[House Prints 118-12]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
118th Congress }
COMMITTEE PRINT
2nd Session }
_______________________________________________________________________
FULL COMMITTEE BUSINESS MEETING:
MARKUP OF RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING
THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FIND UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
MERRICK B. GARLAND IN CONTEMPT OF
CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH
A SUBPOENA DULY ISSUED BY THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
ACCOUNTABILITY
=======================================================================
for the
COMMITTEE ON
OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 16, 2024
__________
Serial No. CP:118-12
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on: govinfo.gov,
oversight.house.gov or
docs.house.gov
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman
Jim Jordan, Ohio Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Ranking
Mike Turner, Ohio Minority Member
Paul Gosar, Arizona Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina Columbia
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Michael Cloud, Texas Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
Gary Palmer, Alabama Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Clay Higgins, Louisiana Ro Khanna, California
Pete Sessions, Texas Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
Andy Biggs, Arizona Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Nancy Mace, South Carolina Katie Porter, California
Jake LaTurner, Kansas Cori Bush, Missouri
Pat Fallon, Texas Shontel Brown, Ohio
Byron Donalds, Florida Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania Robert Garcia, California
William Timmons, South Carolina Maxwell Frost, Florida
Tim Burchett, Tennessee Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia Greg Casar, Texas
Lisa McClain, Michigan Jasmine Crockett, Texas
Lauren Boebert, Colorado Dan Goldman, New York
Russell Fry, South Carolina Jared Moskowitz, Florida
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida Rashida Tlaib, Michigan
Nick Langworthy, New York Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts
Eric Burlison, Missouri
Mike Waltz, Florida
------
Mark Marin, Staff Director
Jessica Donlon, Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel
Jake Greenberg, Chief Counsel for Investigations
Abby Salter, Counsel
Mallory Cogar, Deputy Director of Operations and Chief Clerk
Contact Number: 202-225-5074
Julie Tagen, Minority Staff Director
Contact Number: 202-225-5051
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
ORDER OF BUSINESS
----------
Page
Meeting held on May 16, 2024..................................... 1
Resolution Reported..............................................
................................................................. 1
INDEX OF DOCUMENTS
----------
* Statement for the Record; submitted by Rep. Connolly.
* Comer Campaign email; submitted by Rep. Moskowitz.
* Transcript, October 8, 2023, Special Counsel Hur; submitted
by Rep. Raskin.
* Transcript, October 9, 2023, Special Counsel Hur; submitted
by Rep. Raskin.
Documents are available at: docs.house.gov.
FULL COMMITTEE BUSINESS MEETING:
MARKUP OF RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING
THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FIND UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
MERRICK B. GARLAND IN CONTEMPT OF
CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH
A SUBPOENA DULY ISSUED BY THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
ACCOUNTABILITY
----------
Thursday, May 16, 2024
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Oversight and Accountability,
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 8:08 p.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. James Comer
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Comer, Jordan, Gosar, Foxx,
Grothman, Cloud, Palmer, Higgins, Sessions, Biggs, Mace,
LaTurner, Fallon, Donalds, Perry, Timmons, Burchett, Greene,
Boebert, Fry, Luna, Langworthy, Burlison, Waltz, Raskin,
Norton, Lynch, Connolly, Krishnamoorthi, Mfume, Ocasio-Cortez,
Porter, Bush, Brown, Stansbury, Garcia, Frost, Lee, Casar,
Crockett, Goldman, Moskowitz, Tlaib, and Pressley.
Chairman Comer. The Committee will please come to order. A
quorum is present.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
Pursuant to Committee Rule 5(b) and House Rule XI, Clause
2, the Chair may postpone further proceedings today on the
question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an
amendment on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are
ordered.
Now pursuant to notice, I call up a report containing a
resolution recommending that the House of Representatives find
Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for
refusal to comply with a subpoena duly issued by this
Committee.
The clerk will report the report, which has been
distributed in advance.
The Clerk. A report containing a House resolution
recommending that the House of Representatives find Attorney
General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for refusal to
comply with a subpoena is duly issued by this Committee.
Chairman Comer. I ask unanimous consent that the report be
considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
Without objection, so ordered.
The Chair recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the
nature of a substitute.
The clerk will please report the amendment.
The Clerk. An amendment in the nature of a substitute
offered to the Contempt Report as offered by Mr. Comer of
Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read, and the substitute will be considered as
original text for the purposes of further amendment.
I now recognize myself for 5 minutes for a statement on the
report.
Mr. Donalds. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes, sir?
The Chair recognizes Mr. Donalds.
Mr. Donalds. Mr. Chairman, for the purposes of this
hearing, I move that debate be structured to 1 hour on the ANS,
30 minutes each side, and 10 minutes on every debate that might
be entered during this hearing of the Oversight Committee.
Mr. Burchett. Second.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Lynch. Objection.
Mr. Raskin. I object to that.
Chairman Comer. All right. There is an objection, so we
will vote.
Mr. Lynch. Mr. Chair, may we be heard on the motion?
Chairman Comer. Yes. There is a motion. All right. We will
suspend.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman, my objection consists of this. He
cannot move to override the rules of the House of
Representatives, and we know exactly how debate is to occur,
which is the way we usually proceed in debate. So, I do not
think we have the power to do that.
Mr. Donalds. Mr. Chairman, if I may, this Committee has
already done that earlier in this very Congress. We went into
structured debate on a couple of items a few months ago.
Mr. Raskin. Yes, by unanimous consent only, so I have
objected to it. I mean, if the gentleman wants to take it to a
vote, we can take it to a vote.
Mr. Lynch. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Raskin. By all means. Why do we want to limit debate on
this anyway?
Mr. Lynch. Yes. If I may, I rise in support----
Chairman Comer. OK. We are going to suspend and call the
parliamentarian to get the official ruling, correct?
Mr. Raskin. OK.
Chairman Comer. So, it may take, I am estimating, 5
minutes.
Mr. Raskin. Fine, Mr. Chairman. In the meantime, I have a
parliamentary inquiry of my own. Can you----
Chairman Comer. Well, I think we are suspended.
Mr. Raskin. Oh. I just thought in order to save time, if
you had other parliamentary inquiries you could take them. No?
Chairman Comer. No. Let us get the ruling from the
parliamentarian, then we will proceed.
[Pause.]
Chairman Comer. The Committee will come back to order.
The motion is out of order.
I will now recognize myself for a 5-minute opening
statement.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman, can I just pursue my
parliamentary inquiry?
Chairman Comer. Proceed.
Mr. Raskin. Will you just explain why this markup was
delayed to 8 p.m., throwing everybody's schedule into chaos
today and the building is closed to the public? Why was that
done?
Chairman Comer. OK. That is not an appropriate inquiry.
Mr. Raskin. The time of the meeting is not an appropriate
procedural inquiry?
Chairman Comer. Your inquiry is not an appropriate
parliamentary inquiry, so let us get back to order.
I recognize myself for an opening statement.
[Poster]
Today's markup initiates contempt of Congress proceedings
against U.S. Attorney Merrick Garland for defying a subpoena
from the Oversight Committee. The Committee's February subpoena
required the Department of Justice to produce audio recordings
of President Biden's interview with the special counsel
investigating his mishandling and improper disclosure of
classified materials. The Department has chosen not to produce
them. That is why we are here today.
This is not a complicated subject. The Oversight Committee
requires these audio recordings, and the Department of Justice
has refused to provide them. We are not in court. The
accommodations process has been exhausted. We are not making a
request. The subpoena requires production. We are not requiring
anything that interferes with an ongoing investigation. The
special counsel already concluded his investigation by choosing
not to charge President Biden because he is an ``elderly man
with a poor memory.''
This morning, the Department of Justice informed the
Committee that the President has asserted executive privilege
over the audio recordings of the President's interview with
Special Counsel Hur. President Biden's decision to withhold the
audio recording from Congress is alarming. The Committee has
already obtained the transcript of the interview. President
Biden must have something to hide because it does not make
sense that he would suppress the audio if the transcript was
accurate. There is no substitute, as the many lawyers on this
Committee will tell you, for a recording of an actual
conversation, not a summary, not a report, not a transcript.
The White House has shown it is willing to alter
transcripts to protect Joe Biden's image. We will not simply
take the Justice Department's word about this interview. It is
not the Department of Justice's decision how to cooperate with
a subpoena. Just like the people who receive subpoenas from DOJ
do not get to negotiate their compliance. The Department of
Justice is not above Congress. It is not above the law. It is
also not President Biden's decision to assert executive
privilege on audio recordings when the transcript has already
been released. In 1974, the House rejected an attempt by
President Nixon to release a transcript instead of subpoenaed
audio recordings, and there should be bipartisan support to
reject it here, too.
Not long ago, a very distinguished Member of this Committee
said, ``The lesson is, please tell your children out there in
America, if you get a subpoena to go before Congress, if you
get a subpoena to go to court, go. You have a legal
responsibility to go.'' That distinguished Member was none
other than Ranking Member, Jamie Raskin, in 2022, only 2 years
ago. Now, Ranking Member Raskin has spent this Congress making
excuses for why people like Hunter Biden or now the Department
of Justice do not have to comply with congressional subpoenas.
On January 10, 2023, this Committee announced an
investigation into President Biden's mishandling of classified
documents. Two days later, on January 12, 2023, the Attorney
General announced his intent to appoint a special counsel to
oversee the criminal investigation of President Biden. While
the special counsel pursued his investigation, the Committee
did its own work and found facts that have challenged the White
House's official narrative about these classified materials.
Months of thorough investigating by this Committee have
revealed attempts by the White House to keep the truth from the
American people, not just about the documents themselves and
why Joe Biden had them, but President Biden's memory and mental
capacity to do his job.
The Committee's timeline begins well before the White
House's narrative that President Biden's private lawyers just
stumbled upon classified materials in November 2022 at the Penn
Biden Center. May 24, 2022, 6 months before the White House's
story began, the White House counsel, Dana Remus, contacted a
Biden former employee to retrieve President Biden's materials
from the Penn Biden Center and then traveled there herself to
pick up boxes. Why would the most senior lawyer at the White
House be going to pack up an office that was supposed to have
just pictures and personal documents in it? Why were President
Biden's personal lawyers visiting the Penn Biden Center days
before the discovery of classified materials if they thought
they were just picking up pictures and letters? Why were they
calling FedEx to pick up boxes and a White House employee was
leaving with boxes before the November 2 discovery?
Now the White House will not permit this Committee to
depose Dana Remus. The White House will not allow any of the
employees that entered the Penn Biden Center before November
2022 to speak with the Committee. What is the White House
afraid of? Why not be transparent and open with this Committee
and the American people? For that matter, what are Democrats on
this Committee who oppose the release of these audio recordings
afraid of? The recordings will just be President Biden
speaking. What is it that would make them nervous about that?
It is because they know, once again, President Biden has
not been honest. He has not been honest about his family's
foreign entanglements. He has not been honest about mishandling
classified documents, and if the Democrats were honest, they
would admit President Biden's mental capacity is declining.
Americans see it happening every day. In fact, 6 in 10
Americans do not have confidence in Joe Biden's mental
capacity.
If the Attorney General wants to defy Congress and not
produce the audio recordings, he will face consequences for
those actions. The path before us is clear. I urge this
Committee to move forward with holding Attorney General Merrick
Garland in contempt. I now recognize the Ranking Member.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen,
in this special nighttime episode, we resume the madcap comedy
mystery series called ``Comer's High Crimes and Misadventures:
The Hilarious Quest to Impeach a President Who Has Done Nothing
Wrong,'' in a validly low budget, but multimillion-dollar
taxpayer-funded production, which most Americans assumed had
ended 2 months ago and had completely forgotten about. But
tonight, with the cast and crew now fresh back from a surprise
visit to New York City----
Ms. Greene. You mean like the January 6 Committee?
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Ms. Crockett. Uh-uh. Stop it.
Mr. Raskin. I would like my time restored to me, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Comer. Order. Order. The Chair recognizes the
Ranking Member.
Mr. Raskin. OK.
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Chairman Comer. Order. Order. Order.
Mr. Raskin. Well, tonight with the cast and crew fresh back
from their surprise trip to New York City, it is clear the show
must go on.
[Photo]
Now, our originally scheduled performance was supposed to
be at 11 a.m. today, but it was postponed when Members of the
Majority chose to join a mass spiritual pilgrimage to the New
York criminal trial of a Florida man, an adjudicated fraudster
and rapist, as he faces 34 felony counts of falsifying
corporate financial records to cover up $130,000 paid in hush
money to a porn star sex partner. Now, although some people are
churlishly complaining that Members should actually be here to
vote on public business and should not have forced a last-
minute change in the Committee's schedule, our colleagues
properly demonstrated for all of history their fierce devotion
to this clearly reformed, devout, and pious Florida spiritual
leader who many supporters are now calling the Messiah from
Mar-a-Lago.
Of course, in the meantime, Chairman Jordan and the House
Judiciary Committee preempted----
Mrs. Luna. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Raskin. No, I am in the middle of my introduction----
Mrs. Luna. Sir, I appreciate that, but it is a good photo.
Ms. Boebert. I would like a copy of that.
Mrs. Luna. Would you like a signed one, Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. Yes.
Ms. Boebert. I want----
Mr. Goldman. Will you get your Members in order, Mr.
Chairman?
Mrs. Luna. It is a great photo. I want a copy.
Chairman Comer. Order. Order. Order.
Mr. Raskin. In the meantime, Chairman Jordan in the House
Judiciary Committee preempted our GOP colleagues on Oversight,
rendering this entire exercise not only absurd but completely
meaningless and redundant. They have already held Attorney
General Garland purportedly in contempt.
Now, when we last met on this matter, you will recall that
the Majority still had not identified a single high crime or
misdemeanor that the President had committed. The Committee's
impressive 3.8 million pages of documents and 80 hours of
testimony from 20 witnesses produced nothing but overwhelming
and definitive proof that President Biden had done nothing
wrong. So, desperate for a new storyline, Republicans have come
up with this astonishing new plot twist. They now propose to
hold the Attorney General of the United States in contempt for
giving the Committee the information it asked for, and it is
information that has absolutely nothing to do with their failed
impeachment investigation or any high crimes or misdemeanors.
Now, true fans of the show will recall from prior episodes
this plot device of punishing people for complying with
Committee orders, but this new episode of not taking ``yes''
for an answer sends us off into strange new worlds of absurdity
where no congressional committee has truly ever gone before.
The Majority wanted to know what President Biden said in his
voluntary interview with Special Counsel Hur, and maybe there
was an impeachable diamond lurking in the rough, so the Justice
Department complied with the request. It turned over the 250-
page transcript of President Biden's 5-hour interview with the
special counsel. We had a hearing on it in this Committee. The
special counsel came, and there was nothing impeachable there.
If there had been, you would have taken up Mr. Moskowitz's
offer, and you would have voted on impeachment after it
happened, but you did not.
Committee Members and millions of Americans got to read the
entire transcript and can read it right now if they like. We
all can learn what the President was asked and see how he
answered each and every question, but the Chairman insists that
is not enough. He and the rest of America are clearly able to
read the interview, but he wants to be able to hear the
interview. The book is not sufficient. He wants the audiobook,
and because of this gratuitous and comical request, the whole
troop now seeks to hold the Attorney General of the United
States of America in contempt. Anyone watching can grasp the
fallacy cleverly tucked into this new special primetime
episode. There is nothing relevant or material that our
Committee can learn from an audiotape which we cannot learn
from the 250 pages of the transcript. The format of the medium
does not change the content of the communications.
So, in this absurd twist, our friends now seek to blame the
spectacular belly flop of their own impeachment probe on
Attorney General Garland and his sneaky effort to obstruct the
investigation by cooperating with it. We know what real
obstruction looks like because the last President specialized
in it. This President agreed to sit down for a voluntary 5-hour
interview with the special counsel investigating him. Attorney
General Garland turned over the complete 250-page transcript
interview. That is not obstruction. Real obstruction was Trump
and his Administration refusing to provide information Congress
requested in more than 100 different congressional
investigations and inquiries. And I know that pleases the
gentlelady from Georgia because he issued----
Ms. Greene. I just want to hear Joe Biden. Why cannot the
American people hear him?
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Mr. Goldman. Order, Mr. Chairman. Get her under control.
Mr. Raskin. President Trump.
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Mr. Raskin. President Trump issued an edict. No, I am glad
that the gentlelady from Georgia is learning something tonight,
OK? The President----
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Mr. Raskin. I encourage her to be a good listener, and she
has been a good listener.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Raskin. So, Mr. Chairman, the last President issued an
edict directing all Federal officials in his Administration to
categorically ignore and reject all congressional subpoenas. Do
my colleagues remember that? Do they know that? He told them
not to cooperate with any Federal investigation at all by
Congress, and we did not hear peep from any of them. That was
real obstruction. Real obstruction happened when two Members of
this Committee, who may be preparing to vote tonight to hold
Attorney General Garland in contempt, brazenly refuse to comply
with subpoenas from the U.S. House Select Committee to
investigate the January 6 attack on the United States Capitol
and still have not responded to those subpoenas.
But now it seems, Mr. Chairman--I just got passed
something--that the whole obstruction gimmick may just be a
fundraising ploy which demeans the overwhelming legal integrity
and impressive theatrical ambitions of this enterprise. I was
just handed a mass fundraising email solicitation for your
campaign that you sent out this evening, Mr. Chairman, stating
that, ``Biden and his advisors are terrified that I will
release the recordings, forcing the media and Democrats to
answer for the dismal decline of Biden's mental state. This
could be the final blow to Biden with swing voters across the
country. The Democrats are pulling out all the stops to stop
the bleeding. Signed James Comer, Chairman, House Oversight
Committee.'' Now, I must confess my disappointment to be handed
this fundraising solicitation signed by you as Chairman of the
House Oversight Committee. I thought that you were serious
about the legal enterprise here and not just another political
huckster calling hearings to score cheap political points and
to make a buck.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask unanimous consent to
enter into the record the full and complete 250-page transcript
of the President's interview with Special Counsel Hur, which we
have now had in our Committee for more than 2 months.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Raskin. And I know that some people may think this is a
big Broadway production now with everybody's trip to the Big
Apple, but it is high time to close this unhinged series and
get back to some semblance of the people's work.
We have the interview transcript. We have the President's
words. There is no basis for this outlandish contempt
proceeding which only further disgraces our Committee along
with Judiciary. Accordingly, Mr. Chairman, and since your
Members seem to be in such a hurry to be done with this, I move
to immediately adjourn these proceedings.
Ms. Lee. Seconded.
Ms. Crockett. I second.
Chairman Comer. So, in your opening statement, you move to
adjourn.
Mr. Raskin. I am moving to adjourn these proceedings.
Ms. Lee. Second.
Chairman Comer. Motion and second.
All those in favor of adjournment, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
All those opposed, no.
[Chorus of noes.]
Chairman Comer. The noes have it. The motion fails.
Now, do any other Members wish to be heard?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Recorded vote.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote has been requested. The
clerk will call the roll.
A procedural vote, we have to vote the old-fashioned way.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan.
[No response.]
Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
Mr. Gosar?
Mr. Gosar. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes no.
Ms. Foxx?
Ms. Foxx. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx votes no.
Mr. Grothman?
Mr. Grothman. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes no.
Mr. Cloud?
Mr. Cloud. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes no.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. Palmer. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes no.
Mr. Higgins?
Mr. Higgins. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes no.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. Sessions. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes no.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes no.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. Mace. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes no.
Mr. LaTurner?
Mr. LaTurner. No.
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner votes no.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. Fallon. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes no.
Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Donalds votes no.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes no.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. Timmons. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes no.
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. Burchett. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes no.
Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Greene votes no.
Mrs. McClain?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Ms. Boebert?
Ms. Boebert. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes no.
Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Fry votes no.
Mrs. Luna?
Mrs. Luna. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna votes no.
Mr. Langworthy?
Mr. Langworthy. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy votes no.
Mr. Burlison?
Mr. Burlison. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes no.
Mr. Waltz?
Mr. Waltz. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz votes no.
Mr. Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin votes aye.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. Norton. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes yes.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Lynch. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes aye.
Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Connolly votes aye.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes aye.
Mr. Khanna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume?
Mr. Mfume. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes aye.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez votes aye.
Ms. Porter?
Ms. Porter. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Porter votes aye.
Ms. Bush?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Brown?
Ms. Brown. Yes
The Clerk. Ms. Brown votes yes.
Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. Stansbury. Yes
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes yes.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes aye.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. Frost. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes yes.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes yes.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. Casar. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes yes.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes aye.
Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Goldman votes aye.
Mr. Moskowitz?
Mr. Moskowitz. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Moskowitz votes aye.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. Tlaib. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes yes.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. Pressley. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes aye.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. I vote yes, and how did Mr. Jordan vote?
I mean, I vote no. I am sorry. I vote no.
The Clerk. The Chairman votes no.
Chairman Comer. Yes. How is Mr. Jordan recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan is not recorded.
Mr. Jordan. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan votes no.
Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the nays are 24. The ayes are
19.
Chairman Comer. The noes have it. The motion to adjourn
fails. Does any other Member----
Mr. Moskowitz. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last
word.
Chairman Comer. Does any other Member seek recognition?
Mr. Moskowitz. Mr. Chairman, move to strike the last word.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Mr. Moskowitz.
Mr. Moskowitz. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All
right. So, welcome to ``Oversight After Dark.'' If you love
James Comer at 11 in the morning, you are really going to love
him at 8:30 p.m. So, Members, the hearing was moved today. We
do not have to ask the question. The hearing was moved today so
that Members could go to New York and attend the Trump hearing.
How is he doing? He has complained that he is chilly in the
courtroom. Is it chilly? Is it chilly?
Mrs. Luna. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Moskowitz. No. I will assume it is chilly.
Mrs. Luna. He is doing very good.
Mr. Moskowitz. OK. Good. So, it was mentioned by the
Ranking Member about really what we are doing here. You do not
have to listen to my words. I would like to do a spirited
reading of the campaign email sent out by the Chairman, and it
is on lovely stationery. In fact, it says, ``From the Desk of
the Oversight Chairman.'' I am not sure you can do that, but I
am not an ethics expert.
It says, ``Friend: President Biden is exerting executive
privilege in a last-ditch attempt to stop the disastrous audio
recording of his interview with special counsel from being
released.'' And it is highlighted in yellow. Want to make sure
people saw that. ``Just a few months ago, the White House
bragged that Joe Biden had nothing to hide and would not exert
executive privilege during Special Counsel Hur's investigation.
They even said he had nothing to hide,'' and that is in
italics. ``Now Biden and his advisors are terrified that I,
James Comer, will release the recordings, forcing the media and
the Democrats to answer for the dismal decline of Biden's
mental state. He even had Attorney Merrick Garland write a
letter saying that his interview falls within the scope of
executive privilege. This could be the final blow with swing
voters across the country.''
OK. Hold on. We are not done. It gets better. ``You and I
know he is not up for the job, but the mainstream media's
refusal to report on it as only keeping him in the game. Stand
with Comer, the Democrats''----
[Applause.]
[Cheers.]
Mr. Moskowitz. You sure about that? ``The Democrats are
pulling out all the stops to stop the bleeding. That means
coming after me with everything they had. If you are able, we
hope you are, I would be so grateful if you would consider
making a donation to my campaign. I sure need it to defend
against the onslaught of attacks. Thank you for everything.
James Comer, Chairman of the House Oversight Committee.''
Without objection, I would like to enter that into the
record.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Moskowitz. All right. Beautiful.
So, again, Mr. Chairman, since you think this is the final
blow, right, and obviously the Chairman of Judiciary is here,
too, we only have June, July, and September before the
election. We are not here in August and October. So, I mean, I
am sure the American people are paying attention at 11:30 p.m.
where you buried this hearing because it is so important. When
are we going to do the impeachment of Joe Biden? When is that
going to happen? Is it going to be June? Is it going to be
July? Is it going to be September? Let us just put it on the
calendar. Let us just put it on the calendar. Pick a month. We
are available. We were available at 11 a.m. You guys were not.
Just pick a month, right, so we can get it on the calendar and
do the impeachment. So, hold on, I will give you choices.
Ready? June.
Mr. Perry. We just need the evidence.
Mr. Moskowitz. July.
[No response.]
Mr. Moskowitz. How about September?
[No response.]
Mr. Moskowitz. OK. So, we are never going to schedule this
thing. It is never going to happen. He is sending out more
subpoenas because he has no evidence, OK, and yet here we go
around and around and around, and so we get it. You will raise
money off of it. Congratulations to you. If you want, Mr.
Chairman, I can get the transcript out. I can do a spirited
reading. We can sit here. I will do all 250 pages for you. I
will even, like, put on a Biden mask, make it visual so you can
really get in the moment. I mean we just want to know, what is
it going to take, Mr. Chairman, to get you comfortable.
You go on Newsmax, and you get comfortable. What is it
going to take to get you comfortable to ask your friend,
Chairman Jordan sitting next to you, when we are going to
schedule impeachment. So, we will do it again. Ready,
everybody? How about June?
[No response.]
Mr. Moskowitz. July.
[No response.]
Mr. Moskowitz. September.
Ms. Boebert. Does the gentleman know how many spare Biden
masks there are available in D.C.?
Mr. Moskowitz. I do not, but there is a lot on Etsy.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Moskowitz. I mean, you can get lots of things. OK. So,
look, I will yield the balance of my time to the Ranking Member
if he wants to use the last 45. Oh, you have something to say,
Mr. Chairman. Go ahead, please.
Chairman Comer. No, I was going to say you yielded to
Ranking Member Raskin----
Mr. Moskowitz. Yes. I am done. I know.
Chairman Comer. He has 30 seconds.
Mr. Moskowitz. Go ahead, Mr. Ranking Member.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Moskowitz. There is an ethics
principle that no solicitation of a campaign or political
contribution may be linked to an action taken or to be taken by
a Member or employee in his or her official capacity. That is
just a reminder to my side. I hope that nobody is linking
specific actions that you are taking on the Oversight Committee
to campaign contributions or solicitations. And with that I
will yield back to the distinguished gentleman from Florida.
Chairman Comer. The time has expired. Does any other Member
seek recognition?
Ms. Greene. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Ms. Greene.
Ms. Greene. I would like to know if any of the Democrats on
this Committee are employing Judge Merchan's daughter.
Ms. Crockett. Please tell me what that has to do with
Merrick Garland.
Mrs. Luna. Goldman.
Mr. Raskin. Is she a porn star?
Ms. Greene. Oh, Goldman. That is right. He is advising. OK.
Ms. Crockett. He is advising who? Do you know what we are
here for? You know we are here about the AG.
Ms. Greene. I do not think you know what you are here for.
Ms. Crockett. Well, you the one talking about--Ms. Greene.
I think your fake eyelashes are messing up what you are
reading.
Ms. Crockett. No, it is nothing----
Chairman Comer. Hold on. Hold on.
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Chairman Comer. Order.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chairman, would you please----
Mr. Raskin. That is beneath even you, Ms. Greene.
Chairman Comer. Order. Order.
Mr. Raskin. That is beneath even you.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chairman, would you please regain order of
your Committee?
Chairman Comer. Order.
Mr. Lynch. We have a point of order.
Chairman Comer. We have a point of order. Mr. Lynch, state
your point.
Mr. Lynch. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to ask the
parliamentarian if your conduct here in raising money in
connection with this hearing is referable to the Ethics
Committee within this hearing. Is a motion in order to refer
your conduct and your abuse of----
Chairman Comer. That is not a point of order.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I do have a point of order, and I would
like to move to take down Ms. Greene's words. That is
absolutely unacceptable. How dare you attack the physical
appearance of another person.
Chairman Comer. The meeting will suspend. The meeting will
suspend.
Ms. Greene. Are your feelings hurt?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Move her words down.
Ms. Greene. Aw.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Oh, girl. Baby girl.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Greene. Oh really?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Do not even play with me.
Ms. Greene. ``Baby girl?'' I do not think so.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. We are going to move, and we are going
to take your words down. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mfume. I second that motion.
Chairman Comer. OK. We are suspending.
Mr. Donalds. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes?
Mr. Donalds. So, you remember what I was saying earlier
about----
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Chairman Comer. The Committee will reconvene. Ms. Greene
has 4 minutes and 21 seconds. There is a motion. Ms. Greene, do
you wish to strike your words?
Ms. Greene. I have 4 minutes and 21 seconds to speak?
Chairman Comer. I think we have to do the motion first, and
then, unless there is another motion, then you will be
recognized again, but I believe there is another motion coming.
So, do you agree to strike your words?
Ms. Greene. Yes, I will agree.
Chairman Comer. OK. Ms. Greene agrees to strike her words.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I believe she needs to apologize.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Mr. Perry.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No, no, no, she needs to apologize.
Chairman Comer. Hold on. Mr. Perry is going to be
recognized, then Ms. Greene has 4 minutes and 21 seconds.
Ms. Greene. I am not apologizing.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Well, then, you are not striking your
words.
Mr. Raskin. OK. Reserve the right to object.
Ms. Greene. I am not apologizing.
Chairman Comer. Come on, guys.
Ms. Greene. Why don't you debate me?
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman, the Minority----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I think it is pretty self-evident.
Chairman Comer. You are out of order.
Ms. Greene. Yes. You do not have enough intelligence.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Mr. Perry.
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Mr. Raskin. OK. Move to strike the lady's words.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I would like to strike those words as
well.
Mr. Mfume. I move to strike those words.
Mrs. Luna. Order.
Mr. Raskin. Move to strike the gentlelady's words again.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. That is two requests to strike. That is
two requests to strike.
Ms. Greene. Oh, they cannot take the words.
Mr. Raskin. There is another motion to strike her words
again. Please get your Members under control.
Chairman Comer. All right. Here is the correct priority.
Ms. Greene, do you agree to unanimous consent to strike your
words?
Ms. Greene. I repeat again for the second time, yes, I will
strike my words----
Chairman Comer. All right.
Ms. Greene [continuing]. But I am not apologizing.
Chairman Comer. Without objection.
Ms. Greene. Not apologizing.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the Chair recognizes----
Mr. Raskin. I reserve the right to object.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Mr. Perry.
Mr. Raskin. I reserve the right to object.
Mr. Perry. Mr. Chairman, I move that Mr. Goldman's words
and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez's words be stricken.
Chairman Comer. OK.
Mr. Raskin. Which words, and you have to do it
contemporaneously. Object. The objection must be
contemporaneous, and they have not spoken in 10 minutes.
Mr. Perry. Nobody has spoken in 10 minutes.
Mr. Raskin. That is right, therefore, defeating your
proposal.
Mr. Perry. You all have, so that is my motion, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Raskin. Well, I object. It does not refer to anything
that is on the Floor. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez objected immediately
and instantaneously as you are supposed to do under the rules
and precedent----
Mr. Timmons. We were in a recess after that.
Mr. Raskin [continuing]. Of the House of Representatives.
Voice. So, the first time he could move to strike----
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman, point of parliamentary inquiry.
Chairman Comer. All right. We are going to suspend for a
minute, but we will talk to the parliamentarian.
[Pause.]
Chairman Comer. OK. The Committee will come back to order.
So, Ms. Greene asked unanimous consent to strike her words.
Mr. Raskin objected. I am going to recognize Mr. Raskin for his
objection. We are not counting against--Ms. Greene has 4
minutes and 21 seconds left. This will not count against her
time.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I reserve the right to
object because the understanding of the Minority is that the
gentlelady from Georgia would move to take her words down and
strike her words, and to offer a sincere apology for having
engaged in personalities against another Member offending her
personal appearance and insulting her. We do not do that in
this Committee, and I think the major problem was that we
allowed pornography in this Committee, and we have gone down a
bad road. But in any event, we should not allow face-to-face,
ad hominem insults. It is totally contrary to the rules of the
House of Representatives, and I would ask Ms. Greene if she
would just make the apology. It is not that complicated. We do
not want to get into face-to-face insults.
Ms. Greene. You will never get an apology out of me. I do
not owe you one.
Mr. Raskin. Then I object. Then I object, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. Mr. Raskin objects. The Member will state
the words he wishes taken down or she wishes down.
Mr. Raskin. Well, what I heard her to say, but I would like
her to repeat the words. What I heard her to say was, and you
can take off your fake eyelashes, too.
Well then, what did you say? What did you say, Ms. Greene.
Chairman Comer. I mean, really? I mean----
Mr. Raskin. The clerk needs to report the words, but
those----
Chairman Comer. OK. The clerk----
Mr. Raskin. That was the sum and substance.
Chairman Comer. The clerk will report the words. The clerk
will report the words.
Mr. Palmer. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Raskin. We could subpoena the audiotape, Mr. Chair.
[Laughter.]
The Clerk. It will just take us a few minutes to get the
words.
Chairman Comer. OK. We will suspend.
[Pause.]
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, just
a point of order here. I believe there are Members who have
been interviewed by the media from their seats. Do we allow
that?
Mrs. Luna. They identify as clerks.
Mr. Raskin. As clerks?
Mrs. Luna. You are not respecting their identity?
Chairman Comer. For decorum, the media will evacuate the
well, at the request of the--complaint of the Ranking Member.
Ms. Mace. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, Netflix followed
Hunter Biden into this room, and I do not remember anyone
across the aisle complaining about Hunter Biden and his TV crew
when he came up here.
Chairman Comer. That is a fair point. So, do you withdraw
that?
Mr. Raskin. Yes.
Chairman Comer. OK, Mr. Raskin withdrew this one. Are we
ready to proceed and let Ms. Greene finish with her 4 minutes
and 21 seconds?
Mr. Raskin. Well, what is the ruling on the motion to take
her words down? I thought we had an agreement. Mr. Chairman, I
would just urge you to prevail upon the gentlelady from
Georgia--her words----
Chairman Comer. Well, it is very difficult for the
stenographer to understand everything with everyone yelling and
screaming back and forth. We went through this with the--I
would like to make a point--we went through this with some of
the things that Mr. Swalwell said in the Hunter Biden
deposition. Some of the things that he said negative about our
staff and the Members were not picked up by the stenographer,
unfortunately, because there was so much yelling.
Mr. Raskin. Fair enough, Mr. Chairman. But I think we do
not want to see a complete descent of our Committee. The
verbatim quote of the gentlelady was ``I think your fake
eyelashes are messing up your reading.'' That is what she said.
And that is obviously engaging in personalities. It is an ad
hominem attack, and I would just ask every Member of this
Committee, in a fair-minded way, would you want to be talked to
in that way, about your personal appearance, by another Member
of the Committee. Because what we are doing is setting
standards going forward. All the gentlelady seeks is a simple
apology, Ms. Greene.
Chairman Comer. I will say this, for Committee decorum, we
are not supposed to engage in personalities of Members. That
applies to everyone on both sides of the aisle--Mr. Moskowitz,
Ms. Greene--every single Member across the aisle. Can we
proceed?
Mr. Raskin. Well, the motion belongs to the gentlelady from
New York, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. OK. Back to order. The clerk will report,
stenographer?
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, there was a lot of over-talking,
but as far as we can make out, it is, ``And you can remove your
false eyelashes, too.''
Chairman Comer. OK.
Mr. Raskin. Well, let us have a vote on that because I
honestly do not think there is a Member on this Committee who
would think we should descend to that level of discourse here
other than one perhaps. I am sorry. You agree it should be
taken down, Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. Mr. Raskin, the gentlelady from Georgia
already said that she would strike down her words. What else
are we doing past that point?
Mr. Raskin. No.
Mr. Donalds. I did not realize that apologies were a matter
of----
Mr. Raskin. No. The suggestion was made to the Minority
that rather than go through the process of formally taking her
words down, which means she would not be able to speak for the
rest of our hearing, as you know--as you know--that she could
continue to speak but she would voluntarily take her words
down----
Chairman Comer. All right.
Mr. Raskin [continuing]. And offer a sincere apology.
Chairman Comer. I am going to rule. I overrule the point of
order. It was not personalities. It was indecorous, and I would
encourage, again, every Member to abide by Committee decorum,
and let us vote. We all know what we are here for. You are
either going to vote for it or against it----
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. And the lady from Georgia has 4 minutes and
21 seconds----
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chairman, point of order.
Mr. Raskin. I appeal the ruling of the Chair, Mr. Chairman,
because the rules provide that you cannot insult another
Member's personal appearance or attire, and that is obviously
part of engaging in personalities.
Mrs. Luna. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Hold on. Hold on. We have so many motions,
we are sitting here trying to--all right. There is now a motion
to table Mr. Raskin's motion.
Mr. Raskin. No, I was appealing your motion.
Mr. Gosar. I second the motion.
Chairman Comer. The motion by Mr. Perry, seconded by Mr.
Gosar.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I do not believe you can table----
Chairman Comer. All those in favor?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I do not believe you can. It is not
eligible to table. It is not eligible to table.
Mr. Mfume. It is not eligible to table.
Chairman Comer. We can table the appeal. We can table the
appeal.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I do not know if we can table----
Mr. Raskin. The underlying motion----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Is it his privilege to strike?
Chairman Comer. We can table the appeal. There is a motion
and second to table the appeal.
Mr. Raskin. Just to be clear, your ruling was that she had
not engaged in personalities. Is that your ruling?
Ms. Greene. Mr. Chairman, when do I have my 4 minutes and
21 seconds?
Chairman Comer. I have already ruled. I have already ruled.
I have already ruled.
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chairman, point of order.
Chairman Comer. No. There is a motion to vote on it. Is not
debatable, motion by Mr. Perry, second by Mr. Gosar, to table.
All those in favor of tabling, signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
Chairman Comer. All those opposed no.
[Chorus of noes.]
The motion passes to table.
Mr. Raskin. Move for the yeas and the nays.
Chairman Comer. Now, the Chair recognizes Ms. Greene.
Mr. Raskin. I want to move for the yeas----
Mr. Connolly. A recorded vote.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote to table has been
requested.
The clerk will call the roll on tabling.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
[No response.]
Mrs. Luna. I have an amendment at the desk.
Chairman Comer. We are voting on a requested roll call vote
on whether or not to table. She started the roll call with Mr.
Jordan.
The Clerk. Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. Gosar. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes yes.
Ms. Foxx?
Ms. Foxx. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx votes yes.
Mr. Grothman?
Mr. Grothman. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes yes.
Mr. Cloud?
Mr. Cloud. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes yes.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. Palmer. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes aye.
Mr. Higgins?
Mr. Higgins. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes yes.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. Sessions. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes aye.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. Mace. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes aye.
Mr. LaTurner?
Mr. LaTurner. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner votes aye.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. Fallon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes aye.
Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Donalds votes yes.
Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes aye.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. Timmons. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes aye.
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. Burchett. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes aye.
Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Greene votes aye.
Mrs. McClain?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert?
Ms. Boebert. Present.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes present.
Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fry votes aye.
Mrs. Luna?
Mrs. Luna. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna votes aye.
Mr. Langworthy?
Mr. Langworthy. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy votes aye.
Mr. Burlison?
Mr. Burlison. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes aye.
Mr. Waltz?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. Norton. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes no.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Lynch. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes no.
Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Connolly votes nay.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes no.
Mr. Khanna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume?
Mr. Mfume. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes no.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez votes no.
Ms. Porter?
Ms. Porter. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Porter votes no.
Ms. Bush?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Brown?
Ms. Brown. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Brown votes no.
Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. Stansbury. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes no.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. Frost. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes no.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. Casar. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes no.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Mr. Moskowitz?
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. Tlaib. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes no.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. Pressley. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes no.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes yes.
Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 21, the nays are
19, with one voting present.
Chairman Comer. All right. Motion tabled. Now the Chair
recognizes Ms. Greene for 4 minutes and 21 seconds.
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chair, point of order.
Chairman Comer. Who is?
Ms. Crockett. It is me.
Chairman Comer. Ms. Crockett.
Ms. Crockett. I am just curious just to better understand
your ruling. If someone on this Committee then starts talking
about somebody's bleach blonde, bad built butch body, that
would not be engaging in personalities, correct?
Chairman Comer. A what now?
[Laughter.]
Mrs. Luna. Chairman, I make a motion to strike those words.
Chairman Comer. I do not think that is a parliamentary----
Ms. Crockett. I am trying to find clarification on what
qualifies----
Chairman Comer. I did not----
Mrs. Luna. Chairman, motion to strike those words.
Chairman Comer. I have no idea what you just said.
Mrs. Luna. We are not going to do this. Look, you guys
earlier, literally just----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. You just voted to do it.
Ms. Frost. You all did it first.
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. You just voted to do it.
Chairman Comer. Order. Order.
Ms. Crockett. I am trying to get clarification.
Mrs. Luna. Look, calm down. Calm down.
Ms. Crockett. No. No, no, no, because this is what you all
do.
Mrs. Luna. I would like to get through the proceeding.
Ms. Crockett. So, I am trying to get clarification----
Chairman Comer. Ms. Crockett, you are not recognized.
Ms. Crockett [continuing]. Since you all want to play
games.
Chairman Comer. Ms. Crockett.
Mrs. Luna. I cannot hear you with your yelling.
Ms. Crockett. If you do not want me to be----
Mrs. Luna. Calm down.
Ms. Crockett. No.
Mrs. Luna. Can you please calm down?
Ms. Crockett. Do not tell me to calm down.
Mrs. Luna. Calm down. Please calm down.
Ms. Crockett. Because you all talk noise, and then you
cannot take it. Because if I----
Mrs. Luna. You are out of control. Chairman, can we send
her outside to take a break for 5 minutes?
Ms. Crockett [continuing]. Come and talk shit about her,
you all going to have a problem.
[Disturbance in hearing room.]
Mr. Mfume. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. Order. All right. OK. Order.
Mrs. Luna. I do not know why you are acting like that. It
is not cute.
Chairman Comer. Order. The Chair recognizes Ms. Greene for
4 minutes and 21 seconds. Four minutes. Let Ms. Greene talk,
and then you all can----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I move to strike----
Chairman Comer. I will recognize----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I move to strike her words for a second
time based on her second set of personal remarks, attacking
another Member.
Mrs. Luna. Chairman Comer?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Because you all cannot seem----
Mrs. Luna. I have an amendment at the desk.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez [continuing]. To apply the rules of the
Committee----
Mrs. Luna. This sideshow can stop.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez [continuing]. We have to do this every
time.
Ms. Greene. OK. I am recognized. I am recognized.
Chairman Comer. Order, order.
Ms. Greene. I am recognized. I am going to go ahead and
start talking.
Chairman Comer. Look, I know. I know. Look, I do not know
if you have noticed it. I have two hearing aids. I am very
deaf. I am not understanding. Everybody is yelling. I am doing
the best I can. Can we not recognize Ms. Greene and let her
get----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. We cannot because of the rules of the
Committee, Mr. Chair. That is what I am trying to communicate
in the present moment.
Chairman Comer. OK. What is the motion? What is the motion?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. The motion is to strike the gentlelady's
words for the second set of remarks. Not the first, the second
that apply to me.
Mrs. Luna. She has no idea. She has no idea.
Chairman Comer. Do we know what the words?
Ms. Greene. She has no idea. She has no idea. I think, Mr.
Chairman, I am the only one recognized right now.
Mr. Raskin. Well, we objected at the time.
Chairman Comer. Will the Member state the words she wishes
struck?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Yes. She told me or she asserted that I
was not intelligent. These are the specific words. We can have
it read by the clerk.
Mr. Raskin. It was made immediately
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. And it was made immediately. I am not
moving now. I am not moving now.
Chairman Comer. I do not think it was timely.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. It was immediately.
Mr. Raskin. It was made immediately both by the gentlelady
and by me.
Chairman Comer. Guys, look----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Mr. Chair, it was made immediately, and
you said that you would return to us.
Mr. Raskin. She said you do not have the intelligence to
talk to me, is what she said.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Ms. Greene for 4
minutes and 21 seconds.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Mr. Chair, what is happening with the
rule?
Mr. Raskin. I object to the ruling.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. We must object.
Mr. Raskin. If you want to take it up----
Mr. Lynch. Mr. Chairman, a point of order.
[No response.]
Mr. Lynch. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Chairman, on a point of order.
[No response.]
Chairman Comer.
Back in order. The Committee will come back to order.
The Chair rules to strike the words that Ms. Greene said
where she said that Ms. Ocasio-Cortez was not----
Mr. Raskin. That she lacked the intelligence to speak to
her----
Chairman Comer. OK. OK.
Mr. Raskin [continuing]. When, in fact, Ms. Mr. Ocasio-
Cortez is a brilliant Member----
Chairman Comer. I did not say it because I did not want you
all to get anything on me.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No, we should be on the record with what
was----
Chairman Comer. OK. We strike the words that she said,
``You are not intelligent.'' Are we good on that?
Mr. Goldman. No, no----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. We need----
Chairman Comer. The words have been struck.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No, no, no. Whoa.
Mr. Goldman. No, it was to take the words down.
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chairman----
Chairman Comer. Mr. Goldman, you, you are out of order.
Listen----
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Chairman, her motion was to take her words
down, not to strike the words.
Chairman Comer. It was to strike the words. That is what
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez asked, OK? Now----
Mr. Raskin. Which is to take them down.
Mr. Goldman. There is no such thing----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Which is to take them down.
Mr. Raskin. Which is to take them down.
Chairman Comer. Which is to take them down. They have been
taken down. They have been taken down. All right.
Mr. Goldman. All right. Then that means that Ms. Greene has
to leave the Committee. She cannot speak.
Chairman Comer. No, Mr. Goldman, Mr. Goldman, you are out
of order. Now, I want everyone--let us comply with decorum.
[Laughter.]
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Ms. Greene for----
Mr. Frost. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. No, no, no.
Mr. Goldman. Her words were taken down.
Chairman Comer. No. No.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No. Her words were taken down. That
means she cannot speak.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes----
Mr. Goldman. If her words are stricken, she cannot speak in
this hearing. Talk to your parliamentarian. She has to get out.
Mr. Raskin. Without a motion under unanimous consent, the
gentlelady is not permitted to speak for the rest of this
session.
Mrs. Luna. Chairman?
Mr. Raskin. And we are happy to revive our motion to
adjourn, Mr. Chairman.
I think these 17-hour days might not work for us.
Mrs. Luna. Something about working, huh?
Mr. Goldman. Maybe showing up for a vote.
Mrs. Luna. You have a lot to say being that you are on
retainer for the judge's daughter. Sorry, trust fund kid.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. We should strike those words, too.
Ms. Greene. I hope you brought your popcorn.
Voice. Mr. Chairman?
Mrs. Luna. I will strike those after we strike the fact
that they----
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman?
Mrs. Luna [continuing]. Are making comments about
Marjorie's body.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman?
Mrs. Luna. So, we can do this all night long, but I have a
motion----
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman, this is out of control.
Mrs. Luna [continuing]. I would like to get.
Mr. Raskin. We should adjourn, Mr. Chairman.
Mrs. Luna. Motion at the desk.
Ms. Greene. I think my body is pretty good. I am going to
be 50 this month.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman? Point of order.
Ms. Greene. I am. I turn 50.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman?
Ms. Greene. Pretty good.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman?
Ms. Greene. Thank you.
Ms. Stansbury. Mr. Chairman?
Ms. Greene. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Ms. Stansbury. We have some Members in the room who are
drinking inside the hearing room who are not Members of this
hearing.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman?
Ms. Stansbury. Mr. Chairman, we have Members who are not on
this Committee sitting in the hearing room drinking.
Mr. Biggs. We have Members talking who have not been
recognized. Mr. Chairman, point of inquiry.
[No response.]
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman, point of inquiry.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. We are going to suspend for 5 minutes while
our staffs work the parliamentary questions out. So, this
Committee----
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chair?
Chairman Comer [continuing]. Is suspended 5 minutes. It
would be a good time for everyone to go out and take a break.
Ms. Boebert. Can we apologize to the American people back
home first?
Chairman Comer. Get some fresh air.
Ms. Boebert. That would be really great.
Chairman Comer. Five minutes. The Committee will reconvene
in 5 minutes.
Ms. Boebert. How sorry we are that we are not----
[Recess.]
Chairman Comer. The Committee will reconvene. Members are
advised they must observe the House's standard of decorum in
debate and conduct. They must speak and act respectfully and
may not use disorderly words or unparliamentary language, such
as words negative toward your colleagues or engage in
personalities toward the President or senator. Does that count
for former president?
OK. All right. I move that the gentlelady from Georgia be
permitted to proceed in order.
Mr. Raskin. And would object and ask for recorded vote.
Chairman Comer. Mr. Raskin has requested a recorded vote
for my motion to allow the gentlelady from Georgia to proceed.
I vote yes.
The clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. Gosar. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes yes.
Ms. Foxx?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud?
Mr. Cloud. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes yes.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. Palmer. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes aye.
Mr. Higgins?
Mr. Higgins. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes yes.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. Sessions. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes aye.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. Mace. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes aye.
Mr. LaTurner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon?
Mr. Fallon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes aye.
Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Donalds votes yes.
Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes aye.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. Timmons. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes aye.
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. Burchett. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes aye.
Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Greene votes aye.
Mrs. McClain?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert?
Ms. Boebert. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes no.
Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fry votes aye.
Mrs. Luna?
Mrs. Luna. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna votes aye.
Mr. Langworthy?
Mr. Langworthy. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy votes aye.
Mr. Burlison?
Mr. Burlison. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes aye.
Mr. Waltz?
Mr. Waltz. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz votes aye.
Mr. Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. Norton. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes no.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Lynch. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes no.
Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Connolly votes nay.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes no.
Mr. Khanna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume?
Mr. Mfume. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes no.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez votes no.
Ms. Porter?
Ms. Porter. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Porter votes no.
Ms. Bush?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Brown?
Ms. Brown. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Brown votes no.
Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. Stansbury. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes no.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. Frost. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes no.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. Casar. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes no.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Goldman votes nay.
Mr. Moskowitz?
Mr. Moskowitz. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Moskowitz votes nay.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. Tlaib. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes no.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. Pressley. Nay.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes nay.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes yes.
Chairman Comer. How is Mr. Grothman recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman is not recorded.
Mr. Grothman. I will vote yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes yes.
Chairman Comer. How is Mr. LaTurner recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner is not recorded.
Mr. LaTurner. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner votes yes.
Chairman Comer. How is Dr. Foxx recorded?
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx is not recorded.
Ms. Foxx. Foxx votes yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx votes yes.
Chairman Comer. How is Mr. Sessions recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions is recorded as voting aye.
Chairman Comer. Do any other Members wish to vote? Has
Nancy voted?
Has Ms. Mace voted? Yes. OK. Well, the clerk can tally the
report.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 22. The
nays are 20.
Chairman Comer. The motion passes.
I will now recognize Ms. Greene for 4 minutes and 21
seconds.
Ms. Greene. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are here tonight to
hold Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress, and there has
been complaint and complaint after complaint from the other
side of the aisle. Now, I would like to remind everyone that
the American taxpayers were forced to pay millions and millions
of dollars for the January 6 Committee last Congress, who was
convened during primetime evening hours, and they hired an ABC
News executive, James Goldston, to produce these committee
hearings. Actually, had the American taxpayers pay for this,
and Democrats are complaining about our Committee hearing this
evening? I would also like to remind everyone that during the
117th Congress, we would vote until 1 or 2 in the morning many,
many times late at night, and that was when Democrats
controlled the house.
But the worst thing about the January 6 Committee is that
the Speaker broke her own rules when she produced this
Committee, created the Committee. The Minority leader appointed
Members of Congress to this Committee, and they were denied
being able to participate on the January 6 Committee. This
Committee operated against the rules of Congress. It was
procedurally defective. And today, right now, Peter Navarro is
sitting in jail because he was held in contempt of Congress,
and, also, Steve Bannon has been held in contempt of Congress
and could go to jail soon. Those are the consequences of when
the Democrats controlled the House. They broke the rules, and
the consequences are people have gone to jail, and they may
soon go to jail. And tonight, we are here to hold Merrick
Garland in contempt of Congress, and this Committee needs to be
able to proceed forward to do that.
I would also like to remind the Committee and anyone
watching this, that every single time we hold a Committee
hearing in Oversight Committee, the Democrats attack President
Trump repeatedly. It does not matter what the issue is, does
not matter what the topic is. They cannot produce facts. They
cannot produce anything to make their arguments. They make it
about personal character attacks on the former President of the
United States and our Republican Presidential candidate. Every
single time, they attack President Trump. They think the way to
win an argument is to attack President Trump. You talk about
character attacks. It goes on and on.
Also, Members of this Committee attacked me repeatedly over
and over and over again constantly, but they are offended when
I say something back? And I think this needs to be called out,
Mr. Chairman, because the hypocrisy is screaming, and the
American people watch it every single day. And I will not
apologize for my words, and I will not change them, and I will
not tolerate being treated this way constantly on this
Committee and in other committees. And I think that if we are
going to hold hearings like this and hold Merrick Garland in
contempt of Congress, I think we should move forward and go
ahead and do that. But the actual behavior that happens across
the aisle in this Committee of constant attacks on President
Trump are unbelievable, and attacks on President Trump, the
weaponized government against President Trump.
I want you to know something. He may be sitting in a New
York courtroom with a sham trial with a political judge whose
daughter works for Democrats, but I will tell you right now,
President Trump is up 10 points in Georgia because the American
people see this for exactly what it is. They know what it is,
and it is completely wrong. And the fact that our American
people's hard-earned tax dollars were spent on the January 6
Committee with no accountability is wrong, too. I think
Democrats should be held accountable for that and the wrongs
that they have committed, and the fact that Peter Navarro is in
jail right now and Steve Bannon may have to go to jail soon.
And, Mr. Chairman, I would ask that we can go ahead and
move forward as soon as possible to hold Merrick Garland in
contempt of Congress. Thank you.
Chairman Comer. The gentlelady yields. Does any other
Member seek recognition? Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Tonight has been
very interesting. I want to just take a moment just to put
today in context.
We are here right now at this late hour to accommodate the
Majority's field trip to praise their leader, and let us not
forget that he left office in disgrace. Yes, gentlelady from
Georgia, we are going to talk about that Donald Trump, who
stole classified materials and stored them in his bathroom. He
was investigated and indicted for his crimes. Now, Attorney
General Garland set up a parallel investigation of President
Biden's handling of classified documents as well, and that
shows the Department of Justice is actually fair and
independent. So, to oversee this investigation, he appointed
Robert Hur, a former U.S. attorney handpicked by Donald Trump.
Robert Hur found no wrongdoing by President Biden--no
wrongdoing by President Biden--but he chose to smear President
Biden with a totally unprofessional and wrong assessment of the
President's age and mental sharpness. Now, as we know, his
assessment about President Biden was wrong because you can
literally yourself read the transcript, which is over 250 pages
long.
Now, many of us, especially us Democrats, know the
President. He is sharp. He is focused on the big issues. He is
dealing with large challenges across the world. Now, the
Majority is hyping up this issue to distract us from the fact
that Donald Trump keeps embarrassing himself in public, and as
much as a gentlelady from Georgia and others may not like it,
we know that Trump's public statements have been crazy and
incoherent for years. And we know that he is too tired and
sleepy to stay awake through his own criminal trial. It is not
President Biden who is not sharp. It is, in fact, Donald Trump.
Now, let us look at public reporting. I am only going to
talk about public reporting. His criminal trial started on
April 15, and here is a summary of the press reports. On his
first day of his trial, Reuters reported that Trump appeared to
doze off during jury selection. On April 16, it was reported
that Trump dropped his head inside the courtroom, keeping his
eyes closed before jolting his head upright. On April 19, the
New York Times reported, Trump's eyes remained ``closed for
extended periods'' during the final day of jury selection. On
April 22, MSNBC reported that Trump's lawyers were fighting to
keep him awake. On April 30, NBC and the New York Times
reported that Trump nodded off for significant portions of
witness testimony, and as we all know, basically kept his eyes
closed for hours and hours on end. On May 9, Trump's eyes
remained closed for many minutes, and Trump later, of course,
dozed on and off, and the reports go on and on. May 13, Trump
was ``asleep during the afternoon session.'' On May 14, a
political reporter said Trump slouched in his seat and closed
his eyes and his mouth.
[Photo.]
Now, here we have a photo of Donald Trump, of course,
through some of his trial, and I bring this up because it is
Donald Trump that is asleep, and it is hurting and dividing our
country. And this attack on President Biden and his mental
acuteness, or his ability or his age is completely just a
reason and an excuse for the Republicans to continue to attack
President Biden when we all know that Donald Trump is the one
that is unfit to be President. And that is why the Majority is
so desperate to be here today because they want to help him get
elected and hurt President Biden. Well, it is not going to
work, and with that I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize
myself, first, to offer an amendment. The clerk will distribute
the amendment to all Members.
Ms. Boebert. Are we done?
Chairman Comer. No, no, we are not done. We are not done. I
am just going to do an amendment, and then we will have all the
debate we want, and I know Mr. Goldman has an amendment he
wants to offer. Mrs. Luna has an amendment, and--we can go
back. Everybody will have an opportunity to talk. We are just
going to go ahead and do the amendment in the nature of a
substitute. Does everyone have a copy? OK, Ms. Boebert? Ms.
Boebert, I have to allow people to speak on the ANS, if they
want, right now, so I will recognize you for 5 minutes.
Ms. Boebert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I just want to
apologize to the American people. I do not think that this is
the best use of our time when we are squabbling. It is one
thing to have fun and laugh as Members of Congress and try to
find humor or some sort of lightheartedness in what we are
doing, but when things get as heated as they have, it is,
unfortunately, an embarrassment on our body as a whole. And so,
I just want to personally apologize to the American people for
that.
But we are here to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in
contempt of Congress for ignoring subpoenas and believing that
he is above the law. We simply want to hear what was said in
the interview that was transcribed. Yes, we have the
transcriptions, but the White House has recently edited
President Biden's mistakes by labeling them ``inaudible'' in
transcripts. The Committee Members must be able to assess for
themselves that the transcripts accurately reflects the true
content of the interviews.
Now, the American people, fortunate or unfortunate, have
heard Joe Biden speak for over 3 years now, really, if you
include the campaign about 4 years, and we have witnessed in
real time a massive cognitive decline. President Trump, when he
was in office, he underwent testing for his cognitive
dissidence, for his ability to function as President of the
United States as the Commander-in-Chief. And unfortunately, I
have not seen Joe Biden even read a teleprompter properly and
get through the reading without also adding in what is in the
brackets when he needs to take a pause. And there are many
things that we could go on here, but I want to hear the
inflections in Joe Biden's responses when he is answering these
questions.
Now, on February 27, 2024, the Oversight Committee issued a
subpoena for relevant information regarding the special
counsel's investigation, including the transcript and any
recordings of the special counsel's interviews with President
Biden in October 2023. Now, to date, the Department of Justice
has refused to provide the Committee the audio recordings. It
is a very simple request. It can be provided at any time, but
maybe, just maybe, this Administration, that has tried to cover
up so much and tried to physically lift up Joe Biden and keep
him upright, is hiding even more. So, we just want to hear how
that interview actually went.
I am in favor of moving forward to hold Attorney General
Merrick in contempt of Congress. I think there are many other
things that we need to have him in for and move forward on in
holding him accountable. I mean, he has gone after so many
American citizens--moms and dads who attend school board
meetings, those of the Catholic faith. The DOJ has been
completely weaponized, and it is very sad for our country.
But this hearing will continue. We have many amendments. I
am sure there will be much dialog. Hopefully, there is some
decorum on both sides of the aisle. And if, in my remaining 1
minute, I could request, every so often, Mr. Garcia, maybe you
could just lift up that picture of President Trump sleeping, as
you say. I think he is praying, but if he is sleeping, he
certainly looks pretty while he sleeps. Maybe it is an
endearing moment of prayer, though. I know when I fall asleep
on airplanes, my mouth kind of drops open and his mouth is kind
of tightlipped. So, maybe, it is just a somber moment of
thought.
Mr. Garcia. I mean he is sleeping. It has been reported by
multiple press outlets that he was actually sleeping.
Ms. Boebert. I was in the courtroom today, and I could see
why someone would fall asleep just like George Conway fell
asleep today in the court hearing. It is kind of slow in there.
It is not as exciting as the House Oversight Committee, but I
just wanted to say that is a lovely picture you have of
President Trump, Mr. Garcia.
Mr. Garcia. Thank you.
Ms. Boebert. Thank you, and I yield.
Chairman Comer. The gentlelady yields back. Does any other
Member wish to speak on the underlying? Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In preparing for this
markup, I wanted to do a little bit of work to understand why
the Oversight Committee is trying to hold the Attorney General
of the Department of Justice in contempt. The Oversight
Committee does not have jurisdiction over the Department of
Justice, the Judiciary Committee does, and I understand the
Judiciary Committee held a markup of their own today on the
same exact contempt motion. And so, I thought, oh, well, let us
take a look at the impeachment investigation. It must be coming
from that.
So, I looked at the impeachment resolution that was passed
on December 13, 2023, H.Res. 918, and it refers to a memorandum
dated September 27, 2023 from the three Chairs that was
entitled, ``Impeachment Inquiry.'' It is 30 pages long, this
memorandum, and there is not a single mention of classified
documents, or Special Counsel Robert Hur, or Joe Biden
possessing classified documents. And so, Mr. Chairman, I would
ask what on earth we are doing here in the Oversight Committee
when we have no jurisdiction to be holding the Attorney General
in contempt, and I will happily yield to you if you would like
to respond.
[No response.]
Mr. Goldman. He does not want to respond.
Mr. Gosar. I will respond.
Mr. Goldman. Go ahead, Mr. Gosar.
Mr. Gosar. Yes, we actually set the precedent in my first
term, or second term in regard to holding Mr. Holder
accountable in contempt in this very office or this very
Committee, and----
Mr. Goldman. But, if I may, just reclaiming my time, that
was related to an investigation that this Committee was doing.
What Special Counsel Hur was investigating has nothing to
do with anything that this Committee is investigating. I
understand that the impeachment investigation that you all ran
was such a massive flop and a bust, that you would like to try
to distract from that complete humiliation, but doing so
outside of your jurisdiction is probably not the best way to do
it. And in reality, not only was this absurdly postponed so
some people could go prostrate themselves in front of their
dear leader today in New York and we are now at 10 night, but
we have absolutely no reason to be here. We have no
jurisdiction over this matter.
It was properly in front of the Judiciary Committee. The
Judiciary Committee will do what they want to do over there in
the Department of Justice, but it is truly a reflection, an
unfortunate reflection, of how desperate the Chairman is to
distract from what was a monumental bust of an impeachment
investigation. And so----
Mr. Biggs. Will the gentleman for a question?
Mr. Goldman. Not quite yet, Mr. Biggs. I will get to you.
Mr. Biggs. Thanks.
Mr. Goldman. And so, I would urge the Chairman to explain
to all of us what, other than pure distraction from the
impeachment investigation that seems to be over now, as to why
we are here at 10 at night marking up something over which we
have no jurisdiction. Mr. Biggs, happy to yield to you.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you. Thanks so much. I guess my question
is, on your jurisdiction position, your position that we lack
jurisdiction, I am wondering what you think of Rule X of the
Committee's jurisdiction and also----
Mr. Goldman. Well----
Mr. Biggs [continuing]. And also----
Mr. Goldman. I do not have Rule X memorized, Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Well, take a look at it. Let me see if I can
just give you a slight----
Mr. Goldman. Go ahead and read it just like you can read
the transcript.
Mr. Biggs. Yes. Well, I would prefer actually seeing the
audio of the transcript, hearing the audio of the transcript.
``Anything at any time,'' that is the language that is used in
Rule X. Take a look. It might be helpful when you are making a
lack of jurisdiction argument. The other thing is----
Mr. Goldman. Sorry. What is ``anything at any time,'' Mr.
Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Take a look in Rule X. I think you will change
your position. Let me ask you this other question.
Mr. Raskin. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Goldman. Well, I will reclaim my time and yield to Mr.
Raskin.
Mr. Raskin. I wanted to thank the gentleman from New York
for his trenchant remarks here. Would you think it is fair to
say that it is not only way outside of our jurisdiction, but it
is also redundant given that the Judiciary Committee, which has
jurisdiction has already acted?
Mr. Goldman. Well, of course. This is already going to go
to the House Floor regardless of whatever we do, so it is a
shame that this Committee feels so desperate to latch on to
some victory that we need to hold a completely redundant,
unnecessary markup over something that we have no jurisdiction.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman Comer. And the gentleman's time has expired. Does
anyone else seek recognition? We have some amendments to be
offered. Can we start with the amendment process? Is everybody
OK with that?
I will begin. I recognize myself to first offer an
amendment.
The clerk will distribute the amendment to all Members.
Everyone have my amendment?
The clerk will please designate the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute to the Contempt Report as offered by Mr. Comer of
Kentucky.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read.
Mr. Raskin. I reserve a point of order.
Chairman Comer. I reserve the point of order.
I recognize myself for 5 minutes to explain the amendment.
Mr. Raskin. Great, and I reserve a point of order against
the amendment. Thank you.
Chairman Comer. As I said in my opening remarks today, the
Department of Justice informed the Committee that President
Biden is asserting executive privilege over the audio
recordings of his interviews with Special Counsel Hur. Until
today, the White House had not asserted any privilege and, in
fact, bragged that President Biden had not asserted executive
privilege in the interest of transparency. My amendment simply
amends the Contempt Report to reflect that the White House has
now asserted a privilege regarding these recordings. Though I
believe this is a miscalculated and invalid assertion of
executive privilege, my amendment would make the Contempt
Report reflect today's developments from the Department of
Justice and the White House and reflect the record as of today.
Do any other Members wish to speak on this amendment?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. If not----
Mr. Goldman. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Mr. Goldman.
Mr. Goldman. This is the part of the problem why you cannot
give the Republicans nice things.
Because it is never enough. And it is true that President
Biden has not asserted executive privilege over the entire
subpoena, effectively, that they responded to but for the audio
which is redundant because you have the information. There is
no point in having the audio other than for political partisan
purposes. And I understand how my colleagues get irritated
because every time you bring up something about President
Biden, we bring up something about President Trump, but the
reason we do is because in every single circumstance, what
President Trump did was so egregious compared to what President
Biden may or may not have done.
Donald Trump asserted executive privilege over everything,
over just about everything while he was President. It was a
reflex of his. And here you are complaining that Joe Biden
finally asserted executive privilege over material that you
cannot possibly enumerate a legitimate legislative purpose
about. There is not one. Nobody can tell me. I know you say
that what the intonation is, is why you need this, but I can
assure you every court of law would tell you that the
intonation of the voice as opposed to the words on the page is
not a legitimate legislative purpose, so----
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman, would you yield to me, Mr.
Chairman?
Mr. Goldman. I think it is----
Mr. Raskin. It is Mr. Goldman's time.
Mr. Biggs. Oh, I am sorry. I thought you had yielded Mr.
Goldman.
Mr. Goldman. No, that is OK. So, I do think that the
executive privilege's assertion is yet another reason why the
contempt motion fails, as it has previously, and contempt
proceedings have been called off when the last Administration
has asserted executive privilege. If you would like to
challenge the executive privilege, you may do so. You may go to
court. But to hold the Attorney General in contempt over
something that the President has asserted executive privilege
is completely illegal and improper.
So, in addition to the jurisdictional problem, you also
have an executive privilege problem because you cannot hold
someone in contempt for something they have no control over,
whether it is asserted executive privilege. You are welcome to
go to court. You can go to court and challenge the assertion of
executive privilege. That has happened before. Don McGahn has a
very well-known case now that was litigated because the
President asserted executive privilege over him. But this is a
legitimate use of executive privilege, and if you disagree, go
to court. But this contempt hearing and this contempt motion is
completely nullified by the assertion of executive privilege.
Mr. Raskin. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Goldman. Yes, I yield to Mr. Raskin
Mr. Raskin. And thank you again for your clarifying
analysis of the contempt citations. Some of our colleagues
invoked the cases of Dan Scavino and Peter Navarro and Steve
Bannon. We are talking about people in those cases who never
produced a single document and never spent a minute before the
Committee. They completely blew off their subpoenas, which is
why they were held in contempt by the Congress, and then they
were subjected to criminal prosecution for it.
Now, you compare that to the case of the Attorney General
in the United States, who produced precisely the document that
was being sought, all 250 pages of it. Then there is a bait and
switch, and then it said, oh well, no, now we want the
audiotape. He has a very reasonable invocation, I assume, of
executive privilege, although I have not looked at it, but in
any event not anything that you would base a criminal arrest
upon given that he overwhelmingly complied with the demands of
the Committee, and I think everybody has got to concede that.
And if you want to make the argument splitting hairs that,
well, through some intonation or accent in the audiotape that a
high crime and misdemeanor might emerge, then please make that
argument. If somebody could even offer us a hypothetical of how
we could ground this in the jurisdictional authority and the
legitimate exercise of power of this Committee, explain how the
audiotape could reveal some intonation or accent that would
produce the holy grail that you have been looking for, for 18
or 19 months, which is a high crime or misdemeanor, and so far
nobody has uttered a peep about it. Thank you for yielding, Mr.
Goldman.
Mr. Goldman. I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman's time has expired. The
question is on the amendment--Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, the point
of deciding that we need to release this audio is really simple
from my analysis. This is an opportunity for your party to take
an opportunity to try to mock the current President. I know a
lot of people refer to the former President as ``President,''
but we have one President at a time, and that is Joe Biden. And
seemingly, this type of attitude and position has come straight
from the top. This idea of lacking all decorum, decency has
left the building when the stench of Donald Trump showed up.
And so, we have seen constantly from him how he mocks people.
We have seen in this Committee how different Members want to
mock other Members, and that is all this is about.
But what is so frustrating to me and what should be
frustrating to the American people, and the reason that really
all you all should lose you all's jobs, but why we are going to
take the majority is simple, is because we showed up ready to
work earlier today like we always do. And now, it is currently
10 p.m., and we are still here because we are committed to
doing the right thing. And my question is really simple. It is
a matter of if this was such a big deal, if it was a matter of
an emergency, if this was so important as it relates to whether
or not the President of the United States has done something so
wrong, then why is it that we could not have our hearing at 11
this morning instead of Members being in a criminal courthouse
with a twice-impeached, over 88-count-indicted sexual abuser
instead of being here to do the work of the American people if
this was serious? This is the reason that people do not believe
that we are doing serious work here----
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman, point of order.
Chairman Comer. Go ahead. State your point.
Mr. Biggs. My point of order is this. She just engaged in
personalities about a former President, which you just
reviewed----
Ms. Crockett. You cannot engage in personalities with a
former President? That is not the----
Mr. Biggs. You just reviewed the rules, and you know that
it is true. If you were on the Floor, you would be admonished.
You know that.
Ms. Crockett. Not the rules. That is not the rules.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chairman, I will further say, if this
happened on the Floor----
Chairman Comer. Right.
Mr. Biggs [continuing]. You would be admonished by the
parliamentarian.
Chairman Comer. Your point is correct.
Mr. Raskin. No, no. In this circumstance, you made an
announcement, I believe, that points of order about insulting
Presidents or former Presidents are not in order in this
hearing because, I take it, you are going after Joe Biden and
so----
I think you carved out an exception to that rule.
Chairman Comer. OK, point of order overruled. Ms. Crockett,
finish please.
Ms. Crockett. I will yield the remainder of my time.
Chairman Comer. Thank you.
Mr. Connolly. Would my friend yield to me?
Ms. Crockett. Yes, I will yield the remainder of my time.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the gentlelady. Originally, we have a
motion, an ANS, to hold the Attorney General in contempt
because he did not produce one item, an audiotape of the
transcripts that were provided in full. And we decided
apparently that that was what we were going to do because we
are not sure about our chances in a court of law, which is
really where this needs to be adjudicated. Now we have an
amendment to the ANS taking cognizance of the development today
in which the White House, not an unusual development and not
always justified, invokes executive privilege.
Now that is as old as the republic. In fact, the first
President to invoke executive privilege was George Washington
who did not want to provide documents regarding the Jay Treaty
because it was controversial, and it might embarrass the White
House. And we have had ups and downs with respect to executive
privilege ever since, but the proper venue for adjudicating
this is in a court of law. It is not this Committee.
And so now, this amendment to the amendment is essentially
holding an attorney general in contempt because they are
invoking executive privilege to protect information they choose
not to provide the Congress, and I find that a very narrow
basis. And I can understand why you do not want to have this
adjudicated in a court of law because I do not know that any
judge would find that we have substantial reason to hold
somebody in contempt for noncompliance. I thank the gentlelady
lady for yielding.
Chairman Comer. Do you yield back?
Ms. Crockett. I yield the remainder to the Ranking Member.
Mr. Raskin. And I yield back to you, Ms. Crockett.
Ms. Crockett. OK. Then I yield.
Chairman Comer. Thank you. The question is now on the
amendment offered by the Chairman.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
All those opposed signify by saying no.
[Chorus of noes.]
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the
amendment is agreed to.
Mr. Raskin. Recorded vote, please, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote has been requested by
Ranking Member Raskin. OK.
The clerk will call the roll.
A recorded vote is ordered.
As previously announced, further proceedings on the
question will be postponed.
Mr. LaTurner. Mr. Chairman, parliamentary inquiry?
Chairman Comer. Yes, Mr. LaTurner.
Mr. LaTurner. I think an actual one which is rare. Would it
be a proper motion for me to make--this is an important
amendment offered by the Chairman of the Committee--would it be
a proper motion for me to make that we hold the vote on this
specific amendment immediately and not roll it to the end?
Would that be a proper motion for me to make?
Chairman Comer. Yes. That motion is in order. Do you want
to----
Mr. LaTurner. I would make that motion.
Mr. Fallon. Second.
Chairman Comer. OK. Motion and second. OK.
Mr. Raskin. What is the motion?
Chairman Comer. OK. All right.
The clerk will call the vote on the amendment.
It was a request.
All right.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
Mr. Jordan. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan votes yes.
Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. Gosar. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes yes.
Ms. Foxx?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud?
Mr. Cloud. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes yes.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. Palmer. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes aye.
Mr. Higgins?
Mr. Higgins. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes yes.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. Sessions. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes aye.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. Mace. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes aye.
Mr. LaTurner?
Mr. LaTurner. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner votes aye.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. Fallon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes aye.
Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Donalds votes yes.
Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes aye.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. Timmons. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes aye.
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. Burchett. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes aye.
Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Greene votes aye.
Mrs. McClain?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert?
Ms. Boebert. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes aye.
Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fry votes aye.
Mrs. Luna?
Mrs. Luna. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna votes aye.
Mr. Langworthy?
Mr. Langworthy. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy votes aye.
Mr. Burlison?
Mr. Burlison. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes aye.
Mr. Waltz?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. Norton. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes no.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Lynch. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes no.
Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Connolly votes nay.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Khanna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume?
Mr. Mfume. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes no.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez votes no.
Ms. Porter?
Ms. Porter. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Porter votes no.
Ms. Bush?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Brown?
Ms. Brown. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Brown votes no.
Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. Stansbury. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes no.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. Frost. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes no.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. Casar. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes no.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Mr. Moskowitz?
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. Tlaib. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes no.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. Pressley. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes no.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes. How has Dr. Foxx been recorded?
The Clerk. Dr. Foxx is not yet recorded.
Ms. Foxx. Foxx votes aye.
Chairman Comer. What about----
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx votes aye.
Chairman Comer [continuing]. Mr. Grothman? Has he been
recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman is not recorded.
Mr. Grothman. Aye.
Chairman Comer. And----
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes aye.
Chairman Comer. How has Mr. Waltz been recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz is not recorded.
Mr. Waltz. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz votes aye.
Chairman Comer. How has Mr. Krishnamoorthi been recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi is not recorded.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. I vote no.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes no.
Chairman Comer. Does any other Member wish to vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, will the clerk please report
the tally?
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, your vote.
Chairman Comer. I voted yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes yes.
Mr. Chairman, on this vote the ayes are 24. The nays are
19.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it, and the amendment is
adopted.
Mrs. Luna. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes?
Mrs. Luna. I have an amendment at the desk.
Chairman Comer. The Chair recognizes Mrs. Luna.
Mrs. Luna. Has it been distributed?
Chairman Comer. Will the clerk please report the amendment?
Mr. Raskin. I reserve point order, Mr. Chairman.
The Clerk. An amend----
Chairman Comer. Before that, Clerk--you have a point of
order, Mr.----
Mr. Raskin. I am just reserving it.
Chairman Comer. OK. Reserving it. Clerk, please report the
amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute to the Contempt Report as offered by Mrs. Luna of
Florida.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, amendment is considered
as read.
I reserve a point of order.
The gentlelady from Florida, Mrs. Luna, is recognized for 5
minutes to explain the amendment.
Mrs. Luna. I wanted to offer this amendment because I, like
so many Americans, have, frankly, lost faith in the justice
system. And there was some comments made earlier by my
colleague, Mr. Goldman, who I actually very much so enjoy
debating with on this Committee, but he said that Oversight did
not have authority in regards to contempt proceedings. And
during my time off for maternity, after I was told that I could
not vote, I actually spent that time reading the House Rule
Book and Manual. And there is something that has not been used
since the early 1900's called inherent contempt of Congress. It
is actually something that any one individual Member reserves
as their right and authority in the House of Representatives.
And the reason why we are here today is because the
Attorney General thought he was above the law and did not
comply not just with one subpoena, but with two subpoenas.
Those are subpoenas from both Chairman Jordan and Chairman
Comer. I want to read this to you because, ultimately, if in 10
days, the Department of Justice does not do their job and hold
the Attorney General responsible just like they would any other
American, I think that it should be our job in the House of
Representatives to bring an inherent contempt proceeding
against the Attorney General, of which I have already filed
that privilege motion over a week ago.
And so, although I realize that my Democrat colleagues
might have an issue with this and I am willing to retract the
amendment, I would like to read it real quickly in saying that,
``Resolved, that if in 10 days after the passage of this
report, the Department of Justice had failed to indict Attorney
General Garland, the Speaker of the House of Representatives
shall issue his warrant commanding the Sergeant-at-Arms of his
duty to take into custody the body of the said Attorney General
Garland, wherever found, and bring him to the said Attorney
General Garland before the Bar of the House of Representatives,
then and there to provide documents, materials, and answer such
questions pertinent to the matter under inquiry as the House of
Representatives may order the Speaker of the House of
Representatives to propound, and to keep the said Attorney
General Garland in custody to await further orders of the House
of Representatives.''
This is something that we reserve as an authority in order
to bring back order to a House that has seemed to have
forgotten it. And so, with that, Chairman, I just wanted to let
you all know as my colleagues, because I am sure we will debate
this on the Floor, I fully intend in 10 days after this passes
out of Committee to hold Attorney General Garland in inherent
contempt of Congress if the Department of Justice does not do
their job. And with that, Chairman, I am going to withdraw my
amendment, and thank you.
Mr. Moskowitz. Mr. Chairman, I have a question on the----
Chairman Comer. I thank the lady for withdrawing, for
raising this issue, and please note that she withdrew her
amendment. OK. We are going to suspend for one moment.
[Pause.]
Chairman Comer. OK. The Committee will reconvene.
I understand, Mr. Goldman, you have an amendment?
Mr. Goldman. I do, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Comer. Will the clerk please report?
The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute to the Contempt Report as offered by Mr. Goldman of
New York.
Chairman Comer. Without objection, the amendment is
considered as read.
I reserve a point of order.
The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 minutes to
explain his amendment.
Mr. Goldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment
details and enumerates exactly what the subpoena requested and
exactly what the Department of Justice has done in response to
that subpoena, and I will summarize that the subpoena of
February 12 requested all documents and communications,
including audio and video recordings related to the special
counsel's interview of President Biden, as well as the special
counsel's interview of Mark Zwonitzer, who is the ghostwriter
of President Biden's book or books; three, the documents
identified as A-9 and A-10 in Appendix A of Mr. Hur's report;
and four, all communications between or among representatives
of the Department of Justice, including the Office of Special
Counsel, the Executive Office of the President, and President
Biden's personal counsel, referring or relating to Mr. Hur's
report.
Obviously, it goes almost without saying that that last
request is completely improper, would be deliberative process
and executive privilege, although I do not think they
determined executive privilege, but there is no basis for
Congress to get internal communications within the Department
of Justice about decisions they have made. And if you have any
question about that, you should go refer back to your favorite
former President and his Administration, where they used that
repeatedly.
In response to the subpoena, the special counsel or,
rather, the Department of Justice provided the unredacted
report, as you know, the transcripts of the interviews of
President Biden and Mr. Zwonitzer, provided the documents
identified as A-9 and A-10. So, really, the only thing that
could even be considered as a legitimate request that the
Department of Justice withheld is the audio recording of the
two interviews, about which there already is a transcript.
And so, the question that this amendment begs is if the
Majority thinks that giving substantially the entire subpoena
response--responding with substantially everything that the
subpoena asks for warrants contempt of Congress, what does the
Majority think about somebody who, I do not know, refuses to
respond to a subpoena altogether? Maybe Chairman Jordan has a
response to that, Mr. Biggs, Mr. Perry? Because I am pretty
sure that they each received duly authorized subpoenas, and I
appreciate that the gentlelady from Georgia----
Mr. Biggs. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Goldman. In one sec I will. I appreciate that the
gentlelady----
Mr. Biggs. Well, you asked me to respond.
Mr. Goldman. I will, 1 second. The gentlelady from Georgia,
with her esteemed legal knowledge, determined that the January
6 Committee was not a legitimate committee when, unfortunately,
a number of actual courts of law determined that it was. So,
those subpoenas to Members of Congress were duly authorized
subpoenas.
And if Merrick Garland is going to be held in contempt and
is going to be threatened with inherent contempt and sent to a
nonexistent jail in the basement of the Congress, then what is
going to happen to those witnesses who just outright defy
congressional subpoenas, because I do think the Majority ought
to be careful about the precedent that it sets. Because Mrs.
Luna, I am happy--happy--to reinstitute right now with you
inherent contempt. And I can assure you that when you consult
with the rest of your party, nobody will want it because----
Mrs. Luna. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Goldman [continuing]. It will be much, much worse for
you than for the Democrats.
Mrs. Luna. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Goldman. I am happy to yield, yes.
Mrs. Luna. I just like to point out that inherent contempt
or contempt, to my understanding, cannot be brought forward in
a new Congress even if it has been a past violation. I know
because I actually inquired on Cohen today, so just so you are
aware.
Mr. Goldman. No, no. I am not suggesting that we bring
inherent contempt----
Mrs. Luna. Well, just to clarify.
Mr. Goldman [continuing]. For any past subpoenas. I am
talking about the precedent that you are----
Mr. Biggs. Are you right now willing to yield, Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. Mr. Biggs, yes.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chair?
Mr. Biggs. Thank you. Thank you for yielding to me. First
of all, you made a personal reference, again, about Mr. Jordan,
about myself, and about Mr. Perry, which we had agreed that we
would not do, but I am going to respond to you. We asserted
that we had not received service.
Mr. Goldman. OK.
Mr. Biggs. And that is how we responded. End of story.
Mr. Goldman. So, your response is that you did not receive
service of the subpoena. I just want to be clear. That is why
you did not comply?
Chairman Comer. The gentleman's time has expired. The
gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Goldman. I thought so. I yield.
Chairman Comer. Do any other Members wish to speak on the
Goldman Amendment? The Chair recognizes Mr. Fry from South
Carolina for 5 minutes.
Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I oppose this amendment
by Mr. Goldman. Mr. Goldman's amendment is just an attempt to
distract from the very obvious and clear fact that the Attorney
General has failed to comply with a duly issued subpoena. The
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District Court has stated that
the level of grave accusations that a President may have
committed treason, bribery, or other high crimes of
misdemeanors, the House must be appropriately informed. Mr.
Goldman's amendment completely ignores the fact that audio
recordings, as he knows as a lawyer, are material to
understanding the full context of President Biden's mishandling
of classified documents, his credibility as a witness, and his
fitness to serve as President of the United States. Quite
simply, the Attorney General has not complied with two
subpoenas. Mr. Goldman's amendment completely distracts from
that obvious fact.
And I will remind my colleagues that a subpoena is not a
menu. It is not an a la carte menu that you can choose what you
comply with or not. You either produce the requested materials
or you do not. And when Mr. Goldman was with the Department of
Justice, he probably did not allow criminal defendants to pick
and choose what subpoenas they were going to comply with. And
so, just simply put, this amendment is just about helping
President Biden hide in a basement but by other means.
Mr. Goldman. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Fry. No, sir.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman's time is expired. Or he
yielded back. Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The gentleman from
South Carolina just implied, more than implied, that there is
evidence the President of the United States committed high
crimes and misdemeanors. The Hur report finds otherwise. He, in
fact, found no grounds for proceeding. That might be an
unpleasant fact, but it is a fact. In addition, there is no
committee in this Congress that has found the President of the
United States guilty of high crimes or misdemeanors, nor is the
President currently the subject of the charge that he is
guilty----
Mr. Fry. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Connolly [continuing]. That he is guilty of high crimes
and misdemeanors.
Mr. Fry. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Connolly. So, if we are going to take care in invoking
Presidents' names and characterizing them, their circumstances,
or their legal standing, let us at least stick to the facts. I
yield back.
Mr. Raskin. Mr.----
Mr. Fry. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Connolly. I am sorry. I yield first to the Ranking
Member.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Connolly, and I want to further
clarify this issue for our colleague because I did have some
familiarity with these contempt motions. Now, when the January
6 Committee, whose legality and constitutionality was
repeatedly upheld by the D.C. Circuit and no court ever
rejected it, issued subpoenas and requests to testify, hundreds
of people cooperated. More than 900 people did what the vast
majority of Americans do. You get a subpoena, you go, and you
testify. If you get a subpoena for documents, you turn over the
documents.
There was a tiny handful of people who blew off the
subpoenas. Some of them claimed to be invoking executive
privilege even when Donald Trump did not invoke executive
privilege. Some of them were not even working for the
government when they purported to invoke executive privilege,
and they were referred for contempt motions and voted that way,
and then prosecutions were brought only against those people
who categorically did not participate.
I will give you an example of someone who kind of did the
hokey pokey--he was sort of in and sort of out--and that was
Paul Manafort, and he participated some and then some not.
There were some other witnesses--Mark Meadows, that is who I am
thinking of. Mark Meadows is the one who turned over a whole
bunch of stuff, and then we understand Donald Trump was not
pleased and he stopped cooperating, but he was never held for
contempt because he had at least partially complied, OK?
So, now you are talking about the Attorney General of the
United States who has invoked executive privilege for one very
small part of the overall subpoena but has materially,
substantially, and overwhelmingly complied in this case, by
turning over the entire document that was subpoenaed, which was
the President's testimony. And now people are talking about
invoking the inherent power of contempt of Congress, which has
not been used in more than a century, to go and arrest him
because you did not get the audiotape?
Mrs. Luna. Will the gentleman yield, please?
Mr. Raskin. For a quick question, sure.
Mr. Connolly. Actually, it is my time.
Mr. Raskin. Oh, I am sorry.
Mr. Connolly. And I yield to the Ranking Member.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you. Just to complete my----
Mrs. Luna. Will the gentlemen yield for a question?
Mr. Raskin. I will just complete my point, and I will yield
back to the very distinguished gentleman from Virginia. So, I
think that our colleagues should really think about what they
are talking about here. You understand that when he was
President, Donald Trump invoked executive privilege and cutoff
all cooperation with legislative committees in more than a
hundred cases. You are saying he could have been arrested a
hundred times and thrown into jail, and do not bury your faces
in your phones. I mean, I just want you to follow the principle
of your argument that Congress can throw anyone in jail if
there is----
Mrs. Luna. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Raskin. I will yield back to my distinguished----
Mr. Connolly. I would yield to the gentlelady, yes.
Mrs. Luna. I think the whole point of this, and this is not
tit for tat, this is a very serious thing in that Congress used
to be respected. We are no longer respected because people do
not respect our authority. And so, the inherent contempt
clause--I am not hoping that he is thrown in jail. What I am
saying is that he has violated a law, something that we have as
a privilege, and as a result of that, any other American would
be in trouble or in jail because of it. And, so----
Mr. Connolly. Reclaiming my time. I want the gentlelady to
know that on the principle of inherent contempt, I actually
agree. I believe that the courts are too slow in enforcing
congressional subpoenas, and, therefore, the work of the
legislative body is impeded. But, that begs the question of
whether there are serious grounds on which to bring a contempt
citation, and if we are going to use----
Mrs. Luna. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Connolly. If we are going to use that power, we had
better use it very carefully and thoughtfully, and I do not
believe this proceeding against Merrick Garland meets that
criteria, but thank you for the point.
Chairman Comer. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair
now recognizes Mr. Jordan for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Luna. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Jordan. I thank the Chair. Independent and impartial,
that is what they told us. Attorney General of the United
States says we will administer justice in an impartial fashion.
The White House said we will let the Justice Department operate
in an independent fashion. The key question for this Committee,
the key question for the Judiciary Committee earlier today was,
was the decision not to prosecute President Biden consistent
with that commitment that President Biden and Attorney General
Garland gave the country. It is key question for the Congress
when we are doing our oversight.
Trump was charged. Biden was not. We know that is the case.
Was there a commitment to impartiality and independence? Was
that what was actually going on, particularly when you look at
what Robert Hur found, page 1 of his report: ``Our
investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully
retained, willfully disclosed classified materials after his
vice presidency when he was a private citizen.'' So, he met the
elements of the crime. He kept information he was not allowed
to keep. He shared information he was not allowed to share.
Now, why would he do that? Well, guess what? Robert Hur told us
that, too, page 231 of the report. He says it right here: ``Mr.
Biden had strong motivations to ignore the proper procedures
for safeguarding classified material. He had decided months
before to write a book,'' so he had motive. The motive was the
book he wrote for which he got paid, by the way, $8 million in
advance, so he had an $8 million motive. He met the elements of
the crime, but he is not being charged.
Now, one of the things we have to evaluate as Congress, the
legislative branch, is are they administering justice in a fair
and equal fashion? It is a fair question, and the best way to
determine that is to get all the evidence and the best
evidence. The best evidence, the purest evidence would be the
audiotape. The transcript is great. I would argue he has
already waived privilege when he gave us the transcript, but we
want the audiotape because that is the best evidence. That is
the best evidence we can have as the body who is supposed to do
oversight. It is part of our constitutional duty.
In order to do that, we should get the best--that is the
simple question. We can get into all the other fights we get
into in Congress. God bless us, that is how it goes, but to me,
that is the fundamental question. The elements of the crime
were met, both of them, and by the way, he knew the rules. He
had only been in government 50 years, chaired the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, Vice President of the United
States getting a daily briefing, intelligence briefing all the
time. He knew the rules, did not follow them, shared them with
the ghost writer, did it for $8 million, but was not charged.
Why? Why? Because Mr. Hur said he is a forgetful, elderly
gentleman. That is what he told us.
So, we want to evaluate it all, and the best way to do that
is to get all the evidence. That is all this is about, plain
and simple. I yield back
Chairman Comer. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes Ms. Stansbury from New Mexico.
Ms. Stansbury. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
make some points for the record on this amendment and on this
proceeding this evening, and I want to start off by first
saying to my colleagues across the aisle, welcome back to
Washington, DC. I know it is late, and I know a bunch of you
have been traveling. You were on the road today, and I know you
must be tired. You all were visiting Donald Trump's trial today
to defend his porn star hush money case.
[Photos]
And, in fact, we have some cute pictures of you here today,
and they are some cute pictures, so congratulations, and also
some from the last few days, and it looks like you guys had a
good time in the courtroom today.
But you know what? I do not know, the Speaker looks a
little bit stressed here. I mean, it is lot, right, to ask
someone who is facing a criminal trial and running for
President to ask his political allies to travel over 200 miles
on a voting day here in Congress to pop up to New York and snap
some cute pictures to defend him because the judge has ordered
him to stop threatening the jurors in his own trial. I mean,
some might actually view this as direct interference in a
criminal court case. It is not exactly law and order, as our
friends like to talk about all the time.
But I want to just take a moment to let you all know what
you missed today while you were up in New York. You missed some
votes. Yes, you were not here. You did not show up for votes.
You did not vote on some of the bills that you claimed were
your priorities, some of your public safety and border bills. I
can see you had some important business to take care of here
today. And as the Ranking Member noted, the Chairman did manage
to find time today, after they canceled the hearing this
morning, to have his political fundraising team send out this
fundraising email. And I do genuinely hope you made some good
money off of it because we are not actually supposed to use the
resources that the taxpayers fund in this Committee to
fundraise off of.
But it does really make you wonder why we are sitting here
at 10:30 at night after this is the activities that the GOP
were engaged in earlier today when we were supposed to be
having this hearing, these fundraising emails went out. Why are
we here? Why are we using taxpayer official resources in this
Committee right now? I mean, could it be political? I mean, it
would make sense why you guys rescheduled and skipped votes and
went up to New York, and here we are. And if there is any
indication that this impeachment scheme is in its flop era, I
do not know what is. This Committee has spent 17 months
reviewing 3.8 million pages of documents--3.8 million pages of
documents--80 hours of recorded testimony and not turned up a
single shred of evidence in this impeachment scheme, and yet
you still had time to go to Donald Trump's trial where he is
about to be convicted.
And so, you know, I think it is very clear what all of this
is about. The GOP is using this Committee and its resources to
make countless misleading and false statements to try to spin a
political narrative to fundraise off of it in a blatantly
partisan effort to support Donald Trump's reelection. If you
need any evidence, it is right here behind me. So, I thought it
was important to really set the record straight on this. This
is not a taxpayer-funded campaign effort. And if you needed any
evidence that that is what the Majority is involved in here, I
think it is very clear that that is what this hearing is all
about, or we would not be sitting here at 10:30 at night after
your little field trip. And with that, I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and this hearing
started off tonight with a crazy satire, and with the
condescending presentation we just received, it just continues
and perpetuates. So, I am glad we actually had an agreement
that we were going to tone it down. This is why you cannot--it
is tough to make deals with my colleagues across the aisle.
They condescend, they call out individuals, and they do not
go to the issues. That is why it is tough, folks. That is why
it is tough, and you wonder why, but let us take a look at a
few things here.
It was not that the Special Counsel Hur did not find that
criminal activity had taken place. As Mr. Jordan just pointed
out on page 2, we found out that President Biden, after he left
the vice presidency, he unlawfully retained and disclosed
classified information, but he was not prosecuted. You guys
conflate this. He was not charged, and so say, oh, see he did
not do anything wrong. No, that is not true. He did something
wrong, but Mr. Hur made a prosecutorial decision. He said,
well, this is a feeble old man with a poor memory, and you know
what, going to be tough to actually convict.
Now, the Attorney General has received a subpoena, and this
amendment by the gentleman from New York basically says,
``including audio and video recordings.'' And we are told, gee,
if he substantially complied, whoop, that is great. That is all
you have to do. But we actually had a great example earlier
this evening why you just might want to have the oral
transcript. You just might want to have that oral audio
recording. What was it? Do you remember? Nobody could
successfully identify and isolate and remember what Ms. Greene
said exactly. And so, we went there, and the comment was, well,
``the best that we could determine.'' But you know what might
have helped? An audio recording, and that is why an audio
recording becomes valuable in this particular case as well.
Now--yes, the best evidence, the original evidence. Now,
President Biden has now asserted executive privilege, which is
no longer available to him because he waived executive
privilege when he actually provided the written transcript. He
also went way up past the deadline. When the subpoena was due,
that is when he should have made that assertion. He chose not
to, and that is part of his problem. And then I think of the
Mitchell case, and if you remember the U.S. v. Mitchell case,
President Nixon was trying to get by with turning over what?
Some part of the written transcript. He said this is the
written transcript, this is what you should have, and the U.S.
Supreme Court said, no, turn over the audio recordings. That is
what happened in the U.S. v. Mitchell case.
Next thing here, when we get to the jurisdiction, oh my
goodness gracious, we do not have jurisdiction. Actually, we
do, Rule X(c)(2). Take a look at that. ``In addition to its
duties under subparagraph (1), the Committee on Oversight and
Accountability may at any time conduct investigations of any
matter without regard to Clause 1, 2, 3 of this clause
conferring jurisdiction over the matter to another standing
committee.'' That means we can have jurisdiction over darn near
anything, and we have claimed jurisdiction. That means we can
go forward with it.
What else you got? Let us see here. Oh goodness gracious.
It was late. It is late. Why are we here? It is late. You know
why it is late? You know why we are here? Because the time for
this hearing was set for 8 p.m., properly noticed. That is all
right. And you know what? I have actually been in committees
that have started late, after votes, when the Democrats had
control, and we went through to midnight, 1, 2 in the morning
when Democrats were sitting in the chair, so I do not feel bad
about that.
So, what you have here is the Democrats conflating
executive privilege as well as the contempt, but the issue that
they failed to understand is that the full compliance of the
subpoena required disclosure of the audio recordings. It is
right here in this proposed amendment. So, what would happen if
you had a deposition, and you did both a video recording and a
written transcript? Do you think the court is going to say,
hey, look, you can have one but not the other? No, that is
probably not going to happen. So, the time has expired.
Chairman Comer. The time has expired. I think Ms. Crockett
seeks recognition.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do want to make
sure that we point out some obvious differences in what the
Majority is talking about. No. 1, we are talking about an
interview that was voluntarily done by the sitting President of
the United States versus someone who has obstructed at every
angle, in fact, is continually obstructing, to the extent that
we are waiting on the Supreme Court to give us a ruling on
whether or not it is OK for him to commit his crimes while
sitting in the Oval Office and be excused for them. So, we have
got trials all over the place that are on hold because of the
continual obstruction.
The difference in the documents case between the former
President and the current President could not be any clearer.
We absolutely did not have mounds of documents sitting in
someone's bathroom versus some that have been stored in a
garage, but also it is this level of voluntariness. And so, for
those that are not lawyers in the room, typically we look to
something that is called mens rea, and mens rea is always
talking about a level of intent, and there are various levels
of intent. And so, while someone may be negligent, that may not
necessarily rise to the level of criminality, but when someone
is being intentional by making sure that they get rid of the
video footage, they lie to their lawyers, they lie to those
officials that are coming and inquiring of them, that is why
you then end up facing criminal charges.
But I also just want to make it clear because it seems like
when we talk about conflating, that those in this legislative
body really want to be more so on the Judiciary side of things.
They really sound like they want to enforce various things.
They want to enforce the law. They want to somehow decide over
what has already been decided that the President of the United
States should be charged with a crime, and I guess somehow they
are going to figure out a way to charge the President.
But I do want to remind this Committee and the Chairman
that since day one of the 118th Congress, which is now over 17
months, the Majority has wasted the Committee's resources,
time, and, quite frankly, the sanity of Members and staff on a
sham impeachment investigation that has failed to produce one
legitimate piece of evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden.
And the ``evidence'' our Chair and Majority used as its basis
to try to impeach the President was the FD-1023 form that has
since found to have information from an individual who was fed
lies by Russian assets. Now, I know the Chairman and the
Majority on this Committee know how to read, and so, in fact,
we heard from a Member that she has read through all the rules,
so I am not really sure why reading this transcript is so
difficult.
But Members and staff on both sides of the aisle have
combed through over 3.8 million pages of documents and 80 hours
of testimony for nearly 20 witnesses, scouring all of this
material to try to find any evidence of wrongdoing by President
Biden. But lo and behold, there never was any because there
clearly is none, because if there was, our Chairman would have
moved forward with a vote to impeach in this Committee.
The American people want the truth, and the truth is that
every Member on this Committee has access to the 250 pages of
transcript of what the President said during his voluntary sit-
down for questioning with the special counsel. But maybe my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle simply want the
audiobook version of the transcript because they have nothing
better to do than to listen to it on repeat on their train ride
to and from Trump's criminal trial and veep-stakes tryouts. By
the way, we love the matching red ties.
Mr. Raskin. Will the gentlelady yield?
Ms. Crockett. I will yield.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much. I just wanted to make a
point and answer to the distinguished Chairman of the Judiciary
Committee, the special counsel in this case, on page 97 says,
``The published book is not known to contain classified
information.'' Special counsel was very clear that President
Biden did not retain or use classified documents in order to
sell his book. And you might not like the conclusions of the
special counsel who is a Republican appointed by President
Trump, but those were his conclusions, and either you stand by
the rule of law, or you do not stand by the rule of law. And
all of us have the transcript to read, and all of it bears that
out. There was no intention by President Biden to exploit any
classified documents. I yield back.
Chairman Comer. The gentlelady's time has expired. The
Chair recognizes Mr. LaTurner from Kansas.
Mr. LaTurner. Mr. Chairman, I move the previous question.
Chairman Comer. Motion to move to the previous question.
Mr. Raskin. I object.
Mr. Cloud. I second the motion.
Chairman Comer. Motion and second.
It is nondebatable.
Mr. Raskin. OK.
Chairman Comer. And all those in favor?
Mr. Raskin. All right. Let us have a recorded vote, if we
could, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. The motion is not debatable. Shall the main
question be now put, those in favor of moving the previous
question signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
All those opposed signify by saying no.
[Chorus of noes.]
In the opinion Chair, the ayes have it. The previous
question is ordered.
Mr. Raskin. I would like a recorded vote, if I could, Mr.
Chairman
Chairman Comer. A recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will
call the roll.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. Gosar. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes yes.
Ms. Foxx?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman?
Mr. Grothman. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes yes.
Mr. Cloud?
Mr. Cloud. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes yes.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. Palmer. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes aye.
Mr. Higgins?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions?
Mr. Sessions. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes aye.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes aye.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. Mace. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes aye.
Mr. LaTurner?
Mr. LaTurner. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner votes aye.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. Fallon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes aye.
Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Donalds votes yes.
Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes aye.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. Timmons. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes aye.
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. Burchett. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes aye.
Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Greene votes aye.
Mrs. McClain?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert?
Ms. Boebert. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes aye.
Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fry votes aye.
Mrs. Luna?
Mrs. Luna. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna votes aye.
Mr. Langworthy?
Mr. Langworthy. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy votes aye.
Mr. Burlison?
Mr. Burlison. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes aye.
Mr. Waltz?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman, to be clear, this is a motion on
the previous question to cutoff all debate and all amendments?
Is that right?
Chairman Comer. That is correct.
Mr. Raskin. OK. And including the pending amendment or no?
Chairman Comer. The pending amendment.
Mr. Raskin. So, we would vote on the pending amendment, or
we would not?
Chairman Comer. Yes. Yes, we will vote on the pending
amendment.
Mr. Raskin. My vote is no. I have never seen this done in
this Committee in 8 years by either the Democrats or the
Republicans. I vote no on the motion on the previous question.
No.
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. Norton. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes no.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Lynch. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes no.
Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Connolly votes nay.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Khanna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume?
Mr. Mfume. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes no.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez votes no.
Ms. Porter?
Ms. Porter. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Porter votes no.
Ms. Bush?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Brown?
Ms. Brown. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Brown votes no.
Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. Stansbury. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes no.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. Frost. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes no.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. Casar. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes no.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Mr. Moskowitz?
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. Tlaib. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes no.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. Pressley. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes no.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes yes.
Chairman Comer. How is Mr. Waltz recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz is not recorded.
Mr. Waltz. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz votes yes.
Chairman Comer. How is Dr. Foxx recorded?
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx is not recorded.
Ms. Foxx. Foxx votes yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx votes yes.
Chairman Comer. And how is Mr. Krishnamoorthi recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi is not recorded.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes no.
Chairman Comer. How is Mr. Higgins recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins is not recorded.
Mr. Higgins. I vote yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes yes.
Chairman Comer. Have all Members been recorded?
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman, would you just explain why you
invoked that because that has not happened in 70 years in this
Committee.
Chairman Comer. Will the clerk please report?
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 23. The
nays are 19.
Chairman Comer. The move to the previous question passes.
The question is now on the pending amendment from Mr.
Goldman.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
All those opposed signify by saying no.
[Chorus of noes.]
In the opinion of the Chair, the noes have it----
Mr. Raskin. Recorded vote.
Chairman Comer [continuing]. And the amendment is not
agreed to.
Mr. Raskin. Request for a vote.
Chairman Comer. A request for a recorded vote has been
requested.
Will the clerk please call the roll? This is on the Goldman
Amendment.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. Gosar. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes no.
Ms. Foxx?
Ms. Foxx. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx votes no.
Mr. Grothman?
Mr. Grothman. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes no.
Mr. Cloud?
Mr. Cloud. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes no.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. Palmer. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes nay
Mr. Higgins?
Mr. Higgins. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes no.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. Sessions. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes no.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes no.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. Mace. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes no.
Mr. LaTurner?
Mr. LaTurner. No.
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner votes no.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. Fallon. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes no.
Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Donalds votes no.
Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes nay.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. Timmons. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes no.
Mr. Burchett?
Chairman Comer. Whose name were you on?
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett.
Chairman Comer. Mr. Burchett.
Mr. Burchett. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes no.
Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Greene votes no.
Mrs. McClain?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert?
Ms. Boebert. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes no.
Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Fry votes no.
Mrs. Luna?
Mrs. Luna. No.
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna votes no.
Mr. Langworthy?
Mr. Langworthy. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy votes no.
Mr. Burlison?
Mr. Burlison. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes no.
Mr. Waltz?
Mr. Waltz. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz votes no.
Mr. Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin votes aye.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. Norton. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes yes.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Lynch. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes aye.
Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Connolly votes aye.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes aye.
Mr. Khanna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume?
Mr. Mfume. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes aye.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez votes aye.
Ms. Porter?
Ms. Porter. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Porter votes aye.
Ms. Bush?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Brown?
Ms. Brown. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Brown votes yes.
Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. Stansbury. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes yes.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes yes.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. Frost. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes yes.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes yes.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. Casar. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes yes.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes yes.
Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. Yea.
The Clerk. Mr. Goldman votes yea.
Mr. Moskowitz?
Mr. Moskowitz. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Moskowitz votes yes.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. Tlaib. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes yes.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. Pressley. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes yes.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes no.
Chairman Comer. Has Mr. Perry been recorded?
The Clerk. Mr. Perry is recorded as no.
Chairman Comer. Have any other Members not been recorded?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, will the clerk report the
tally?
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 19. The
nays are 23.
Chairman Comer. The Goldman Amendment fails.
The question is now on the amendment in the nature of a
substitute to the Report.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
[Chorus of ayes.]
All those opposed signify by saying no.
[Chorus of noes.]
In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. The
amendment in the nature of a substitute to the report is
agreed.
Mr. Raskin. Recorded vote.
Chairman Comer. On the ANS?
Mr. Raskin. Yes.
Chairman Comer. OK.
Mr. Raskin. We are not even allowed to bring in any other
amendments.
Chairman Comer. Well, we have had deals and you all----
Mr. Raskin. It has not happened in 70 years, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Comer. You have not----
Mr. Raskin. Seventy years.
Chairman Comer. We have tried to negotiate with you, and
you have not done it.
A recorded vote is ordered on the ANS. Will the clerk
please report?
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. Gosar. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes yes.
Ms. Foxx?
Ms. Foxx. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx votes yes.
Mr. Grothman?
Mr. Grothman. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes yes.
Mr. Cloud?
Mr. Cloud. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes yes.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. Palmer. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes aye.
Mr. Higgins?
Mr. Higgins. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes yes.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. Sessions. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes aye.
Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes yes.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. Mace. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes yes.
Mr. LaTurner?
Mr. LaTurner. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner votes yes.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. Fallon. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes yes.
Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Donalds votes yes.
Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes yes.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. Timmons. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes yes.
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. Burchett. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes aye.
Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Greene votes aye.
Mrs. McClain?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert?
Ms. Boebert. Aye.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes aye.
Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fry votes aye.
Mrs. Luna?
Mrs. Luna. Aye.
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna votes aye.
Mr. Langworthy?
Mr. Langworthy. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy votes aye.
Mr. Burlison?
Mr. Burlison. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes aye.
Mr. Waltz?
Mr. Waltz. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz votes aye.
Mr. Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. Norton. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes no.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Lynch. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes no.
Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Connolly votes nay.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes nay.
Mr. Khanna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume?
Mr. Mfume. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes no.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez votes no.
Ms. Porter?
Ms. Porter. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Porter votes no.
Ms. Bush?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Brown?
Ms. Brown. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Brown votes no.
Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. Stansbury. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes no.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. Frost. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes no.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. Casar. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes no.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Mr. Moskowitz?
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. Tlaib. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes no.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. Pressley. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes no.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes yes.
Chairman Comer. Have any Members failed to vote?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Seeing none, will the clerk please report
the tally?
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 23. The
nays are 19.
Chairman Comer. The ayes have it. The motion is passed.
The question is now on favorably reporting the report.
Members will record their vote----
OK. The clerk will call the roll. This is the last vote.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan?
Mr. Jordan. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Jordan votes yes.
Mr. Turner?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar?
Mr. Gosar. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Gosar votes yes.
Ms. Foxx?
Ms. Foxx. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Foxx votes yes.
Mr. Grothman?
Mr. Grothman. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Grothman votes yes.
Mr. Cloud?
Mr. Cloud. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Cloud votes yes.
Mr. Palmer?
Mr. Palmer. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Palmer votes aye.
Mr. Higgins?
Mr. Higgins. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Higgins votes yes.
Mr. Sessions?
Mr. Sessions. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Sessions votes yes.
Mr. Biggs?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Mace?
[No response.]
The Clerk. I am sorry. Mr. Biggs?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs?
Mr. Biggs. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Biggs votes yes.
Ms. Mace?
Ms. Mace. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Mace votes yes.
Mr. LaTurner?
Mr. LaTurner. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. LaTurner votes yes.
Mr. Fallon?
Mr. Fallon. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Fallon votes aye.
Mr. Donalds?
Mr. Donalds. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Donalds votes yes.
Mr. Perry?
Mr. Perry. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Perry votes yes.
Mr. Timmons?
Mr. Timmons. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Timmons votes yes.
Mr. Burchett?
Mr. Burchett. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Burchett votes yes.
Ms. Greene?
Ms. Greene. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Greene votes yes.
Mrs. McClain?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert?
Ms. Boebert. Yes.
The Clerk. Ms. Boebert votes yes.
Mr. Fry?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Fry votes yes.
Mrs. Luna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna?
Mrs. Luna. Yes.
The Clerk. Mrs. Luna votes yes.
Mr. Langworthy?
Mr. Langworthy. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Langworthy votes yes.
Mr. Burlison?
Mr. Burlison. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Burlison votes yes.
Mr. Waltz?
Mr. Waltz. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Waltz votes yes.
Mr. Raskin?
Mr. Raskin. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Raskin votes no.
Ms. Norton?
Ms. Norton. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Norton votes no.
Mr. Lynch?
Mr. Lynch. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Lynch votes no.
Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly. Nay.
The Clerk. Mr. Connolly votes nay.
Mr. Krishnamoorthi?
Mr. Krishnamoorthi. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Krishnamoorthi votes no.
Mr. Khanna?
[No response.]
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume?
Mr. Mfume. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Mfume votes no.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez?
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez votes no.
Ms. Porter?
Ms. Porter. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Porter votes no.
Ms. Bush?
Ms. Bush. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Bush votes no.
Ms. Brown?
Ms. Brown. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Brown votes no.
Ms. Stansbury?
Ms. Stansbury. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Stansbury votes no.
Mr. Garcia?
Mr. Garcia. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Garcia votes no.
Mr. Frost?
Mr. Frost. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Frost votes no.
Ms. Lee?
Ms. Lee. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
Mr. Casar?
Mr. Casar. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Casar votes no.
Ms. Crockett?
Ms. Crockett. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Crockett votes no.
Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. No.
Chairman Comer. The Committee will be in order.
The Clerk. Mr. Goldman votes no.
Mr. Moskowitz?
Mr. Moskowitz. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Moskowitz votes no.
Ms. Tlaib?
Ms. Tlaib. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Tlaib votes no.
Ms. Pressley?
Ms. Pressley. No.
The Clerk. Ms. Pressley votes no.
Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Yes.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman votes yes.
Chairman Comer. Have all Member been recorded?
[No response.]
Chairman Comer. Will the clerk please report the tally?
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, the ayes are 24. The
nays are 20.
Chairman Comer. The motion passes.
Pursuant to this vote, the Committee hereby adopts the
Report recommending that the House of Representatives find
Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for
refusal to comply with a subpoena duly issued by this
Committee. We will move the Report to the full House.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer. Pursuant to House Rule XI----
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Comer [continuing]. Clause 2, Committee Members
shall have the right to file with the clerk of the Committee
supplemental, additional, Minority, and dissenting views within
2 days.
Without objection, so ordered.
Additionally, the staff is authorized to make necessary
technical and conforming changes to the Report ordered reported
today, subject to the approval of the Minority.
Without objection, so ordered.
If there is no further business before the Committee,
without objection, the Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:10 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[all]