US House Judiciary Panel Intends to Subpoena Attorney General Barr

The U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee intends to subpoena Attorney General William Barr to testify about the firing of a federal prosecutor whose office had been investigating President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer.

A spokeswoman for the committee confirmed the move on Monday, but said no official date had been set for Barr’s appearance.

Democrat Jerrold Nadler, the committee’s chairman, told CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday that Barr deserved to be impeached over the issue but the Senate’s Republican majority would block such a move.

Jim Jordan, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to Nadler on Monday saying he opposed issuing a subpoena and urged him instead to try to find a mutually agreeable date for the attorney general to testify.

The dispute began on Friday when Barr announced Geoffrey Berman, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, was stepping down and would be replaced by U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Jay Clayton.

Berman then issued a statement saying he refused to resign, a position he only backed down from on Saturday after Barr allowed Berman’s deputy Audrey Strauss to take the reins on an acting basis.

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; Writing by Mohammad Zargham; editing by Jane Wardell)

Responses

  1. “but the Senate’s Republican majority would block such a move” Article

    I am confused.

    I thought that the House was an independent body that could impeach with a Democratic majority.

    1. The House Judiciary Committee has been waiting since March 2019 for McGahn to comply with their subpoena and it is still under litigation. Barr was subpoenaed in April, 2019 and still has not complied with requests regarding his presentation of the Mueller report information.
      Republicans in BOTH Houses of Congress have relinquished their oversight responsibilities and NO ONE expects them to grow a spine until Trump leaves the Oval Office. Interesting that the same folks that called D’s “snowflakes” now are afraid of a tweet.

        1. I thought you wanted to give your candidates “name recognition” for future elections. General election losing candidates that can get the Stacey Abrams media attention. Of course that gives us 6 more years of Mitch McConnell or more members of “the squad” to use in general election ads against actual Democrats.

          1. Ah HELL no!

            If candidates can win outright on their first attempt, I will take it. For those that come close but don’t win, it may take a bit longer.

            Primaries are there for us to find and nominate the best candidates possible and if that means dumping someone who hasn’t done anything for years, sides with their party’s opposition more than supports their own party’s policies, or is just stupid or corrupt, yeah, I am all for cleaning up both parties, too.

        2. Let’s be serious for a moment. How long do you see it taking for a Sanders & AOC endorsed Justice Democrat candidate to beat ANY Republican in Kentucky?

Comments are closed.