WASHINGTON – Four Republicans in the House of Representatives, including Kevin McCarthy, the minority leader, signaled Thursday that they would not co-operate with summons from the commission investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, a dilemma the group may face. implications for inquiry and for Congress itself.
Representatives Jim Jordan of Ohio, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Andy Biggs of Arizona sent letters to the commission objecting to the investigation ahead of a statement scheduled for this week, and Mr. McCarthy of California filed a lawsuit arguing the commission’s appeals were illegitimate.
“In order for the Republican leaders in the House of Representatives to agree to take part in this political trick, it will change the House forever,” Mr McCarthy and Mr Jordan wrote in a publication in The Wall Street Journal. In a statement, Mr Perry called the Democrat-led Kangaroo Court a commission and accused the group of “perpetuating political theater, denigrating and destroying political opponents”.
Republican resistance could hamper the commission’s investigation by leaving unanswered questions about the deadly mob attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, which injured more than 150 police officers. It is also likely to force the committee to decide whether to prosecute allegations of contempt of Congress against men, which could lead to a legal battle that could set a precedent for future congressional investigations.
Mr Perry, Mr Biggs and Mr Jordan were called to testify this week, and Mr McCarthy and Alabama’s Mo Brooks were scheduled for next week.
CNN previously reported that Mr. Perry and Mr. Biggs had sent letters to the committee objecting to the subpoenas. Mr Brooks did not respond to a request for comment.
The men used slightly different tactics to oppose the summons. While Mr Perry refused to appear – his lawyer categorically stated that the congressman “refuses to appear for an order on May 26 and wants to withdraw the summons” – Mr. Jordan issued a long list of requests that the committee is unlikely to to agree.
Mr Jordan, who is set to become chairman of the Judicial Committee if his party takes control of Congress after the midterm elections in November, has called for “all documents, videos or other material available to the elected committee” to be used in his interrogation and all kinds of materials the panel has in which his name appears.
“Your attempt to force you to testify about a colleague’s debates on a statutory legislative issue and an important constitutional function is a dangerous escalation of the Democrats’ persecution of political vendettas in the House of Representatives,” Jordan wrote to Representative Benny. Thompson, Mississippi Democrat and chairman of the committee.
A spokesman for the commission declined to comment.
The men’s resistance came when 22 former Republican members of the House called on them to co-operate with the commission.
“We understand that you may have concerns about this exercise of the Commission’s subpoena,” the former members wrote in a letter published in Medium. “Indeed, in most circumstances, we would strongly recommend that the testimony of current members of Congress not be imposed. But the exceptional nature of this circumstance is clear: one in which the members of the meeting can have first-hand knowledge of an attack on our government. The best way to ensure a full and fair account of what happened before and on January 6 is to give your understanding of what happened and explain it to the American people. “
The commission issued the summons this month as it deepened the role of Republicans in trying to cancel the 2020 election.
Mr Perry, who is coordinating a plan to try to replace the acting Attorney General after opposing Mr Trump’s false allegations of widespread fraud by voting, argued in a letter to the committee that “nothing is wrong” in his actions.
“The committee has no authority to issue the summons and we respectfully request that it be withdrawn immediately,” wrote his lawyer, John P. Rowley III.
At least one witness told the commission that Mark Meadows, the former White House chief of staff, burned documents in the fireplace in his office after meeting with Perry, a man familiar with the commission’s activities said Thursday. The information was first published by Politico. The Times reported on Wednesday that the commission had information that Mr Meadows had used his fireplace to throw away documents.
Mr. McCarthy, along with Louisiana, Steve Scaliz of Louisiana, a Republican Republican in the House of Representatives, filed a statement in support of Stephen K. Bannon, an ally of Trump who was charged with contempt of Congress for failing to comply with a subpoena. by the commission.
In summary, Mr McCarthy’s lawyers argued that the committee’s subpoenas were illegitimate because they said the committee did not follow House rules on the number of committee members and the role of Republicans in the committee. Several judges have already rejected this argument in other cases.
Mr Bannon tried to dismiss the allegations of disrespect, and Mr McCarthy and Mr Scaliz sided with him, arguing that Mr Bannon’s January 6 prosecution of the commission could cause “potential harm” to the institution of the Chamber.
The committee’s move to force Republicans to cooperate was widely considered unprecedented in the modern history of Congressional investigations. In the Chamber, subpoenas are almost never issued outside the ethics committee, which is tasked with investigating allegations of misconduct by members.
Before sending their letters, Republicans in private called to discuss how best to respond, according to people familiar with their thinking, who described it on condition of anonymity. Some argue that there is a clear political benefit to opposing the commission – because the base of former President Donald J. Trump will almost certainly look favored on the move – but some are also worried about weakening the credibility of their own appeals if their party takes over Congress.
Mr Thompson said that if men did not comply, another option other than a charge of contempt could be to refer it to the Ethics Committee.
Maggie Haberman contributed to the report.
Add Comment