to keep hunter on the board so everything would be okay. And according to the human source, they hired hunter biden to, quote, or to us through his dad for all kinds of problems. Mr. Garland, does that concern you . Okay, it should. I got limited time. Remember, your sources are credible, trustworthy, honest, and valuable. Are you familiar with Viktor Shokin . Who was mr. Viktor shokin . I got three minutes left. You want me to answer that . Yeah, Viktor Shokin, who is he . Okay, hes the prosecutor, folks, hes the prosecutor that was, he oversees all the corruption in ukraine. We know theres corruption over there. For the American People watching, after few months, a few months after hunter biden joined the burisma board, Viktor Shokin was named prosecutor general for ukraine to target corruption. At one of his investigations was into burisma. In this fd 1023 document, the human source clarified that burismas ceo, the man in charge of burisma, said he has many Text Messages and recordings that show he was coerced to make such payment to ensure Viktor Shokin was hired. Matter of fact, there was 17 of them. Mr. Garland, its clear, joe biden wanted shokin fired so he would stop looking into burisma, where hunter was on the board. Would you agree . All right, lets let the American People decide. Play the clip. Play the clip. Remember going over, convincing our team, to convince that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And i went over, i guess, the 12th, 13th time to kyiv, and i was supposed to announce that there was another billion dollar loan guarantee. And i got the commitment from poroshenko and from pay attention, sir, please and they did. So they said, they were walking on the press conference, i said, were not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. Youre not the president. The president said. I said, call him. I said, im telling you, youre not getting the billion dollars. I said, youre not getting the billion. Im going to be leaving here, i said, im leaving in six hours. If the prosecutors not fired, youre not getting the money. Well, son of a. He got fired. There you go. Mr. Attorney general, what you just saw, that was joe biden in his arrogance and role as the Vice President of this country saying, if you dont fire shokin, the United States isnt giving the 1 billion loan. Why would joe biden say that as the Vice President . Why would he say such a thing . Was it policy . With our policy at the time . Yes or no . It wasnt. I have documents here. Interagency policy Committee Data is the gentleman ever going to let im on my time pipe down time belongs to the gentleman from texas. Hes made significant reforms, choking appeared matteroffact, john kerry says he was impressive. And you know, within a few months after shogun was fired, they appoint a prosecutor that said, were not going to look into burisma anymore. Cancel that, forget it, were not looking into burisma. Boom. Here comes the Million Dollars. Joe biden threatened the ukrainian president and the prime minister. Everybody could see it. To fired burisma. If that is not good, what is . I will tell you what it is, and america agrees with me. Its bribery, and its impeachable. Are you going to do something about it . I bet you not, and thats why you, sir, also need to be impeached. I yield back. Time of the gentleman has expired. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. Moran. Attorney general, you were aligned assistant u. S. Attorney for years and a federal judge after that. You have significant experience with the processes surrounding criminal investigations. Tell me, whats the normal process for obtaining and getting a search warrant . You go to a federal judge, you present an affidavit, which you believe constitutes probable cause. The federal judge looks at it, make the determination of whether it does constitute probable cause. He then signs the search warrant , and its then executed. And whats the purpose of a search warrant . The purpose of a search warrant is to find either, to find evidence of a crime for which there has to be probable cause, and its in that location. When executing a search warrant on location that may contain evidence of a crime, what benefits are there for doing so without notifying the putative defendant, or the target of the investigation, or his attorney ahead of time the execution of the search warrant is forthcoming . Sometimes you make notification, sometimes you dont. If you think that the person who has the evidence of a crime is obstructing justice, or is going to move the evidence, or will secrete it if you want them in advance, then you dont give it. If you dont have those concerns, you may give advance notice. Yeah, so, in, in the instance of not withholding, withholding notice, you do so because sometimes, theyre going to actually move the evidence if you give them a heads up, correct . As a general, hypothetical manner, yes. In most instances, in your experience, decades of Law Enforcement, have you seen that more times than not, you give a heads up to the defendant, or is it odd to give a heads up to the defendant . I cant actually make a statistical resolution. I, i think its the case that the government tries to use less intrusive methods if they can, and if they cant, use more intrusive and more emergency methods. I, i agree with that, but typically, when youre going to execute a search warrant, typically, i think people would understand this, you would not actually give a heads up. Would you agree with that . I think as a general matter, thats correct. Gary shapley, one of the whistleblowers, testified that ausa leslie will told investigators, quote, optics were a driving factor in the decision not to request a search warrant for the guesthouse at the bidens delaware residence where hunter biden had stayed for a time. Ausa wolf told the investigators that, quote, there was more than enough probable cause for the physical search warrant there, but the question was whether the juice was worth the squeeze. And she further said, quote, a lot of evidence in the investigation would be found in the guesthouse of former vice President Biden, but there is no way investigators will get that approved. Now, do you agree with ms. Wolf that optics of an investigation should be the driving factor in Law Enforcement decisions when investigating potential crimes . As i said before, singling out assistant u. S. Attorneys is a dangerous matter. The supervisor of that case, mr. Weiss, he is the one who made the decisions in that case. He is the one who can answer questions as to whether those things happen. So lets take her out of the equation, then. Lets just take the statement generally. Do you believe that optics of an investigation should be a driving factor in Law Enforcement decisions as to whether or not to execute a search warrant or not . The dust the permit has standards for its work and improper considerations are not part of those. The only questions are those driven by the facts and the law. Mr. Shapley also testified that ausa wolf objected to a search warrant at irs investigators requested for a storage unit reportedly containing all the documents in the vacated office of the law firm owned by hunter biden. Investigators scheduled a call with u. S. Attorney weiss, who agreed that they could search the storage unit if it remained abandoned for 30 days, but immediately after the call, investigators learned that ausa wolf had reached out to Hunter Bidens defense counsel to tell them about the storage unit, effectively ruining investigators chance to access potentially critical evidence. In your experience, as you said earlier, this is not the typical thing that happens, correct . Once again, i dont know anything about these allegations. I dont know whether they are correct or not. These are questions most appropriately put to mr. Weiss at the appropriate time, and to be covered in his report if you think thats the appropriate way to resolve that. And you conceive of a reason why mr. Weiss or ms. Wolf would have given a heads up to Hunter Bidens legal team that the search of the storage unit was forthcoming . Im not going to get into hypotheticals about this. For somebody that was involved in the investigation at that point, who was literally delaying obtaining potential evidence in the case, do you think it was appropriate that then she was involved in negotiations of the, the, the irs deal with hunter biden . Im, im not, im not actually following the question. Im assistant u. S. Attorneys who are participating in and investigation also part is impressive. Is that what youre asking . Attorney general, i appreciate your time here today, but im concerned that the facts are just some examples of whats been going on here. I apologize. My times out. I yield back. Thank you for the time. Time of the gentleman is expired. The gentleman from maryland is recognized for unanimous consent. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I guess i had my five minutes. I would ask for the unanimous consent to offer some exhibits. First, i would offer objection. District attorney braggs, march 31 2023 letter in response to the committee. I would offer the letter from attorney abby lowell, Hunter Bidens attorney, to the committee dated september 14th, 2023, and this attachment. I would offer the letter from ms. Willis to the chairman on september 7, 2023. No objection. And i would offer this article from cnn, top irs official, latest witness to dispute allegations from whistleblower on hunter biden tax case. No objection. Take you, mr. Chairman. You bet. The gentleman from, gentle lady from wyoming. We have been investigating very serious charges made about your department and other elements of the Biden Administration, which allege ignoring the law to protect political allies from being held accountable for their wrongdoing. One aspect of this allegation brought by two very credible whistleblowers from the irs demonstrates a strategy of delaying criminal investigation into hunter biden and blocking any investigations into the corruption of joe biden. The whistleblower testimony notes that u. S. Attorney david weiss in november 2022 allowed the statute of limitations to expire, even though Hunter Bidens attorney had already agreed to extend the statute on the 2014 and 2015 charges, which charges included an attempt to evade or defeat taxes, and the fraud and false statements related to the Million Dollars that burisma paid to hunter biden while his father was Vice President. During a recent transcribed interview with the committee, fbi officials from the Baltimore Field Office refused to answer questions about the expired 2014 and 2015 tax charges because they were allegedly part of a, quote, Ongoing Investigation. Are the tax charges related to these years in fact part of an Ongoing Investigation . Again, i have no familiarity with the details of this particular investigation. So you dont know one way or the other . Thats right. All right. So how are charges for which the statute of limitations have already expired part of an Ongoing Investigation . Again, i, i, i dont know anything about this case. So i would, so i would charges that have already expired because of the statute of limitations the part of an ongoing and guess instigation . To answer in the hypothetical, because i dont know the fact is, often, charges from previous times are used as part of an Ongoing Investigation to inform information about intent, about patterns for other investigations . So are there other investigations into hunter biden where this information may become relevant . I think its a matter of Public Record that there is a tax investigation of mr. Hunter biden, with respect to other years. Be on the 2014 and 2015 . Beyond the ones that are, that you are referring to. Okay. Mr. Garland . Weiss has already said that. Okay. Mr. Garland, is it Standard Operating Procedure in your department of justice for prosecutors to allow the statute of limitations to expire on very serious crimes when the potential defendant has already agreed to an extension . So there, as i said before, theres no Standard Operating Procedure here. Maybe there should be. This is an oversight hearing. Maybe there should be. Maybe you should adopt Standard Operating Procedures to avoid this kind of a circumstance. Would you agree . No. Speed because its left to the discretion of alexa youve answered my question, thank you. According to one of the irs whistleblowers, quote, the purposeful exclusion of the 2014 and 2015 tax years sanitized the most substantive criminal conduct and concealed material facts, and quote. How can Americans Trust an investigation run by a special counsel who, by allowing the statute of limitations to expire, irreversibly, quote, sanitized the most substantive criminal conduct and concealed material facts . Prosecutor in question is a experienced veteran career prosecutor who was appointed by and we have no reason to trust him, do we . By President Trump. Okay. How much in terms of taxes would hunter biden have owed on the 1 million he was paid by burisma . And well, as you can imagine, since i dont know anything about the facts of the case i cant answer that print probably about 400,000, isnt that right . You can do the math you know the tax code. I dont know anything about the facts of this case, so im not able to do the math. And by failing to pay the taxes on those illgotten gains, what would the typical penalty have been for example if it was someone who didnt have the last name of biden or a d behind the name . Im sorry. These are all questions you have to direct to mr. Weiss, and mr. Weiss will address in his final at the by allowing the statute of limitations to lapse, did mr. Weiss effectively gift the tax money hunter biden owed for the 2014 and 2015 tax years to mr. Biden . To say again, the decisions about whether, in this area, whether these allegations are correct are ones that mr. Weiss will be able to answer. Mr. Garland, one of the things you have done and repeated over and over and over again is that to point out that mr. Weiss was appointed as u. S. Attorney by President Trump, as though that somehow inoculates him from criticism by us. Is that really how this game is played, that if someone is appointed by a republican, then theyre supposed to be on the republican team, or the, if theyre appointed by a democrat, theyre on the Democrat Team . You were appointed by mr. Biden, werent you . Are you on the Democrat Team . Let me just be clear. The point that he was appointed by a republican counteracts the claim that this was a partisan decision to benefit them. He remained as a member of the department of justice. Mr. Chairman, the gentle lady has expired. The gentleman from maryland is recognized again for unanimous consent. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to offer into evidence the testimony, or segments of the testimony of thomas so burzynski, dated september 7th. It was taken here before this committee. Goes to the deacon flexion issue, with respect to hunter biden security detail and the search warrant. Not objection. Thank you. Chernow recognize the gentleman from california. Good afternoon, mr. Attorney general. I do believe Christopher Wray is a competent director of the fbi . I think mr. Ray is a person of the highest integrity for whom i have great admiration, who was extraordinary experience. Thank you. And so you certainly dont think he would knowingly give false testimony to this committee, do you . I am sure that he would not. Are you aware that director ray, a couple months ago, in sworn testimony, advocated you in a sweeping abuse of power . I doubt he would characterize whatever he said in that way . Well, he testified about the School Board Memo that you issued on october 4th of 2021, in which you mobilized federal Law Enforcement powers against american parents. Now, of course, you didnt put it quite like that. Instead, you found a pretext, which is stated right here in the first line of the memo written in recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against administrators, board members, teachers, and staff. What was your basis for making that claim . I will say again, as i testified numerous times in response to exactly the same question, that i, i saw numerous reports in the press of violence and threats. Use all reports of the press, and so you decided to instigate a nationwide Law Enforcement initiative . If i may be permitted to answer the question. Numerous reports in the media of violence and threats of violence against School Personnel of all kinds. Did you consult with the fbi director . We received a letter from the National Association of School Boards reporting yes, that letter contained anecdotes. It didnt contain data of an increase. Did you, yes or no, consult with the fbi director before issuing the memo . I dont believe i spoke with the fbi director, no. Why not . Because the purpose of the memo, as is very clear from the memo, is to ask the fbi to assess the situation, to hold meetings, and to determine mr. Attorney general, you started with a conclusion that there was an increase in threats. Now, if you had bothered to consult with the fbi director, heres what he wouldve said. This is from his sworn testimony. That he was not aware of any such evidence. My question to you, sir, sitting here today, is can you substantiate your claim that there was an increase, of course there will always be criminal, sporadic criminal activity in all corners of society, but your claim was there was an increase. Can you substantiate that, sitting here today . I can substantiate that by the reports in the press of violence and threats of violence, and by the letters sent by representatives thats a no. Youre giving us anecdotes. Im asking you if you had data. You also said in your memo that you were committed to using the departments authority and resources to discourage the start, identify them whenever they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate. Were there any such prosecutions . The emphasis should be there on when appropriate, and there were no such prosecutions, and thats good news, not bad news. There were no prosecutions, and, in fact, director ray said there were no arrests, there were no charges. You have no data to show us that there was any increase. You didnt even bother to consult with the fbi director. And then there were no resulting prosecutions, even though you said that they were coming. So i have to ask you now, in retrospect, was there a compelling Law Enforcement justification for the memo . I think youre mischaracterizing the memo. The question, the purpose of the memo was to hold meetings, to open lines of communications with states so is that a no . Yes or no, was there a compelling Law Enforcement justification . I believe there was a reason to ask for those contacts to be made with state and local Law Enforcement. Well, the fbi director disagrees with you. Thats not what the fbi director said. Is there attorney general, when asked, do you have any reason to dispute the conclusion that there was no nationwide Law Enforcement justification . He said he didnt. Either he didnt see the reports, or he didnt see the national this is a transcript. Ive sent you the transcript. So my question is this. Will you retract the memo, and by that i mean issue a formal document to the effect that it is no longer operative . I will not, because there was absolutely nothing wrong with the memo, as i have testified several times already. Even though you wrote fbi director says there was no justification for it, you will not retract it . The memo is mine, its my decision whether its necessary to make assessments like this, and i asked the bureau to make these assessments are you familiar with the concept of a Chilling Effect . Are you familiar with the concept of a Chilling Effect . Im very familiar, and thats the very reason how would you define a Chilling Effect thats the very reason why the second sentence of the memo says please tell me what you consider to be the definition of a Chilling Effect. That memo has no Chilling Effect. I didnt ask you your opinion on whether the memo has one. I ask you, what is a Chilling Effect . Im telling you that the second sentence of that makes clear ive read the full memo. Im asking you, what do you define a Chilling Effect as . A Chilling Effect is one peoples exercise of First Amendment rights are chilled by coercive activity i the government, which did not occur here. So here, were dealing with mr. Chairman. With respect to the time. The gentlemans time has expired, but it was a pretty darn reporting question with the attorney general of the United States cant define what a Chilling Effect is, so i thought i would let it go a few seconds. The attorney general to define what a Chilling Effect is, and said it didnt occur here. He didnt define it. He just dismissed it. The gentleman time has expired. I thought it was a very important five minutes. We now recognize the gentle lady from florida for five minutes. Good afternoon, mr. Attorney general. Id like to return to the earlier discussion about fisa process and the fisc. A number of the members of this committee, and of my community, are gravely concerned about the welldocumented abuses of the fisa process, and within the fisc proceedings. And declassified opinions from the fisc in 2018 and 2019, the presiding judge roseburg it monitors the fbi, stating, there still appears to be a widespread violations of the querying standard by the fbi, and that there appears to be a fundamental misunderstanding of some fbi personnel about what the standard reasonably likely to return for an intelligence information means. Mr. Attorney general, what measures has the fbi instituted since that time to ensure that these abuses are stopped . So if were talking about fbi fisa section 702 . Yes sir. Was as a central part of our ability to find out what foreign nationstates, foreign terrorists, are trying to do in the United States. I read, when i first came into the Justice Department of the attorney general, i read the opinions you talked about, and they deeply concerned me. And i agreed when i looked into it that there was a misunderstanding by operators as to, and analysts, as to what the query standard were. So one of the very first things i did was send a memo to the fbi directing that the way in which Justice Department, and particularly the fbi, did the querying be examined, and that corrections be made. This was an extension of a memorandum that attorney general barr had likewise, after he read similar concerns, sent to the fbi at the end of 2020. And mr. Attorney general, in addition to other things, the ultimate adjustment included additional attorney oversight, requiring fbi users to affirmatively opt in to search the 702 database, updated guidance and training, and enhanced approval requirements, correct . Yes maam. All thats true, and the consequent with a 93 drop in the number of u. S. Personal queries. Nonetheless, mr. Attorney general, you would agree, would you not, that there are continued needs to review, analyze, and make additional improvements and safeguards to ensure that we dont continue seeing these abuses . I do agree. In fact, in recent weeks, we thought even President Bidens intelligence Advisory Board make recommendations that we continue to revise 702 oversight and restrictions, including a recommendation to direct the dni and the attorney general to Research Potential technological enhancement to the current oversight framework. Tell me, what technology might modernizing improving oversight of the 702 process . One of the technologies that is already worked very effectively is to change this from an opt out to an opt in set of queries. So you had to, first of all, indicate that you are looking at 702 and not just acrossthe board. The fbi holdings. You have to have a, a dropdown window, which explains why you are going to do this. Is that window require the user to input narrative text . Thats right. Thats right. All right. Thank you, mr. Attorney general. Are there other Technology Specific changes that you would recommend . Id like to consider that more. There are various kinds of Auditing Program using technology, a National Security division, Justice Department has done some of that. The fbi actually at the request of attorney general barr began an Auditing Program like that. Fbi director ray, who also agrees that the, that these kind of noncompliance should it continue. Put that Auditing Program into effect within the Justice Department. Thank you, mr. Attorney general. I yield the balance of my time to the chairman. Mr. Garland, in david weisss letter to senator graham on july 10th of this year, he says the spirit i was assured that i would be granted special Counsel Authority if it proved necessary. In this assurance came months before the october 7th, 2022 meeting referenced throughout the whistleblowers, excuse me, allegations. How was that assurance given, and who gave it . Im sorry, i think he was talking about 515 authority. Is that what youre im reading the letter now. Hes not talking about special Counsel Authority. It says that i was 515 authority. Okay. Same difference. Well, nothing different, but same fundamental question. Hes making the point that he was assured that this was, he could get the status, and that status came, that assurance, excuse me, came before october 7th, 2022. How was that assurance given, and who gave it . I made that clear in my direction, and that was trent did to him. So you told him that back before october 7th . Im not going to get into exactly the deliberation of the department, but three simple questions. How was it given, who gave it, when was it done . I understand. I gave it direction from the beginning that he would be able to bring a case whenever, wherever he wanted to. And that direction he heard, obviously, and he confirms that here. I went a little overtime, so i told the Ranking Member i extended to him a few seconds or minutes if you wanted to say a few more things or ask a few more questions. Thank you. Let me just ask the attorney general, mr. Attorney general, weve asked many questions here what you were not permitted to answer. People ask the question, just ask another question, didnt permit you to answer. Is there anything youd like to say an answer to anything that you think should be made clear . Look, im grateful to the opportunity, for the opportunity. I just, again, i want to assure the American Public and this committee that the Justice Department follows the rule of law. It enforces the law equally without regard to persons and without regard to parties, and that we do the best we can to follow the facts and the law. Thank you. Mr. Attorney general, we appreciate you being here in the committee. Maybe have to do something official. I guess if anyone wants to add something to it, they can emit that to the record. With that, the committee is adjourned. Thank you. There for garlands testimony, you can watch the entire hearing today at 8 00 eastern on c span. Also, cspan now, our free mobile videoout, or online at cspan. Org. Monday, watch cspans new series, in partnership with the library of congress. Books that shaped america. Well feature the federalist, a compilation of essays written in 1787 and 1788 by alexander hamilton, james madison, and john j, urging for the ratification of the newly drafted u. S. Constitution. Judge gregory maggs, u. S. Court of appeals for the armed forces, and colleen sheehan, director for graduate studies school of civic and economic thought at Arizona State university, will be our guest to discuss why those essays are considered one of the most important references for interpreting and understanding the original intent of the constitution. Watch books that shaped america, featuring the federalist, monday, live at 9 00 eastern on cspan , c span now, our free mobile videoout, or online at c span. Org. Also, be sure to scan the qr code to listen to our companion podcast, where you can learn more about the authors of the books featured. Cspan is your unfiltered view of government. Were funded by these television companies, and more, including comcast