House GOP to Hold Garland in Contempt  05/07 06:02

   House Republicans plan to move forward next week with holding Attorney 
General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for his refusal to turn over 
the unredacted audio of an interview that was conducted as part of the special 
counsel probe into President Joe Biden's handling of classified documents.

   WASHINGTON (AP) -- House Republicans plan to move forward next week with 
holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for his 
refusal to turn over the unredacted audio of an interview that was conducted as 
part of the special counsel probe into President Joe Biden's handling of 
classified documents.

   The House Judiciary Committee is set to convene on May 16 to advance 
contempt charges against the Cabinet official, according to a person familiar 
with the matter who was granted anonymity to discuss plans not yet made public. 
The resolution would then go to the full House for a vote.

   The contempt proceedings are just the latest flare-up in the increasingly 
tense relationship between Republicans and the Justice Department. House 
Republicans last month threatened to hold Garland in contempt for refusing to 
fully comply with a congressional subpoena issued as part their probe into 
Special Counsel Robert Hur's decision not to charge the president with any 
crimes.

   Republicans -- led by Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and James Comer of Kentucky 
-- had ordered the department to turn over audio of Hur's interviews with Biden 
by early April. But the Justice Department only turned over some of the 
records, excluding the audio interview with the president. They warned of the 
precedent that would be set for future investigations if the audio was provided.

   Assistant Attorney General Carlos Uriarte, the department's head of 
congressional affairs, said in the letter to Jordan and Comer last month that 
the committees' interest in these records may not be "in service of legitimate 
oversight or investigatory functions, but to serve political purposes that 
should have no role in the treatment of law enforcement files."

   Comer dismissed that rationale, saying in response that the Biden 
administration "does not get to determine what Congress needs and does not need 
for its oversight of the executive branch."

   Contempt charges would require majority support in committee and then the 
support of the full House before a referral would be sent to the Justice 
Department. Should the House hold Garland in contempt, it is unlikely that the 
Justice Department -- which Garland oversees -- would prosecute him.

   The last time an attorney general was held in contempt was 2012. That was 
when the GOP-controlled House voted to make then-Attorney General Eric Holder 
the first sitting Cabinet member to be held in contempt of Congress for 
refusing to turn over documents related to the gun-running operation known as 
Operation Fast and Furious.

   The Justice Department took no action against Holder.

   The special counsel in Biden's case, Hur, spent a year investigating the 
president's improper retention of classified documents, from his time as a 
senator and as vice president. The result was a 345-page report that questioned 
Biden's age and mental competence but recommended no criminal charges for the 
81-year-old. Hur said he found insufficient evidence to successfully prosecute 
a case in court.

   In March, Hur stood by the assessment made in his report in testimony before 
the Judiciary Committee, where he was grilled for more than four hours by both 
Democratic and Republican lawmakers.

   But his defense did not satisfy Republicans, who insists that there is a 
politically motivated double standard at the Justice Department, which is 
prosecuting former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified 
documents after he left the White House.

   But there are major differences between the two probes. Biden's team 
returned the documents after they were discovered, and the president cooperated 
with the investigation by voluntarily sitting for an interview and consenting 
to searches of his homes. Trump, by contrast, is accused of enlisting the help 
of aides and lawyers to conceal the documents from the government and allegedly 
sought to have potentially incriminating evidence destroyed.