In a dramatic congressional hearing, Florida Representative Matt Gaetz took Attorney General Merrick Garland to task over the Department of Justice's (DOJ) alleged involvement in the prosecutions of former President Donald Trump.
Gaetz's blistering line of questioning challenged Garland's claims that such allegations were mere "conspiracy theories," demanding transparency and accountability from the nation's top law enforcement official.
During the House Judiciary Committee hearing, Gaetz grilled Garland on whether the DOJ had communicated with the offices of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, and New York Attorney General Letitia James - all of whom have brought charges against Trump. Gaetz argued that Garland's refusal to provide these documents only served to strengthen the perception of collusion between the federal and state-level prosecutions.
Read: CNN Data Guru Says More Foreign-Born Voters Back Trump Over Biden
Gaetz highlighted the employment of former acting associate attorney general Matthew Colangelo, who joined the Manhattan District Attorney's office in December 2022 while Bragg was still investigating Trump. Colangelo had previously worked on the Trump Foundation investigation and the civil fraud case at the New York District Attorney's office. Adding to the concerns, Colangelo also received thousands of dollars from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) for "political consulting" in 2018.
https://twitter.com/RepMattGaetz/status/1798017986202153049
Gaetz also raised questions about the impartiality of the judge overseeing Trump's Manhattan trial, Juan Merchan. The congressman noted that Merchan had donated $15 to President Joe Biden's 2020 campaign and that his daughter runs a political consulting firm serving Democratic clients, including California Representative Adam Schiff. Gaetz argued that Trump deserved a "jury of their peers and a judge that's non-biased" rather than one with apparent political ties.
Read: Florida Sen. Marco Rubio Rips Border-Vetting Process After Illegal Shoots 2 NYPD Cops
Throughout the heated exchange, Garland remained evasive, refusing to directly address Gaetz's requests for transparency. The attorney general claimed that the DOJ did not control the state and local prosecutors' offices, effectively sidestepping the core of Gaetz's concerns. This reticence, according to the congressman, only served to lend credence to the very "conspiracy theory" that Garland had sought to dismiss.
The clash between Gaetz and Garland must be viewed within the broader context of the ongoing legal battles surrounding Trump. The former president has faced a barrage of charges at both the federal and state levels, leading to accusations of a coordinated "lawfare" campaign against him. Gaetz's aggressive questioning aimed to shed light on the extent of the DOJ's involvement in these parallel prosecutions.
"Attorney General, you've told us that it's a dangerous conspiracy theory to allege that the Department of Justice is communicating with these state and local prosecutions against Trump. You can clear it all up for us right now. Will the Department of Justice provide to the committee all documents all correspondence between the department and Alvin Braggs office and Fani Willis assaults office and Letitia James’ office?" asked Gaetz.
Read: Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, Republicans Rip Trump Guilty Verdict “Corrupt”
"The offices you're referring to our independent offices of state," replied Garland.
"I get that. I get that, ok. The question is whether or not you will provide all of your documents and correspondence. That's the question. It's I don't need a history lesson," said Gaetz.
"Well, I'm gonna say, again, we do not control those offices," said Garland.
Rep. Gaetz: The questions, communicate with them, not whether you control them, do you communicate with them, and we provide this...
AG Garland: Committee make a request, we will refer it to our Office of Legislative Affairs to think...
Rep. Gaetz: they will come in here and you will lodge this attack, that it's a conspiracy theory that there is coordinated lawfare against Trump. And then when we say fine, just give us the documents, give us the correspondence. And then, if it's a conspiracy theory, that will be evident. But when you say, well, we'll take your request, and then we'll sort of work it through the do J's accommodation process, then you're actually advancing the very dangerous conspiracy theory that you're concerned about. Now, you're you were a judge once nominated the highest court in our country, when you were a judge. I'm just curious, did you ever make political donations to partisan candidates?
AG Garland: No, no.
Rep. Gaetz: And you didn't, because that would create the potential appearance appearance of impropriety?
AG Garland: I didn't because there's a federal rule Oh, are in federal judges for making contributions? Right.
Rep. Gaetz: But under that same theory of attacks on the judicial process, like shouldn't someone be owed, like a jury of their peers and a judge that's nonbiased rather than getting a judge from your political opponent's donor file?
AG Garland: I'm well aware that you're not asking a hypothetical. You're asking me to comment on a verdict jury verdict in another jurisdiction, which has to be respected. I won't comment on it. That case is still ongoing.
Rep. Gaetz: Attorney General I hadn't asked you about the verdict yet. We were getting there. I was I was talking about the judge. And so let me ask you this question about your time as a judge. Was there ever a time when you were a judge when you had a family member who was personally profiting off of the notoriety of a case? That was before your court?
AG Garland: I'm gonna say again, very clear, you're asking me to comment on a case in another journal.
Rep. Gaetz: Hold on, Mr. Attorney General, did you ever have a family member profit off of the notoriety of any case that you settled and say
AG Garland: Again, you're answering me. No, you're asking me to comment on a case currently.
Rep. Gaetz: Well, it seems you're connecting the dots. Mr. Attorney General, I'm just asking you as to a general principle, but you are aware the judgment or Shawn's daughter was profiting off of this prosecution, you are aware that that creates the appearance of impropriety? You know, the very reason there's a federal rule against judges giving donations is because it is the very attack on the judicial process that we're concerned about.
AG Garland: I'm sorry, I don't agree with anything you just said. But I'm not going to comment on it. Okay, so
Rep. Gaetz: You won't comment on it, Mr. Attorney General, but you had no problem dispatching Matthew Colangelo, who's Matthew Colangelo.
AG Garland: That is false. I did not dispatch Matthew Colangelo.
Rep. Gaetz: Matthew Colangelo became the assistant attorney general, at the very beginning of the Biden administration, without having been Senate confirmed, goes and gets the senior role at the DOJ. And then after, I believe it's a Gupta replaced his Colangelo. He makes this remarkable downstream career journey from the US Department of Justice in Washington, DC, and then pops up in Alvin Bragg's office to go get Trump, and you're saying that's just a career choice that was made that has nothing to do with the law fair coordinated, saying...
AG Garland: It's false. I did not dispatch Mr. Colangelo anywhere.
Rep. Gaetz: Do you know how he ended up there?
AG Garland: I assume he spoke. He applied for a job there and got the job but see, you know what, tell you I had nothing to do with well,
Rep. Gaetz: You might not have had anything to do with it. But we've got this contemporaneous evidence in Mr. Pomerance his book. So Pomerantz writes this book, which I'm sure you're aware of where he says, we put together the legal legals to get Trump. We got all these folks together, and we assembled them for that purpose. And so when we on the Judiciary Committee, think about attacks on the judicial process, our concern is that you're the facts in the law aren't being followed. A target is acquired. Here, Trump and then you assemble the legal talent from DOJ Mr. Pomerance and you bring everybody in together. Yeah, really. And meanwhile, the judges making money on it. The judges making money on it, the judges families making money on it for stuff that you yourself wouldn't do. You know, no one's gonna buy this. No one's gonna believe it. It's going to create great disruption and I am saddened by it because like you I haven't given my life to the law. I care deeply Got the law and I think that the law fair we've seen against President Trump will do great damage well beyond our time in public service I see my time has expired I yield back.
__Help support the Tampa Free Press by making any small donation by clicking here.__
Android Users, Click To Download The Tampa Free Press App And Never Miss A Story. Follow Us On Facebook and Twitter.Sign up for our free newsletter.
