At today's House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) questioned Attorney General Merrick Garland about former President Trump's legal troubles.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Boston field office in which he explains that conspiracies about the FBI causing
00:04the Capitol insurrection are false and concerning.
00:06That objection.
00:07And finally I ask unanimous consent to enter an excerpt from FBI director Ray's
00:12testimony before the committee before this committee last July where he states
00:16quote I will say this notion that somehow the violence at the Capitol on
00:20January 6th was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources and agents
00:24is ludicrous and it's a disservice to our brave hard-working dedicated men of
00:29Without objection.
00:30The gentleman before us is recognized for five minutes.
00:32Attorney General you've told us that it's a dangerous conspiracy theory to
00:36allege that the Department of Justice is communicating with these state and local
00:41prosecutions against Trump.
00:43You can clear it all up for us right now.
00:45Will the Department of Justice provide to the committee all documents all
00:49correspondence between the department and Alvin Bragg's office and Fannie Willis's
00:54office and Letitia James's office?
00:57The offices you're referring to are independent offices of state.
01:01I get that.
01:02I get that.
01:03The question is whether or not you will provide all of your documents and
01:05correspondence.
01:06That's the question.
01:07I don't need a history lesson.
01:10Well I'm going to say again we do not control those offices.
01:14They make their own decisions.
01:15The question is whether you communicate with them not whether you control them.
01:18Do you communicate with them and will you provide those communications?
01:20You make a request.
01:21We'll refer it to our office of legislative affairs.
01:23But see here's the thing.
01:24You come in here and you lodge this attack that it's a conspiracy theory that there is
01:29coordinated lawfare against Trump.
01:31And then when we say fine just give us the documents.
01:34Give us the correspondence.
01:36And then if it's a conspiracy theory that will be evident.
01:38But when you say well we'll take your request and then we'll we'll sort of work it through
01:42the DOJ's accommodation process then you're actually advancing the very dangerous conspiracy
01:48theory that you're concerned about.
01:51You were a judge once nominated the highest court in our country.
01:54When you were a judge I'm just curious did you ever make political donations to partisan
01:59candidates?
02:00No.
02:01No.
02:02And you didn't because that would create the potential appearance of impropriety.
02:08I didn't because there's a federal rule barring federal judges from making contributions.
02:12Right but but under that same theory of attacks on the judicial process like shouldn't someone
02:19be owed like a jury of their peers and a judge that's non-biased rather than getting
02:25a judge from your political opponent's donor file.
02:28I'm well aware that you're not asking a hypothetical.
02:30You're asking me to comment on a verdict jury verdict in a another jurisdiction which has
02:36to be respected.
02:37I won't comment on it.
02:39That case is still ongoing.
02:41The defendant.
02:42Mr. Attorney General I hadn't asked you about the verdict yet.
02:43We were getting there.
02:44I was I was talking about the judge.
02:46And so let me ask you this question about your time as a judge.
02:49Was there ever a time when you were a judge when you had a family member who was personally
02:54profiting off of the notoriety of a case that that was before your court.
02:58I'm going to say again.
03:01Very clear.
03:02You're asking me to comment on a case in another jurisdiction.
03:04No.
03:05Hold on.
03:06Mr. Attorney General.
03:07Did you ever have a family member profit off of the notoriety of any case that you settled?
03:10Say again.
03:11You're asking me.
03:12You're asking me to comment on a case currently.
03:15Well it seems you're connecting the dots Mr. Attorney General.
03:17I'm just asking you as to a general principle.
03:20But you are aware the judge Mershawn's daughter was profiting off of this prosecution.
03:25You are aware that that creates the appearance of impropriety.
03:28You know the very reason there's a federal rule against judges giving donations is because
03:33it is the very attack on the judicial process that we're concerned about.
03:37I'm sorry I don't agree with anything you just said but I'm not going to comment on
03:41it.
03:42OK.
03:43So you won't comment on it Mr. Attorney General but you had no problem dispatching Matthew
03:46Colangelo.
03:47Who is Matthew Colangelo?
03:48That is false.
03:49I did not dispatch Matthew Colangelo.
03:51Matthew Colangelo became the Assistant Attorney General at the very beginning of the Biden
03:56administration without having been Senate confirmed goes and gets the senior role at
04:01the DOJ and then after I believe it's Gupta replaces Colangelo.
04:07Colangelo makes this remarkable downstream career journey from the U.S. Department of
04:12Justice in Washington D.C. and then pops up in Alvin Bragg's office to go get Trump
04:18and you're saying that's just a that's just a career choice that was made that has nothing
04:22to do with the lawfare coordinated by saying it's false.
04:25I did not dispatch Mr. Colangelo anywhere.
04:29Well do you know how he ended up there.
04:31I assume he spoke he applied for a job there and got the job.
04:35But see you know what I tell you I had nothing to do with it.
04:38Well you might not have had anything to do with it but we've got this contemporaneous
04:41evidence in Mr. Pomerantz's book.
04:44So Pomerantz writes this book which I'm sure you're aware of where he says we put together
04:48the legal eagles to get Trump.
04:52We got all these folks together and we assembled them for that purpose.
04:55And so when we on the Judiciary Committee think about attacks on the judicial process
05:00our concern is that the facts and the law aren't being followed.
05:05A target is acquired here Trump and then you assemble the legal talent from DOJ Mr.
05:12Pomerantz and you bring everybody in to get him.
05:16And meanwhile the judge is making money on it.
05:18The judge is making money on it.
05:19The judge's family is making money on it for stuff that you yourself wouldn't do.
05:23You know no one's going to buy this.
05:25No one's going to believe it.
05:26It's going to create great disruption.
05:27And I am saddened by it because like you I have given my life to the law.
05:30I care deeply about the law.
05:32And I think that the lawfare we've seen against President Trump will do great damage well
05:36beyond our time in public service.
05:37I see my time's expired.
05:38I yield back.
05:39Thank you Mr. Chairman.
05:40Mr. Attorney General do you want to respond to anything in Mr. Gates's tirade?
05:48I think everything he was talking about was a case in another jurisdiction an independent
05:54prosecutor Mr. Pomerantz worked for that independent prosecutor I don't know Mr. Pomerantz I don't
06:00know what's in his book but these are decisions made in another office independent of the
06:07Justice Department.
06:08Thank you Mr. Attorney General.
06:10Last week as we all know a jury of his peers convicted former President Trump on 34 felony
06:15counts of falsifying business directions to the first degree.
06:19The case was brought by the Manhattan D.A. so it is a state case not a federal case.
06:24I shouldn't have to ask you this Mr. Attorney General but since the majority seems to be
06:28confused can you please explain the difference between a state case and a federal case?
06:34Yes the Manhattan District Attorney has jurisdiction over cases involving New York State law completely
06:45independent of the Justice Department which has jurisdiction over cases involving federal
06:50law.
06:51We do not control the Manhattan District Attorney.
06:54Manhattan District Attorney does not report to us.
06:57The Manhattan District Attorney makes its own decisions about cases that he wants to
07:02bring under his state law.
07:06My Republican colleagues seem to believe.