Category: fox-news/politics/justice-department

Who is Pam Bondi, Trump’s new pick for attorney general?

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Just hours after former Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz withdrew his name from consideration to be attorney general, President-elect Trump tapped former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as his AG nominee.

"For too long, the partisan Department of Justice has been weaponized against me and other Republicans – Not anymore," Trump wrote in his announcement. "Pam will refocus the DOJ to its intended purpose of fighting Crime, and Making America Safe Again.

"I have known Pam for many years – She is smart and tough, and is an AMERICA FIRST Fighter, who will do a terrific job as Attorney General!"

Bondi chairs the Center of Litigation and co-chairs the Center for Law and Justice at the America First Policy Institute. 

PRESIDENT-ELECT TRUMP ANNOUNCES PAM BONDI AS HIS NEW PICK FOR US ATTORNEY GENERAL

Here's what to know about Trump's new AG pick:

Bondi, 59, is a Tampa native and earned her bachelor's degree in criminal justice from the University of Florida and her law degree from Stetson Law School. She was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1991.

She worked as a prosecutor out of the Hillsborough County State Attorney's Office for more than 18 years, trying a variety of cases from domestic violence to murder.

Bondi made history in 2010 as the state's first female attorney general. Her campaign emphasized challenging the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, and later focused on human trafficking issues once in office. She also notably shut down pill mills and tackled the state's opioid crisis. 

She held the post until 2019. 

Bondi worked as one of Trump's defense lawyers in 2020 after he was first impeached on allegations that he had abused his power and obstructed Congress. 

"They have not charged the president with any crime because the president did nothing wrong," Bondi said when articles of impeachment were sent by the House to the Senate. "There was no crime. The transcript of that phone call speaks for itself."

MATT GAETZ WITHDRAWS FROM CONSIDERATION TO SERVE AS ATTORNEY GENERAL

Bondi also worked on Trump's Opioid and Drug Abuse Commission during his first administration. In her role on the commission, Bondi collaborated with national leaders on drug prevention and treatment. 

Bondi is a partner at Ballard Partners, a Florida-based lobbying firm founded by Brian Ballard. Bondi splits her time between Florida and Washington, D.C., chairing the firm's corporate regulatory practice. 

The D.C. office notably earned more than $70 million in lobbying fees during Trump's first term by representing various corporate clients, according to federal disclosures. 

Trump's incoming chief of staff, Susie Wiles, also works for the firm after becoming a partner there following Trump's 2016 victory. 

WITH GAETZ DROPPING OUT, DO HEGSETH, RFK JR. AND GABBARD NOW HAVE BIGGER TARGETS ON THEIR BACKS?

Bondi has been vocal in her criticism about Trump's prosecutions, going so far as appearing alongside Trump in New York City during his hush money trial. 

"They make it sound like it's a first-degree murder case, and I've tried plenty of trial cases, Trace, and never seen anything like this," Bondi told Fox News host Trace Gallagher in April, shortly after Trump was issued a gag order in his New York case. 

"They're trying to gag him not only of his First Amendment rights but of defending himself," Bondi said at the time. 

Fox News Digital's Chris Pandolfo contributed to this report. 

Who’s who on Trump’s short list for attorney general

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

President-elect Donald Trump has wasted little time in naming top White House and Cabinet officials to serve in his administration as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in January.

It remains to be seen, however, who Trump will pick to head up his Justice Department, perhaps one of the most important vacancies to be filled in the next administration. 

Early contenders for the post include sitting U.S. senators, former Justice Department personnel and at least one top White House adviser from Trump's first term.

Though each would bring widely different backgrounds and perspectives to the position, they all share one common trait: loyalty to the president-elect and a willingness to back his agenda and policies over the next four years. 

As the U.S. awaits a formal announcement from the president-elect, here are some of the top names being floated for the role of U.S. attorney general.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah

Sen. Mike Lee, R- Utah, is considered to be a more conventional pick to head up the Justice Department. Lee is a high-ranking Republican in the chamber and would face a somewhat easy path to Senate confirmation, at least compared to some of the more controversial names that have surfaced.

But he may not be gunning for the role.

The Utah Republican told reporters last week that while he has been in frequent conversations with Trump's transition team, he plans to focus his sway in the Republican-majority Senate on helping gin up support for Trump's Cabinet nominees and helping select the Senate majority leader, a leadership election in which Lee, as current chair of the Senate Steering Committee, is poised to a play a major role.

"I have the job I want," Lee told the Deseret News in an interview. "And I look forward to working in the next Congress and with President Trump and his team to implement his agenda and the reform agenda that Republicans have offered and campaigned on, and it’s going to be an exciting time. We’ve got a lot of work to do."

John Ratcliffe

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe is among the top names being considered to head up the Justice Department. 

Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor and a former U.S. representative from Texas, earned the spotlight during Trump’s first term for his outspoken criticism of the FBI and of the special counsel investigation overseen by Robert Mueller.

Trump tapped Ratcliffe in 2019 to replace Dan Coates as the Director of National Intelligence. The following year, he was tapped by the outgoing president to be a member of his impeachment team.

Mark Paoletta 

Former White House attorney Mark Paoletta served during Trump’s first term as counsel to then-Vice President Mike Pence and to the Office of Management and Budget.

Paoletta is also already working on the Trump transition team, including helping steer Justice Department policy in the next Trump administration, making him a potentially natural fit for the role.

Paoletta also made clear Monday that if tapped to head up the Justice Department, he would not tolerate any resistance to Trump’s agenda by career prosecutors and other nonpolitical officials.

In a lengthy post on the social media site, X, Paoletta said career employees are "required to implement the President’s plan" after an election, even ones they may consider unethical or illegal. 

"If these career DOJ employees won’t implement President Trump’s program in good faith, they should leave," Paoletta said, noting that employees who engage in so-called "resistance" to Trump’s agenda would be guilty of "subverting American democracy" and subject to "disciplinary measures, including termination."

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is also among the names floated to lead the Department of Justice. Bailey was tapped by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson in 2022 to be the state’s top prosecutor after then-state Attorney General Eric Schmitt was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Since taking over the state AG’s office, Bailey has led dozens of lawsuits against the Biden administration and sought to defend the state on a number of conservative issues as well. 

Those familiar with Bailey’s ascent say his lower-profile career could be an asset as a possible U.S. attorney general, especially since the role requires Senate confirmation. He could be aided here by Sens. Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt, two Missouri Republicans who also served as state attorney general before their Senate service.

Since neither appear to be seeking the role of the top U.S. prosector, they could play a key role in stumping for Bailey in the Senate if his name does come up for consideration.

TRUMP TO APPOINT FORMER ICE DIRECTOR TOM HOMAN AS NEXT ‘BORDER CZAR’: NOBODY BETTER AT POLICING OUR BORDERS'

Matt Whitaker

Former Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker temporarily led the Justice Department after Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions during his first term.

Asked last week in a Fox News interview whether he wants the role, Whitaker declined to answer, saying that the decision is Trump's to make. 

"He's going to want someone who he knows, likes and trusts," Whitaker said. "He's going to want someone who was there from the beginning," he added, and who can help defend against what Whitaker described as "all this lawfare nonsense." 

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to Fox News's request for comment as to who remains on its list of candidates to lead the Justice Department.

Who’s who on Trump’s short list for attorney general

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

President-elect Donald Trump has wasted little time in naming top White House and Cabinet officials to serve in his administration as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in January.

It remains to be seen, however, who Trump will pick to head up his Justice Department, perhaps one of the most important vacancies to be filled in the next administration. 

Early contenders for the post include sitting U.S. senators, former Justice Department personnel and at least one top White House adviser from Trump's first term.

Though each would bring widely different backgrounds and perspectives to the position, they all share one common trait: loyalty to the president-elect and a willingness to back his agenda and policies over the next four years. 

As the U.S. awaits a formal announcement from the president-elect, here are some of the top names being floated for the role of U.S. attorney general.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah

Sen. Mike Lee, R- Utah, is considered to be a more conventional pick to head up the Justice Department. Lee is a high-ranking Republican in the chamber and would face a somewhat easy path to Senate confirmation, at least compared to some of the more controversial names that have surfaced.

But he may not be gunning for the role.

The Utah Republican told reporters last week that while he has been in frequent conversations with Trump's transition team, he plans to focus his sway in the Republican-majority Senate on helping gin up support for Trump's Cabinet nominees and helping select the Senate majority leader, a leadership election in which Lee, as current chair of the Senate Steering Committee, is poised to a play a major role.

"I have the job I want," Lee told the Deseret News in an interview. "And I look forward to working in the next Congress and with President Trump and his team to implement his agenda and the reform agenda that Republicans have offered and campaigned on, and it’s going to be an exciting time. We’ve got a lot of work to do."

John Ratcliffe

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe is among the top names being considered to head up the Justice Department. 

Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor and a former U.S. representative from Texas, earned the spotlight during Trump’s first term for his outspoken criticism of the FBI and of the special counsel investigation overseen by Robert Mueller.

Trump tapped Ratcliffe in 2019 to replace Dan Coates as the Director of National Intelligence. The following year, he was tapped by the outgoing president to be a member of his impeachment team.

Mark Paoletta 

Former White House attorney Mark Paoletta served during Trump’s first term as counsel to then-Vice President Mike Pence and to the Office of Management and Budget.

Paoletta is also already working on the Trump transition team, including helping steer Justice Department policy in the next Trump administration, making him a potentially natural fit for the role.

Paoletta also made clear Monday that if tapped to head up the Justice Department, he would not tolerate any resistance to Trump’s agenda by career prosecutors and other nonpolitical officials.

In a lengthy post on the social media site, X, Paoletta said career employees are "required to implement the President’s plan" after an election, even ones they may consider unethical or illegal. 

"If these career DOJ employees won’t implement President Trump’s program in good faith, they should leave," Paoletta said, noting that employees who engage in so-called "resistance" to Trump’s agenda would be guilty of "subverting American democracy" and subject to "disciplinary measures, including termination."

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is also among the names floated to lead the Department of Justice. Bailey was tapped by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson in 2022 to be the state’s top prosecutor after then-state Attorney General Eric Schmitt was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Since taking over the state AG’s office, Bailey has led dozens of lawsuits against the Biden administration and sought to defend the state on a number of conservative issues as well. 

Those familiar with Bailey’s ascent say his lower-profile career could be an asset as a possible U.S. attorney general, especially since the role requires Senate confirmation. He could be aided here by Sens. Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt, two Missouri Republicans who also served as state attorney general before their Senate service.

Since neither appear to be seeking the role of the top U.S. prosector, they could play a key role in stumping for Bailey in the Senate if his name does come up for consideration.

TRUMP TO APPOINT FORMER ICE DIRECTOR TOM HOMAN AS NEXT ‘BORDER CZAR’: NOBODY BETTER AT POLICING OUR BORDERS'

Matt Whitaker

Former Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker temporarily led the Justice Department after Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions during his first term.

Asked last week in a Fox News interview whether he wants the role, Whitaker declined to answer, saying that the decision is Trump's to make. 

"He's going to want someone who he knows, likes and trusts," Whitaker said. "He's going to want someone who was there from the beginning," he added, and who can help defend against what Whitaker described as "all this lawfare nonsense." 

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to Fox News's request for comment as to who remains on its list of candidates to lead the Justice Department.

Jordan demands Smith retain all records related to Trump prosecutions as special counsel’s office winds down

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

FIRST ON FOX: The House Judiciary Committee is concerned that special counsel Jack Smith and prosecutors involved in the investigations of now President-elect Donald Trump will "purge" records to skirt oversight and is demanding they produce to Congress all documents related to the probes before the end of the month, Fox News Digital has learned. 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., penned a letter to Smith on Friday, obtained by Fox News Digital. 

TRUMP VOWS TO LEAD ‘GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA' IN VICTORY SPEECH: ’FIX EVERYTHING'

"The Committee on the Judiciary is continuing its oversight of the Department of Justice and the Office of Special Counsel. According to recent public reports, prosecutors in your office have been ‘gaming out legal options’ in the event that President Donald Trump won the election," they wrote. "With President Trump’s decisive victory this week, we are concerned that the Office of Special Counsel may attempt to purge relevant records, communications, and documents responsive to our numerous requests for information." 

Jordan and Loudermilk warned that the Office of Special Counsel "is not immune from transparency or above accountability for its actions." 

"We reiterate our requests, which are itemized in the attached appendix and incorporated herein, and ask that you produce the entirety of the requested material as soon as possible but no later than November 22, 2024," they wrote. 

Jordan and Loudermilk are demanding Smith turn over information about the use of FBI personnel on his team — a request first made in June 2023 — and whether any of those FBI employees "previously worked on any other matters concerning President Trump." 

They also renewed their request from August 2023, demanding records relating to Smith and prosecutor Jay Bratt visiting the White House or Executive Office of the President; a request from September 2023 for records related to lawyer Stanley Woodward—who represented Trump aide Walt Nauta; a request from December 2023 for communications between Attorney General Merrick Garland and the special counsel’s team; and more. 

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

The Justice Department is looking to wind down two federal criminal cases against President-elect Trump as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in the White House — a decision that upholds a long-standing policy that prevents Justice Department attorneys from prosecuting a sitting president. 

DOJ officials have cited a memo from the Office of Legal Counsel filed in 2000, which upholds a Watergate-era argument that asserts it is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine for the Justice Department to investigate a sitting president. 

It further notes that such proceedings would "unduly interfere in a direct or formal sense with the conduct of the Presidency."  

"In light of the effect that an indictment would have on the operations of the executive branch, ‘an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office,’" the memo said in conclusion.

Smith was leading an investigation into the alleged retention of classified records. Trump pleaded not guilty to the charges stemming from that probe. 

The case was eventually tossed completely by a federal judge in Florida, who ruled that Smith was improperly and unlawfully appointed as special counsel. 

Smith also took over an investigation into alleged 2020 election interference. Trump also pleaded not guilty, but his attorneys took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court to argue on the basis of presidential immunity. 

The high court ruled that Trump was immune from prosecution for official presidential acts, forcing Smith to file a new indictment. Trump pleaded not guilty to those new charges as well. Trump attorneys are now seeking to have the election interference charges dropped in Washington, D.C., similarly alleging that Smith was appointed unlawfully. 

Justice Department looking to wind down Trump criminal cases ahead of inauguration

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The Justice Department is looking to wind down two federal criminal cases against President-elect Trump as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in the White House — a decision that upholds long-standing policy that prevents Justice Department attorneys from prosecuting a sitting president. 

In making this argument, Justice Department officials cited a memo from the Office of Legal Counsel filed in 2000, which upholds a Watergate-era argument that asserts it is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine for the Justice Department to investigate a sitting president. 

It further notes that such proceedings would "unduly interfere in a direct or formal sense with the conduct of the Presidency."  

"In light of the effect that an indictment would have on the operations of the executive branch, ‘an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office,’" the memo said in conclusion.

Former Attorney General Bill Barr also backed this contention Wednesday in an interview with Fox News Digital, noting that after Trump takes office in January, prosecutors will be unable to continue the cases during his term. 

TRUMP VOWS TO LEAD ‘GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA' IN VICTORY SPEECH: ’FIX EVERYTHING'

Barr told Fox News Digital that a Trump-appointed attorney general could immediately halt all federal cases brought by current Special Counsel Jack Smith in Washington, D.C., and Florida. 

The charges in D.C. stem from Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. In Florida, they are centered on Trump's handling of classified documents after leaving the White House in 2020.

And though Trump would be powerless to halt two state cases filed in Georgia and New York, Barr said local prosecutors and judges need to move on from the "spectacle" of prosecuting the president-elect.

"Further maneuvering on these cases in the weeks ahead would serve no legitimate purpose and only distract the country and the incoming administration from the task at hand," Barr said.

He also noted that voters were well aware of the criminal allegations against Trump when they voted to re-elect him for a second term.

"The American people have rendered their verdict on President Trump, and decisively chosen him to lead the country for the next four years," Barr said. 

"They did that with full knowledge of the claims against him by prosecutors around the country and I think Attorney General [Merrick] Garland and the state prosecutors should respect the people’s decision and dismiss the cases against President Trump now."

This is a breaking news story. Check back soon for more developments.

Luna’s bid to force Garland to hand over Biden-Hur tapes fails in House

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

House Democrats and some Republicans joined together to block Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's bid to fine Attorney General Merrick Garland $10,000 per day until he released audio tapes of President Biden's interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

Democrats failed to block the resolution from hitting the floor on Wednesday evening, setting up a vote on the measure for Thursday.

Luna has for weeks threatened to force a vote on holding Garland in "inherent contempt" and appealed to both Republicans and Democrats to support the effort, citing concerns about Biden's mental acuity spurred by his disastrous performance in the CNN Presidential Debate.

Her initial bill would have directed the House sergeant-at-arms to arrest Garland in order for the chamber to hold its own trial. It is a little-known procedure, not invoked since the 1930s, that has never been used on a Cabinet official.

DOJ WON'T PROSECUTE AG GARLAND FOR CONTEMPT FOR REFUSAL TO TURN OVER AUDIO FROM BIDEN, HUR INTERVIEW

Luna agreed to delay forcing the vote until this week after discussing the matter with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. 

She also modified her bill to fine Garland instead of arresting him.

A Department of Justice (DOJ) spokesperson said in response to the GOP effort, "This is unconstitutional. We are confident our arguments would prevail in court." 

Republicans have been seeking the audio tapes of Biden's interview in Hur's classified documents probe for months as part of their impeachment inquiry into the president. 

ANNA PAULINA LUNA CALLS FOR $10,000 PER DAY FINE ON GARLAND FOR BIDEN-HUR AUDIO TAPE

House GOP lawmakers, some of whom long held that Biden is not mentally fit for office, voted to hold Garland in contempt of Congress last month for his refusal to turn over audio tapes of Hur’s interview with Biden on his handling of classified documents. The DOJ has refused to prosecute, citing Biden’s decision to call for executive privilege over the tapes.

Democrats have also pointed out that the full transcript is already available and have bashed the effort as nakedly partisan.

However, Republicans argue that the tapes would provide necessary context about Biden’s mental acuity that could not be gleaned from the transcript.

EX-REP. CHARLIE RANGEL, 94, QUESTIONS WHETHER BIDEN BELONGS IN NURSING HOME, NOT WHITE HOUSE

Some GOP lawmakers reignited those calls in the wake of Biden's debate performance late last month. 

The 81-year-old president spoke with a hoarse voice, reportedly due to a cold, and stumbled over his own answers several times during the primetime event. Viewers also observed him appearing tired and noticeably less sharp than he looked the last time he faced former President Trump in 2020.

The House GOP also sued Garland last week in order to obtain the tapes, with the lawsuit being led by House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.

House Judiciary sues Garland for Biden audio that Hur says shows him as ‘elderly man with a poor memory’

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The House Judiciary Committee is suing Attorney General Merrick Garland to obtain recordings of President Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

The committee, as part of the lawsuit filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, stressed the importance of the "verbal and nonverbal context" of Biden's answers that could be provided by the audio recordings – especially considering that Hur opted against charging Biden after the interview, in part, because he was viewed as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory." 

DOJ WON'T PROSECUTE AG GARLAND FOR CONTEMPT FOR REFUSAL TO TURN OVER AUDIO FROM BIDEN, HUR INTERVIEW

The lawsuit comes amid chaos in the Democratic Party as leaders consider whether Biden should continue with his re-election campaign after the president’s widely panned debate performance last week.

The committee, in its lawsuit, says the president’s invocation of executive privilege over the materials "lacks any merit," and it asks the court to overrule that assertion of privilege. 

"This dispute is about a frivolous assertion of executive privilege," the lawsuit states. 

As part of the House impeachment inquiry against the president, the committee issued a subpoena to Garland to obtain records related to Hur’s investigation of Biden’s alleged mishandling of classified records. The committee sought materials related to Hur’s interviews with Biden and Mark Zwonitzer, the ghostwriter of Biden’s 2017 memoir. 

The Justice Department has provided the committee with transcripts of those interviews, but Garland "has refused to produce the audio recordings of the Special Counsel’s interviews with President Biden and Mr. Zwonitzer." 

"Instead, Attorney General Garland asked that President Biden assert executive privilege over those recordings, and President Biden complied with that request," the lawsuit states. 

The committee argues that audio recordings "are better evidence than transcripts of what happened during the Special Counsel’s interviews with President Biden and Mr. Zwonitzer." 

"For example, they contain verbal and nonverbal context that is missing from a cold transcript," the committee states. "That verbal and nonverbal context is quite important here because the Special Counsel relied on the way that President Biden presented himself during their interview – ‘as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory’ – when ultimately recommending that President Biden should not be prosecuted for unlawfully retaining and disclosing classified information."

The committee argued that the audio recordings – not merely the transcripts of them – are "the best available evidence of how President Biden presented himself during the interview." 

SPECIAL COUNSEL CALLS BIDEN 'SYMPATHETIC, WELL-MEANING, ELDERLY MAN WITH A POOR MEMORY,' BRINGS NO CHARGES

"The Committee thus needs those recordings to assess the Special Counsel’s characterization of the President, which he and White House lawyers have forcefully disputed, and ultimate recommendation that President Biden should not be prosecuted," the suit states. 

The committee said Biden’s "self-serving attempt to shield the audio recording" of his interview from the public "represents an astonishing effort to expand the scope of executive privilege from a constitutional privilege safeguarding certain substantive communications to an amorphous privilege that can be molded to protect things like voice, inflection, tone and pace of speech." 

The committee also noted that the transcript of the interview was made public, which essentially "waived" executive privilege." 

"Additionally, the heart of the privilege claim – that Executive Branch employees will be less likely to cooperate with DOJ investigations if they know that audio recordings of their interviews may be released to Congress after DOJ has made transcripts of those same interviews publicly available – is at odds with common sense," the lawsuit states. 

"If the potential for disclosure would chill cooperation, it would be the disclosure of a transcript, which DOJ voluntarily disclosed here, not the disclosure of audio recordings after the transcripts are widely available," the lawsuit states. 

The committee argued that because of this, Biden’s invocation of executive privilege "lacks any merit." 

"The Committee therefore asks this court to overrule the assertion of executive privilege and order that Attorney General Garland produce the audio recordings of the Special Counsel’s interviews with President Biden and Mr. Zwonitzer to the committee," the lawsuit states. 

The lawsuit comes just weeks after the House of Representatives voted to hold Garland in contempt of Congress, referring him for criminal charges over defying the congressional subpoenas for the audio recordings.

The Justice Department, though, said it would not prosecute Garland. 

"Consistent with this longstanding position and uniform practice, the Department has determined that the responses by Attorney General Garland to the subpoenas issued by the committees did not constitute a crime, and accordingly the Department will not bring the congressional contempt citation before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute the Attorney General," Assistant Attorney General Carlos Felipe Uriarte told House Speaker Mike Johnson in a letter last month. 

Hur, who released his report to the public in February after months of investigation, did not recommend criminal charges against Biden for mishandling and retaining classified documents, and he stated that he would not bring charges against Biden even if he were not in the Oval Office. 

Those records included classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan and other countries, among other records related to national security and foreign policy, which Hur said implicated "sensitive intelligence sources and methods."

House votes to hold Garland in contempt, refer him for criminal charges at own DOJ

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The House voted to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress on Wednesday, referring the top Department of Justice (DOJ) official for criminal charges.

The measure passed nearly along party lines in a 216 to 207 vote, with just one Republican – Rep. David Joyce, R-Ohio, voting against it.

Joyce said in a statement after the vote, "As a former prosecutor, I cannot in good conscience support a resolution that would further politicize our judicial system to score political points. The American people expect Congress to work for them, solve policy problems, and prioritize good governance. Enough is enough."

GOP lawmakers aimed to hold Garland in contempt over his refusal to turn over audio recordings of Special Counsel Robert Hur's interview with President Biden.

Hur’s findings cleared Biden of wrongdoing in his handling of classified documents, but also said the 81-year-old president presented himself "as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory," and that "it would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

JOHNSON FLOATS DEFUNDING SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE AMID JACK SMITH’S TRUMP PROBE

Biden and his allies aggressively pushed back on concerns about his mental fitness in the report’s wake.

The Justice Department released a statement from Attorney General Garland after the vote.

"It is deeply disappointing that this House of Representatives has turned a serious congressional authority into a partisan weapon. Today’s vote disregards the constitutional separation of powers, the Justice Department’s need to protect its investigations, and the substantial amount of information we have provided to the Committees.

"I will always stand up for this Department, its employees, and its vital mission to defend our democracy."

Republicans seeking the audio recording argued it would provide critical context about Biden’s state of mind. Democrats, meanwhile, have dismissed the request as a partisan attempt to politicize the Department of Justice (DOJ).

"It's a huge disappointment. I think it's an abuse of the congressional contempt power," Rep. Glenn Ivey, D-Md., told Fox News Digital of the GOP effort.

HILL AID INTERFERES WITH FOX NEWS CAMERA CREW DURING TLAIB INTERVIEW

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, however, argued that the DOJ's refusal meant Garland simply wanted it hidden.

"There's only one reason why the attorney general would do that. He doesn't want us to hear it. That's why," Roy said on the House floor Wednesday. "And there's really only two reasons why that would be the case – either the transcript doesn't match the audio, or the audio is so bad that he doesn't want us to hear it."

The pursuit of Hur’s audio tapes is part of the House GOP’s wider impeachment inquiry into Biden, investigating allegations he used his political position to enrich himself and his family. Biden has denied accusations of wrongdoing.

House Republicans halted advancement of a contempt resolution against Hunter Biden, the president's son, earlier this year after GOP investigators reached an agreement with his attorneys.

Meanwhile, two ex-Trump administration aides – former Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro and former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon – were convicted on contempt of Congress charges for dodging subpoenas by the House select committee on Jan. 6.

TRUMP GUILTY VERDICT REVEALS SPLIT AMONG FORMER GOP PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY OPPONENTS

Both were referred for criminal charges by the previous Democrat-controlled House of Representatives. The DOJ did not act on a third referral by Democrats for former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.

It's highly unlikely the DOJ will act on House Republicans' Garland referral, something that frustrated House Republicans who spoke with Fox News Digital on Wednesday.

"I'm not optimistic, because I think the DOJ has proven themselves very partisan and not honest brokers of how they apply the law," said Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga.

When asked if he thought the DOJ might act, Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., quipped, "Not likely."

Garland took an indirect shot at Republicans’ pushback on the DOJ in a Washington Post op-ed on Tuesday morning.

"In recent weeks, we have seen an escalation of attacks that go far beyond public scrutiny, criticism, and legitimate and necessary oversight of our work. They are baseless, personal and dangerous," he wrote. "These attacks come in the form of threats to defund particular department investigations, most recently the special counsel’s prosecution of the former president."

Merrick Garland’s fate hangs in balance as House readies contempt vote

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The House of Representatives is expected to vote on holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress on Wednesday over his failure to produce audio recordings of Special Counsel Robert Hur’s interview with President Biden.

Hur’s findings cleared Biden of wrongdoing in his handling of classified documents but also said the 81-year-old president presented himself "as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory" and "it would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

Biden and his allies aggressively pushed back on concerns about his mental fitness in the report’s wake.

Republicans seeking the audio recording argue it would provide critical context about Biden’s state of mind. Democrats, meanwhile, have dismissed the request as a partisan attempt to politicize the Department of Justice (DOJ).

JOHNSON FLOATS DEFUNDING SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE AMID JACK SMITH’S TRUMP PROBE

The pursuit of Hur’s audio tapes is part of the House GOP’s wider impeachment inquiry into Biden, investigating allegations he used his political position to enrich himself and his family. Biden has denied accusations of wrongdoing.

And while the majority of Republicans have indicated they support the measure, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has little wiggle room: He can only lose two votes on any party-line measure.

Two Republicans – Reps. Juan Ciscomani, R-Ariz., and Dan Newhouse, R-Wash., told Fox News Digital they are still unsure about how they'll vote.

"I still have to go through the final decision process. But if they've already released the transcripts, it doesn't seem to me like there's any legal leg to stand on to not release the actual videos. To me, that seems like something they should do," Newhouse said.

Ciscomani said, "I want to understand exactly the purpose behind that before I comment on it."

HILL AID INTERFERES WITH FOX NEWS CAMERA CREW DURING TLAIB INTERVIEW

House Freedom Caucus member Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., criticized the moderates' indecision.

"If moderates don't agree that Merrick Garland needs to be censured by not turning over audio which solidifies whatever the testimony is, that would shock me," Norman said.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., said she would aim to force a vote on her own inherent contempt resolution against Garland if the DOJ fails to go after him if the Wednesday resolution passes. An inherent contempt resolution would direct the House's sergeant at arms to arrest its target rather than passing it to the DOJ.

"As of right now, we fully intend to bring it," Luna said. "I don't really have much faith in the Department of Justice. And I don't think the American people do either. But we are trying to bring back a level playing field and show that, you know, there should be accountability all the way up to the top."

Democrats, meanwhile, blasted the GOP effort. Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., said, "This is what they want to do because they don't have the votes to impeach Joe Biden, right? That's why they did Merrick Garland. That's why they went after [Hunter Biden]. It's all trying to please their base because Congress doesn't want to do what Donald Trump wants, which is to impeach Joe Biden so they can have even scores."

Their targeting of Garland is part of a wider GOP effort to crack down on alleged weaponization of the DOJ by Biden’s officials. That also includes various pieces of legislation and public threats to defund various aspects of the department, including the special counsel currently investigating former President Trump.

Fox News Digital reached out to the DOJ for comment on the contempt resolution against Garland.

TRUMP GUILTY VERDICT REVEALS SPLIT AMONG FORMER GOP PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY OPPONENTS

Garland took an indirect shot at Republicans’ pushback on the DOJ in a Washington Post op-ed on Tuesday morning.

"In recent weeks, we have seen an escalation of attacks that go far beyond public scrutiny, criticism, and legitimate and necessary oversight of our work. They are baseless, personal and dangerous," he wrote. "These attacks come in the form of threats to defund particular department investigations, most recently the special counsel’s prosecution of the former president."

Garland contempt resolution survives key hurdle, setting up House-wide vote

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

House Republicans' contempt resolution against Attorney General Merrick Garland passed a key procedural hurdle Tuesday evening, setting up a chamber-wide vote.

GOP lawmakers are looking to hold Garland in contempt over his refusal to turn over audio recordings of Special Counsel Robert Hur's interview with President Biden.

The resolution passed the House Rules Committee in a party-line vote after a contentious hearing where Republicans and Democrats clashed over Hur's assertions about Biden, though the debate quickly devolved into back-and-forth comparing Biden and his son, Hunter, to the probes and prosecutions of former President Trump.

That opens it up to a House-wide "rule" vote to allow for debate and then a vote on final passage of the resolution.

The 388-page special counsel report cleared Biden of wrongdoing despite him having "willfully retained and disclosed classified materials" from before he was president.

STATUESQUE REV. GRAHAM TRIBUTE COMES TO THE CAPITOL, BUT SHIES AWAY FROM THE LIMELIGHT

Hur said Biden came off "as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory," and that "it would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him – by then a former president well into his eighties – of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

Republicans seized on the report, arguing it's proof Biden is not mentally fit to be president and accusing the Department of Justice (DOJ) of selective prosecution.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, called Hur's description of Biden's mental state "gratuitous," which was challenged by House Rules Committee Chairman Michael Burgess, R-Texas.

PUPPIES AND RAINBOWS: HOW THE BIPARTISAN INVITATION TO THE LEADER OF ISRAEL THREATENS TO DIVIDE THE DEMOCRATS

"Why not then clear the air and make the actual audio of the interview available? Let the American people be the deciders here. Why hide that from them?" Burgess emphatically said.

Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo., argued, "The reason that he recommended against prosecuting President Biden was not a gratuitous statement. It was the reason as to why he refused to recommend prosecution, and it was because Joe Biden is a quote, sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Mr. Hur was concerned that a jury would not be willing to convict."

At one point, that committee's top Democrat, Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said of the proceeding, "This is a distraction from the fact that the Republican nominee for president is a convicted felon. That's what this is all about."

He invoked the recent guilty verdict of Hunter Biden, the president's son, on federal gun-related charges to refute Republican accusations of DOJ weaponization.

JOHNSON FLOATS DEFUNDING SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE AMID JACK SMITH’S TRUMP PROBE.

"The divide here is stunning. And it's a great reminder that one political party remains committed to the rule of law and the other doesn't. It's that simple. Did Hunter Biden walk out of the courthouse this morning and slam the judge or the prosecutors? Did he claim some vast conspiracy to weaponize a legal system against him? No, he did not," McGovern said. "How can any Republican in their right mind argue that the Biden administration is weaponizing the DOJ to hurt Republicans and to help Democrats? They just convicted the president's own son."

While the resolution is likely to pass along party lines, House GOP leaders have precious little room for error with their two-seat majority. The House-wide vote is expected on Wednesday.

Republicans' pursuit of the Hur-Biden tapes is part of their wider impeachment inquiry into Biden over accusations he and his family profited off of his political status.