The Jan. 6 Committee will vote Wednesday on whether it should refer Jeffrey Clark, a Trump-era official, to the Department of Justice for criminal contempt of Congress after he—for weeks—failed to comply with a subpoena from the investigatory body.
A meeting will be held at 7 p.m. this Wednesday where committee members will vote on a report detailing the ways in which Clark, once the acting attorney general for the Justice Department’s (DOJ) civil division, refused to cooperate with the congressional probe into the deadly Capitol attack.
A Senate Judiciary Committee report from Democrats released earlier this year unveiled a variety of emails and other correspondence where Clark appeared ready to oust then-acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, at Trump’s urging, to install himself in Rosen’s place.
Clark is also under scrutiny for his shilling of Trump’s lies about the 2020 election to state officials.
In its Oct. 13 subpoena, the Jan. 6 Committee requested Clark provide testimony and records related to allegations that he delivered a letter to Georgia state officials demanding they delay certification of election results in light of widespread voter fraud.
No fraud, however, existed.
Clark, legislators contend, also asked officials in Georgia to hold a press conference formally announcing that the DOJ was investigating allegations of voter fraud.
Investigators believe that the move to replace Rosen, in combination with the pressure campaign against Georgia officials, was an attempt by the Trump administration to sway the 2020 election results in its favor.
Clark is the second person that may face criminal contempt charges related to the committee’s probe of the insurrection.
The House of Representatives voted to hold former Trump strategist and conspiracy shock jock Steve Bannon in contempt after he refused to provide documents to the committee. Lawmakers sought information from Bannon that they say is central to understanding the planning and financing of the ‘Stop the Steal’ rally held at the Ellipse on Jan. 6.
Bannon was also part of the “war room” at the Willard Hotel in Washington where a gaggle of Trump insiders, attorneys, and hangers-on met with some regularity, according to investigators, to plot their overthrow of the election.
Bannon entered a not guilty plea and is now duking it out with prosecutors in federal court in Washington.
As for Clark, he is a key figure in the probe because lawmakers believe he was in touch with the former president regularly.
Clark appeared ready to cooperate with the committee for a brief time in early November when he, unlike Bannon, agreed to sit down for an interview.
But sitting down was about as far as things went.
In a statement after the meeting, committee chairman Bennie Thompson said Clark would not answer any substantive questions during the closed-door interview. Instead, Clark gave lawmakers a 12-page letter from his attorney Harry MacDougald in which MacDougald insisted that any and all communications between Trump and Clark were subject to executive privilege.
MacDougald said Clark would not cooperate with the committee until the courts reached a decision in Trump’s lawsuit against the Jan. 6 Committee.
In that matter, Trump has sought to block the National Archives from releasing a battery of presidential records as they relate to Jan. 6. Those records will illuminate Trump’s thinking and his direct, or indirect role, in the planning of the insurrection, the committee argues. Though a district court judge ruled that the constitutional oversight powers held by Congress were greater than Trump’s powers to secrecy as a former president, Trump appealed that decision.
The twice-impeached president is set to make his case before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday.
The committee has issued subpoenas to 45 people, including Trump’s closest allies as well as organizers of various rallies leading up to the insurrection, like Women for America First. Trump campaign and White House officials from the administration have also received subpoenas.
The latest batch targeted a slew of white supremacist and right-wing extremist groups like Proud Boys International LLC and the Oath Keepers.
A spokesperson for the committee told Daily Kos earlier this month it has been busy building its body of evidence and anticipates public hearings and other events “when the time is right.”
In a report from the full House on the state of disbursements released Monday, the Jan. 6th Committee reported spending $418,113.22 on its probe from July 1 to Sept. 30. The lion’s share of about 327,000 went to personnel compensation while the rest was split between rent, communications, utilities, supplies, materials, and equipment.
For perspective, the cost of the Mueller investigation topped out at nearly $32 million.
A meeting will be held at 7 p.m. this Wednesday where committee members will vote on a report detailing the ways in which Clark, once the acting attorney general for the Justice Department’s (DOJ) civil division, refused to cooperate with the congressional probe into the deadly Capitol attack.
A Senate Judiciary Committee report from Democrats released earlier this year unveiled a variety of emails and other correspondence where Clark appeared ready to oust then-acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, at Trump’s urging, to install himself in Rosen’s place.
Clark is also under scrutiny for his shilling of Trump’s lies about the 2020 election to state officials.
In its Oct. 13 subpoena, the Jan. 6 Committee requested Clark provide testimony and records related to allegations that he delivered a letter to Georgia state officials demanding they delay certification of election results in light of widespread voter fraud.
No fraud, however, existed.
Clark, legislators contend, also asked officials in Georgia to hold a press conference formally announcing that the DOJ was investigating allegations of voter fraud.
Investigators believe that the move to replace Rosen, in combination with the pressure campaign against Georgia officials, was an attempt by the Trump administration to sway the 2020 election results in its favor.
Clark is the second person that may face criminal contempt charges related to the committee’s probe of the insurrection.
The House of Representatives voted to hold former Trump strategist and conspiracy shock jock Steve Bannon in contempt after he refused to provide documents to the committee. Lawmakers sought information from Bannon that they say is central to understanding the planning and financing of the ‘Stop the Steal’ rally held at the Ellipse on Jan. 6.
Bannon was also part of the “war room” at the Willard Hotel in Washington where a gaggle of Trump insiders, attorneys, and hangers-on met with some regularity, according to investigators, to plot their overthrow of the election.
Bannon entered a not guilty plea and is now duking it out with prosecutors in federal court in Washington.
As for Clark, he is a key figure in the probe because lawmakers believe he was in touch with the former president regularly.
Clark appeared ready to cooperate with the committee for a brief time in early November when he, unlike Bannon, agreed to sit down for an interview.
But sitting down was about as far as things went.
In a statement after the meeting, committee chairman Bennie Thompson said Clark would not answer any substantive questions during the closed-door interview. Instead, Clark gave lawmakers a 12-page letter from his attorney Harry MacDougald in which MacDougald insisted that any and all communications between Trump and Clark were subject to executive privilege.
MacDougald said Clark would not cooperate with the committee until the courts reached a decision in Trump’s lawsuit against the Jan. 6 Committee.
In that matter, Trump has sought to block the National Archives from releasing a battery of presidential records as they relate to Jan. 6. Those records will illuminate Trump’s thinking and his direct, or indirect role, in the planning of the insurrection, the committee argues. Though a district court judge ruled that the constitutional oversight powers held by Congress were greater than Trump’s powers to secrecy as a former president, Trump appealed that decision.
The twice-impeached president is set to make his case before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday.
The committee has issued subpoenas to 45 people, including Trump’s closest allies as well as organizers of various rallies leading up to the insurrection, like Women for America First. Trump campaign and White House officials from the administration have also received subpoenas.
The latest batch targeted a slew of white supremacist and right-wing extremist groups like Proud Boys International LLC and the Oath Keepers.
A spokesperson for the committee told Daily Kos earlier this month it has been busy building its body of evidence and anticipates public hearings and other events “when the time is right.”
In a report from the full House on the state of disbursements released Monday, the Jan. 6th Committee reported spending $418,113.22 on its probe from July 1 to Sept. 30. The lion’s share of about 327,000 went to personnel compensation while the rest was split between rent, communications, utilities, supplies, materials, and equipment.
For perspective, the cost of the Mueller investigation topped out at nearly $32 million.