The turner recognizes s the gentleman from georgia. Five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Attorney general garland, great to see you. Thank you for your service to the nation. And the nation watches as republicans have no answer for why they want to focus and obsess on hunter biden receiving 2 million from burisma after serving on the board he said he was not qualified to serve on. But yet, the saudi arabians gave 1 billion to Jared Kushner who conducted middle east strategy for his dear old dad, donald trump. He got 2 billion for something that he is not equipped to do, which is investment banking. And so republicans looking at hunter biden instead of Jared Kushner, americans dont 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 is to impeach or 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. For trying to hold donald trump accountable. So the American People are watching that and they also appreciate the fact that you have 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 of the land as a judge for 24 years, the d. C. Circuit court of appeals. We appreciate your service, you were for seven years the lead you managed the entire office. Thank you for that. You also served on the Judicial Council for number of years. And so you are steeped in the rule of law. You are a judge extraordinaire. And, as a judge, you never had the occasion to receive a private jet travel to exotic location by a corporate billionaire, did you . No. He never received an offer to get a ride on a private jet . No. Did you take any vacations at exclusive resorts paid for by a billionaire . I know these are not hypothetical questions, its really not within my realm. You are a judge extraordinaire and you know the rules of ethics for judges because your bench was covered by a code of conduct. Is that not correct . All of the judges, federal, appellate district judges are covered by the code of conduct. You would never have had someone to pay for your godsons tuition to private school i want to answer these kind of hypothetical questions. To me there hypothetical questions. What i would say is always as a judge, and ive said this before quite publicly and long ago, i always tell myself to the highest standards of ethical responsibility imposed by the code and that is really all i can answer. Is required the judges and justices avoid even appearances of impropriety. Isnt that correct . Again, i know youre asking this both hypothetically and not hypothetically, all i can say is i follow the code of traditional conduct and includes avoiding appearances. Let me ask you this question. 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 Terrence Thomas being in violation of the ethics in Government Act to the Justice Department. Does that, along with myself and others requested that you take that matter up. Directly. Have you responded to either one of those letters, and if not, why not . And what action have you taken pursuant to those letters . But the gentleman a respond. May respond. I assume if you have a letter i will respond. The time of the judgment has expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from california. Thank you. This may be the reason expecting to leave the chief justice in that group before we speak because you wouldve hurtled up. I want to thank you personally for your office and engagement on camp lejeune and obviously of that amount of litigation. That is one of the many jobs that falls at your feet. One of the jobs that falls at our feet here is that we are watchdogs of the executive branch. You have previously said you are not congresses attorney. And you have said you are not the president s attorney. And i am assuming you are neither executed or defense attorney and you are neither the president s prosecutor or defense attorney. That is why todays investigation really 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 member of his family or in concert with the president s activities in fact needs to be overseen, admonished or even prosecuted. 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 its an Ongoing Investigation. When we ask for information you very commonly say it is the policy, not the law, but the policy of the department of justice, not to provide information needed to an Ongoing Investigation. So far i am on track, is that correct . I think ive said more than its just policy. I think the letters we have sent trace it to the constitutional separation of rule 60. Et cetera. But in general im in accordance with what youre saying. 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 of what he couldve agreed to that he pushed back on a plea settlement and nullified it and said the was attorney going back. In light of that, dont you think it is appropriate for that portion to be considered a preOngoing Investigation and for congress to legitimately look at the activity leading up to that failed plea bargain rather than wait until weeks, months or years from now the cases fully settled . Give me a chance, first, i dont agree with the characterization of what happened in the plea. The district judge performed or obligations under rule 11 to determine whether the parties were in agreement, which each had agreed to and determined they were not. It fell apart as you know. There been another prosecution, the leads to the second thing. Mr. Weiss is in the midst of an ongoing prosecution on the very matter youre talking about. Okay, but mr. Attorney general, if we believe, and we do, at least on the side of the days, that a pattern of behavior is occurring relative to the investigation of hunter biden, particularly and including while he lived in the Vice President s home, while he operated, comingled with the Vice President , and even today as he travels with the president , so 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 when i want your answer on i know we have limited time, mr. Weiss supposedly had this ability to bring a prosecution anywhere. He now explicitly 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, in investigation he was charged with doing in delaware but which flowed over into their jurisdiction . Isnt that in fact an in investigation that he was charged with doing in delaware but which flowed over into their jurisdictions . Is that in fact an example where those political import the appointees of the now and president that their decision not to cooperate create in at least an appearance of political interference with the investigation of the president , son and possibly activities related to the president . Im happy to answer this hypothetical. In the hypothetical it is the normal process of the department that and if attorney wants to bring they go to the other district and consult. They do that in order to determine what the policies are in the district and what the practices have been in the district. What the judges are like in that district. Our u. S. Attorney in another district does not have the authority to deny another u. S. Attorney ability to go forward and i have assured mr. Weiss that he will have the authority one way or another and i think mr. Weisss letters completely reflect that. Thank you, to be continued. Welcome mr. Attorney general and thank you for leading the department with such integrity. We meet today at a momentous time in our history. The country 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 trial of the proposition that we are a nation of laws committed to the rule of law and that no one is above the law. It is a proposition well known around the world because it is the one essential to ingredient. We have expressed our belief but it has never been tested like it is today. In this committee we are engaged in a portion of that trial. The chairman would abuse the power of this committee by trying to interfere in the prosecutions of donald trump, by trying to use the committees power of subpoena to compel criminal discovery and make the committee a kind of criminal defense form for the former president. In doing so the chairman of this committee would establish a very different proposition. He would establish the principle that the rule of law should apply to almost everybody, just not the leader of his party. According to this alternate proposition, if you are the president of the United States and you lose your reelection you can violate the law and constitution to try to stay in power and if you are successful while then maybe you get to be president for life and if you fail there is no repercussion. This proposition is also well known to the world and it is called a dictatorship. Esther jordan hopes to camouflage his assault on the rule of law by falsely claiming that donald trump is the victim of unequal justice and hunter biden his beneficiary. It is a claim that is transparently political as it is devoid of any factual basis. And it is cynical based on the belief that the American People cannot discern fact from fiction. But i am betting on america. History has shown that those who bet against her are rarely successful and more often they end up covered with shame. I believe in the rule of law and i think you mr. Attorney general for defending it. Me now turn to some of the false claims asserted 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 indictments in 91 counts facing him. His response was biden indictments, excuse me, but a lot of a biden political indictments. He said to the attorney general, indict him. Mr. Attorney general, i want to give you a chance to respond. Was the president telling the truth or lying when he said that President Biden told you to indict him . No one has told me to indict and in this case the decision to indict was made by the special counsel. So that statement the president made on sunday was false . I will say again that no one has told me who should be indicted and in any matter like this and that the decision about indictment was made by mr. Smith. Let me ask you this question about the prosecution of hunter biden. The prosecutor in that case, mr. Weiss, was appointed not by joe biden, and he was appointed in the first instance of donald trump, correct . And he was continued in that correct . Can you imagine the hue and cry you would hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle if you would have removed him from that position . Could you imagine the claims that you removed a prosecutor who is diligently investigating hunter biden, could you imagine the outrage . I can say that during my confirmation hearing discussed with many senators on that side of the aisle, their desire and actual insistence that mr. Weiss be continued to have responsibility for that matter and i promise and i said at my confirmation hearing that he would be permitted to stay and that i would not interfere. Mr. Attorney general, that was 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 their attack on you is completely devoid of facts, principal, but i appreciate you doing the right thing for the department of justice and more importantly the right thing for the American People. I yield back. The chair may now yield back. I recognized from kentucky. Elon musk but then he became a critic of the administration and exposed the censorship regime. Now per public reports the d. O. T. Has opened not one but two investigations of elon musk. Mark zuckerberg on the other hand spent 400 million in 2020 tilting the elections secretly for the democrats. No investigations whatsoever. To the American Public, these look like mafia tactics. You pay us money, we look the other way. You get in our way, we punish you. The American Public sees what these tactics are. I want to direct you to a video that we are going to play. Obviously thats a significant matter and it is an ongoing criminal investigation and so i will not comment on an ongoing terminal interest nation. Were those pipe bombs operable . Batf is the expert. I cannot comment. We know this is an active investigation. We can handle classified information and we find that your department so we need that. It is an issue of commenting on ongoing criminal investigations which we are restricted in doing and the last administration after strengthened those policies. Thats not our policy and we find you so lets move on. I will not violate the rule of law and comment on ongoing criminal investigations. Peter navarro was indicted for contempt of congress. Are you in fact in contempt of congress when you give us this answer . This is an answer thats appropriate at a press conference. Its not an answer when we are asking questions. We are a committee that is responsible for your creation, for your existence of your department. You cannot continue to give us these answers. Are you in fact in contempt of congress when you refuse to answer . I have the greatest respect for congress and constitution and laws of the United States. The protection of pending investigations and ongoing criminal investigations as i 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. It is a requirement of due process and respect for those who are under investigation and protection of their civil rights. With all due respect to that, irancontra was an Ongoing Investigation and that didnt stop congress from getting the answers and you are getting in the way of our cost to chanel duty. You are citing the constitution and i will fight it. It is our constitutional duty to do oversight. When i said how many agents are assets of the government were present on january 5th and january 6th and agitating into the crowd to go in to the capitol can you answer that . I dont know the answer to either of those questions. If there were any, i dont know. I think you may have just perjured yourself that you dont know that there were any . I have no personal knowledge of this matter. I think what i said last time you had two years and by the way that was in reference to ray apps and yesterday you indicted him. On a misdemeanor. You are putting people away for 20 years for filming. Some people werent there and the guy is saying to go into the capital capitol. You have got all the goods on him. 10 videos and it indictment for misdemeanor . The American Public is not buying it. May i answer the question . I will ask one now. Go ahead. In discovery in the cases were filed with respect to january 6th the just this department prosecutors provided whatever info they had about the question they are asking with request to mr. Apps the fbi has said he was not in employee or informant of the fbi. Mr. Apps has been charged and as a proceeding i believe going on today on that subject. The charge is a joke and i yield to gentleman from california. Mr. Attorney general, my colleague said you should be held in contempt of congress. And that is quite rich because the guy whos leading the hearing right now, mr. Jordan, is about 500 days into evading his subpoena. About 500 days, so if we talk about intent to congress, lets get real. Are you serious that jim jordan, a witness to one of the greatest crimes ever committed in america, a crime or more prosecutions have insured than any crime committed in america refuses to help this country and we will get lectured about subpoena compliance . Jim jordan wont even honor a lawful subpoena. Are you kidding me . Are you kidding me . There is no credibility on that side. Mr. Attorney general you are serious, they are not. You are decent, they are not. You are fair, they are not. So i welcome you to a law firm of insurrection llp where they work every single day on behalf of one client, donald trump and they do that at the expense of millions of americans who need the government to stay open who want their kids safe in their schools, thats the expense that this nonsense and this clown show except they have real responsibilities that affect real americans, its the difference between one side that believes in governing and one side that believes in ruling. You have tried to comply with this committee in fact last week one of your special agents came here for an interview, brought his lawyer and was told that he couldnt have his lawyer present. Mr. Jordan, who tells all of us he knows so much about the cost of tuition, wouldnt afford one of your employees one of the basic Constitutional Rights to have a lawyer pleasant present. Your office sent a letter saying that you were willing to comply and i would like to send that to the record. Who appointed mr. Weiss . Mr. Trump was the last person who appointed mr. Weiss to the u. S. Who initially appointed john durum . Mr. Durum was also in pointed my President Trump and mr. Barr appointed him as special counsel. Again, these guys are so upset that D