As we reported earlier, Attorney General Merrick Garland was grilled by the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.
In one hot exchange, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) laid into him over his response, not agreeing immediately to turn over communications with any of the people involved in the lawfare prosecutions against former President Donald Trump. He also grilled him over the curious career path of Matthew Colangelo, who was an Assistant Attorney General under Garland but then made the odd choice to take a step down to work for the Manhattan DA. Gaetz delved into that question and asked about the effort to "get Trump."
Then there was also Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), who dug into the questions about the Hur Report and why they weren't turning over the audio — the issue that caused them to consider contempt charges against Garland.
First, he started with something that is unquestioned in the report: the finding by Special Counsel Robert Hur that Biden retained and disclosed classified information.
How bad is Garland? He refused to even acknowledge that was true when asked.
That's why Biggs just ripped into him, saying this is why they talk over him, because he, Garland, is "unresponsive" even when he's asked simple, non-disputable facts about the matter. How could anyone trust someone who responds this way?
Then Biggs went to the point in the Hur report about finding Biden to be a "well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory." Biggs asked Garland if he disputed that Hur made a "prosecutorial decision not to prosecute" for that reason. Again, Garland tried to play deflection games. Garland claimed that was just one of the reasons Hur made the decision. Biggs then asked him to name another, which left Garland stammering. although he claimed "one of them" was that Biden was "completely cooperative." Being "cooperative" after you're caught doesn't change the fact that you did it.
Then Biggs got to the audio, noting that Garland is fighting the release of the audio, claiming it could be used for deep fakes and saying the Biden team has claimed Executive Privilege. Garland refused to talk about whether they had consulted with him about the deep fake excuse.
Biggs then honed in on the problem, saying the DOJ had already admitted to altering the transcript in terms of "filler words." Biggs said then that because of that, we don't know what was edited out and how that might have changed things.
Biggs said he might not want to stand on Hur's Report since Hur determined Biden had a poor memory and couldn't remember things. Substantively, the transcript may be accurate, but the audio would tell us so much more, Biggs observed. If there's editing that has gone on here, that's the rationale, he said, referencing a Supreme Court case. And "your own office admitted it," Biggs declared.
Bam — exactly. If it's different, we have to know what has been changed. It also has redactions and "indiscernible" parts, according to the DOJ official's affidavit. What's in the indiscernible parts? The official might not know what Biden is saying, but someone who speaks Biden-ese (like me) might know what is being said. But in any event, we have a right to know what it is. Plus, they have already given up the transcript, so if it is the "same" as they are trying to argue, then there's no reason not to give it up, and they've effectively waived any claim of privacy or privilege in my view.