The chair recognizes the gentleman reporter from georgia, mr. Johnson, there. Attorney general garland, great to see you. Thank you for your service in the nation. And the nation watches as the republicans have no answer to why they want to focus and obsess on hunter biden receiving 2 million for maurice my after serving on a board that he said he was not qualified to serve on but yet the saudi arabians gave 2 billion to Jared Kushner who conducted middle east strategy for his dear old father, donald trump, he got 2 million for something that he is not equipped to do, which is investment banking. So republicans looking at hunter biden instead of Jared Kushner, americans do not understand how that could be. They also are increasingly alarmed about the fact that republicans in control of the house only seem to have three objectives. One, is to impeach joe biden, number two is to shut down and get rid of kevin mccarthy, and the third is to shut down government and a subset of that is to defund the doj and the fbi. Just for trying to hold donald trump accountable. The American People are watching that and they also appreciate the fact that youve had a distinguished career as a prosecutor and a doj official as well as 24 years on the bench. You served on the Second Highest Court room of the land, as a judge for 24 years, the washington, d. C. Circuit court of appeals. Thank you for your service. You were for seven years the lead circuit appeal appellate george cut. You managed that precinct and office. Thank you for that. You served on the Judicial Council for number of years. So, you are steeped in the rule of law. You are a judge extraordinaire. As a judge you never had the occasion to receive a private jet travel to an exotic location by corporate billionaires, did you . No. Never . No. Did you take any vacations at exclusive resorts paid for by a billionaire . I know these are not hypothetical russians. But this is not within my purview or realm. You were a judge extraordinaire and you know the rules and ethics because revenge had to cover by code of conduct is that not correct . All of the judges are covered by the covered of conduct. Paid for your daughters tuition to private school. I dont want to enter these stupid questions. What i would say, ive said this before, quite publicly, long ago, i hold myself to the highest possible standards of ethical responsibility imposed by the code and that is really all i can say. Is require that judges and justices avoid even appearances of the proprietary. Is that correct . I know you are asking this post hypothetically and not hypothetically, all i can say is i follow the code of judicial conduct and includes avoiding appearances. Senator whitehouse and i sent a letter to you alerting you to the fact that we were asking the Judicial Council to refer the matter of Clarence Thomas in violation of the ethics in Government Act to the Justice Department and after that representative alexandria cortez along with myself and others requested that you take the matter up directly. Have you responded to either one of those letters, if not, why not . And what action have you taken . You sent the letter we will have a i will speak to where it is at this point. This may be the reason its good for me to leave the chief justice before each of us speak because you wouldve already heard all of that. I want to thank you personally for your office and engagement camp lejeune and a vast amount of litigation that is one of the many many jobs that falls at your feet. When the jobs of falls in our feet is that we are watchdogs of the executive branch. He previously said that you are not congresses attorney, and you said you are not the presents attorney. And im assuming that you are neither on prosecutor or defense attorney and you are neither the president s prosecutor or defense attorney. And, thats why is todays investigation does deal with the fact that if you are not by definition the president s prosecutor but we have an obligation to see whether or not the president or a member of his family were in concert with the president s activities in fact needs to be overseen and admonished or prosecuted. So, i have a couple of questions for you. One of them is that you have not said this very much today but you often say i cannot comment on that because is ongoing. We ask for information you very commonly say that it is the policy, not the law, of the department of justice not to provide information on pending litigation. So far, im on track is that correct . Of said more than just the policy. The letters that weve said trace to the constitutional separation of powers that rules on the federal criminal procedure. In general, yes. One of the challenges we face is that just a matter of weeks ago a federal judge found the actions of now special prosecutor to be so outside what can he agree to that he pushed back on a settlement and nullified it and sent the u. S. Attorney going back. In light of that, dont you think that is appropriate for that portion to be considered a, preongoing investigation and for congress to look at the activities leading up to that failed plea bargain rather than wait until weeks months or years from now, and the case is fully settled. If you give me a chance, first, i do not agree with characterization of what happened in the plea. The district judge performed obligations under rule 11 to determine whether the parties were in agreement, what each had agreed to and determined there were not. We fell apart, as you know. There has been another prosecution. Thats the second thing. Mr. Weiss is in the middle of the unit ongoing prosecution on the matter you are talking about. If we believe and we do at least on this side of the day, that a pattern of behaviors occurring relative to the investigation of hunter biden, particularly including while he lived in the Vice President s home, while the operated and co mingled with the Vice President and even today as he travels with the president in light of that, can you agree that in fact it should be reasonable for us to look at a number of items including and one that i want your answer on, if limited time. He supposedly had this ability to bring a prosecution anywhere. He now has that ability. However are you concerned and should we have the right to look into the fact that political appointees in california and in the district of columbia refused to, in fact, cooperate with him in those investigations that he was charged with doing in delaware but which flowed over into their jurisdictions . Is that not, in fact, an example of those political appointees of the now president that their decision not to cooperate with him, creates at least an example of those political appointees of the now president that their decision not to cooperate with him, creates at least an appearance of political interference with the investigation of the president s and his son an activity related to joe . I am happy to answer this question hypothetically but not in the specifics because i have stayed out of this matter. In the hypothetical realm, it is the normal process of the department that is a use attorney in one district wants to bring a case of another, they go and consult. Its perfectly appropriate. They do that to determine what the policies are in that district, what the practices are, what the justices are. But a u. S. Attorney in another district does not have the authority to deny another u. S. District attorney the ability to go forward and i do have assured that mr. Weiss as the authority one way or another and i think mr. Weiss completely reflects that. Thank you, to be continued. The gentleman from california for five minutes. Thank you for leading the department with such integrity. We meet today the momentous time in our history is about to go through a great trial. By this i do not mean any of the several trials of the former president but rather a trial of the proposition that we are a nation of laws committed to the rule of law and that nobody is above the law. It is essential ingredient in all democracies. We have all professed our belief in this principle but it was never truly tested, like it was today. In this committee we are engaged in a portion of that trial, the chairman would abuse the power of the committee by trying to interfere in the present of donald trump by trying to use the committees power of subpoena to compel criminal discovery and making a Committee Defense firm for the former president. In doing so the chairman would establish a different proposition. For mr. Jordans actions he would establish the principle that the rule of law should apply to almost everyone, not the leader of his party. According to the sultanate proposition, if you are the president of United States and you lose your reelection bid, you can violate the law to stay in power, and if youre successful, then maybe you get to be president for life. And if you fail, then there is no repercussions. This proposition is also well known to the world and it is called dictatorship. Mr. Jordan hopes to camouflages result by falsely claiming that donald trump is the victim of unequal justice and hunter biden has been a beneficiary. A claim that is transparently political as is is devoid of any factual basis. It is cynical. Based on the belief that the American People cannot discern fact from fiction but i am betting on america, and history shown that those who bet against her are rarely successful and more often they end up covered in ash. I end up believing in the rule of law and i thank you for the sending it. Let me turn to the false claims asserted by the former president and some of this committee. On sunday, the former president appeared on a National News sunday program and was asked about four indictment and 91 counts facing. His response was, biden indictments . Biden and political indictments. He said to the attorney general, indict him. Misty jenna general, i want you to respond. Was he telling the truth or was he lying when he said that President Biden told you to indict him . Nobody has told me to indict and in this case, the decision to invade was made by the special counsel. That statement the president made on sunday was false . Them to say again, nobody has told me who should be indicted. And, any matter like this. And the decision about any indictment was made by mr. Smith. Let me ask you this question about the prosecution of hunter biden. The prosecutor in the case, mr. Weiss, he was appointed not by joe biden but he was appointed the first instance by donald trump. Is that correct . He was continued in that position, was he not . Correct, and continued. Can you imagine the human cry that you would hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle if you remove him from that position . Can you imagine the claims that you had removed a prosecutor was diligently investigating hunter biden . You imagine the outrage they wouldve expressed . I discussed it with many senators, on that side of the aisle. The desire an actual insistence that mr. Weiss be continued to have responsibility for that matter and i said in my confirmation gary that they were permitted to stay and they would not interfere. That was exactly the right decision. That was the right decision to give the American People the confidence that even a prosecutor chosen by the former president would continue in the investigation into the son of the current president. That was exactly the right decision. Exactly the right decision. And my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would have been screaming if it were otherwise. But, the attack on you is completely devoid of facts, of principle, but i appreciate you doing the right thing for the department of justice and more importantly, for the American People. Attorney general garland, elon musk supported biden but that he became a critic of the administration and exposed censorship. Now we report the doj has opened not one but two investigations of elon musk Mark Zuckerberg spent 400 million in 2020 tilting the election secretly for democrats , no investigations whatsoever. To the American Public please look like mafia tactics. We pay the money, you look the other way. Get in our way, we punish you. The American Public sees with this is. I want to direct your attention to feel that we will play. Obviously that is a significant matter is an ongoing criminal investigation for these operable . The atf is yes. Is in on. We know that this is and there are some restrictions but we can handle classified information we fund your department. It an issue of Wealth Creation is an issue that by longstanding policy we restrict. That is not our policy. You know how im not going to. Did. Arent you in fact two to give the answer is it appropriate. Not an answer thats appropriate when we are asking questions. We are committee that is responsible for your creation, for your department. You cannot continue to give us these answers. Are you in contempt of congress when you refuse to answer. I have the greatest respect for congress and the constitution the protection of pending investigations and ongoing investigations is a briefly discussed in another dialog a few moments ago goes back to the separation of powers which gives to the executive branch the Sole Authority to conduct prosecutions. Its a requirement of due process and those respect who is under investigation and protection of civil rights. With all due respect, iran contra, and it was a investigation. The do not stop them from getting answers. You are getting in the way of our constitutional duties. Im going to decide. Its our constitutional duty to oversight. In the video, that was her answer to questions two years ago. When i said how many asians are assets of the government and agitating in the crowd to go to the capital. I do not know the answer that question. Last time you dont know how many were. I dont know the answer to either of those questions. If they were, i dont know. I think you just perjured yourself. You want to say that again . You dont know . I have no personal knowledge. What i said the last time. You had two years to find out and that was in reference to yesterday. Isnt that a wonderful coincidence. On a misdemeanor. Meanwhile you are putting away people for 20 years for filming. Some people werent there but you have the guy on video and he says go into the capital. Before the speeches. Hes at the site of the first breach. You have all of the goods on him and its an indictment for a misdemeanor. The American Public is not buying it. I yield. Me i answer the question. Lets let the gentleman speak. Go ahead. In discovery, in the cases that were filed in respect to january 6th, the Justice Department prosecutors provided whatever info they had about the question youre asking with respect to the fbi, he has said he was not an employee or informants of the fbi. Mr. Epstein has been charged and there is a proceeding going on today. Chair recognizes the gentleman from california. My colleague said that you should be held in contempt of congress and that is quite rich because the guy leaving the hearing room, mr. Jordan, is about 500 days into the dating his subpoena. 500 days. If we talk about contempt of congress, lets get real. Jim jordan, are you serious, a witness to one of the greatest crimes ever committed, a crime or more prosecution have occurred than any other, refuses to help this country and we get lectured about compliance. Jim jordan will not honor a lawful subpoena. Are you kidding me. Are you kidding me. There is no credibility on that side. You are serious, they are not. You are fair, they are not. I will commute to the law firm of insurrection llp where they work every day on behalf of the client. They do that at the expense of millions of americans to stay open, and would like to see ukraine sites we do not help russia. Thats the expense that this clown show shows, but they have real responsibilities that affect real americans. The difference between autocracy and democracy. And one side that believes in ruling. You tried to comply with this committee, and in fact, last week, what are your special agents came for an interview, brought his lawyer, and was told that he cannot have his lawyer present. Mr. Jordan, who he knows so much about the constitution, cannot afford one of your employees one of the basic constitutional rights, to have a lawyer present. Defendant to call d. C. Police. Are you going with that standoff that occurred . Generally, yes. Your office sent a letter detailing it that you are willing to comply, and i like to submit that to the record with. No objection. Will point mr. Weiss . Trump was the last person who appointed him to the position of u. S. Attorney. I pointed him to the special counsel last month. Appointed john durham . Mr. Durham was appointed by president trump. And he got appointed special counsel. These guys are upset that Donald Trumps appointed prosecutors are not doing enough of the corruption that trump wants them to do. They are either following along or they are not as corrupt as biden, thats what they are asking to have been here. Also, doesnt it seem they wanted both ways when it comes to the special counsel . A lot of questions suggested that the special counsel should be independent but when they did not like the directions, you are asked why you did not interfere more or involve yourself more. Did you get the sense that you are stuck here . When i make an appointment, for the prosecutor, the appointment is without respect of the outcome of the case. Your office is made a number of reforms 2702, targeting foreign nationals. But those forms have not been put into laws. 702 is one of the best weapons we have to go after fentanyl. Would you support putting those reforms into law so we do not have to Live Administration to administration . I would. Section 702 provides us with the greatest Justice Department leeway. The greatest amount of intelligence that we receive about dangerous threats to the u. S. From foreign nationals. I am quite aware and sensitive to Civil Liberties concerns with respect to the queries and for that reason