General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSelect Committee Will Not Turn Over Documents To DOJ
Wow, this is interesting, a lot of thoughts are going through my head. I will defer from commenting what I am thinking.
https://federalnewsnetwork.com/government-news/2022/05/house-1-6-panel-rejects-justice-dept-s-transcript-request/
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)JohnSJ
(92,190 posts)to confirm what they already have.
If that is not the case, then the DOJ has really dropped the ball
OAITW r.2.0
(24,485 posts)What is the Panel's thinking here?
MontanaMama
(23,314 posts)Does the J6 committee want to keep the transcripts private so that they can release them to the public during the hearings in bombshell fashion? Or does the G6 committee not trust the DOJ? I have no evidence to support either of these theories Its just whats coming to my mind in this moment.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)ostensibly. I fear a backlash if its seen as a political hit.
And, I trust Biden and DOJ to finesse this thing.
MontanaMama
(23,314 posts)having public hers where they release information that they believe will be shocking to the public. Whether thats true or not, I think their hope is to sway the citizenry with intel that most folks havent heard before. Its just a theory.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)who will determine the next election will not be swayed by more evidence trump and associates are unfit for office.
If they dont have hard evidence of criminal wrongdoing, that 5% who dont read DU, read a newspaper, or even watch CNN or MSNBC are going to chalk it up as a political hit that wasted Congressional energy. I think most people want to move on, even if its just 55%.
agingdem
(7,849 posts)and they don't want the DOJ overshadowing their hearings..and I think they want to poke the DOJ for not acting on the Navarro, Scavino, Meadows contempt of Congress referrals... just saying..also, Thompson said not yet..this will get resolved...
gab13by13
(21,337 posts)elleng
(130,905 posts)probe is ongoing.'
In an interview, Committee Chair Thomspon said they can discuss DOJ's needs. There are LOTS of transcripts.
gab13by13
(21,337 posts)no use of me speculating, I get in trouble criticizing DOJ.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)gab13by13
(21,337 posts)where would we be without them? They have a good reason I am sure.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)in trouble too.
kentuck
(111,094 posts)Why would that concern the DOJ?
Are they fearful that the Committee will expose information that they will need in their investigation?
Or are they afraid the Committee will expose information that will make it impossible not to investigate further?
The Committee has done a lot of work and they want the people to know what happened.
Perhaps they are concerned that if the DOJ gets control of the documents, they will not make it public?
Who knows? It is a puzzle to me.
We will likely know more in the next few days.
gab13by13
(21,337 posts)I'm sorry to say that I trust the select committee over the DOJ.
kentuck
(111,094 posts)I want the Committee to finish their work. We know the DOJ and FBI have been protective of Republicans for decades. I am not certain this is a decision of Merrick Garland's. It sure has fueled speculation though.
It is interesting.
dem4decades
(11,292 posts)DOJ? Nope, there's still those who worked with Clarke and would undermine everything.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Ill trust Biden on this.
I think the J6 committee is being territorial...they don't want to share..the committee and the DOJ will work this out..I am, however, getting tired of the "OMG!!" teasers coming out of the committee..23 more days...can't wait
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)agingdem
(7,849 posts)"just wait, there's more" snippets are intended to scare the crap out of anyone holding back info..right now it's the five House creeps as well as Meadows, Navarro, Clark, Scavino, Eastman..
Fiendish Thingy
(15,611 posts)DOJ can have access to documents for in camera review (can look at in house chambers, cant take copy with them).
Thompson said it was a premature request since the committees work is ongoing.
So, not as dismal as the headline makes it seem
agingdem
(7,849 posts)Bennie Thomason isn't saying you can't have the documents..he's saying please wait, we're not through..I also get the distinct feeling Thomason is hesitant to give up the documents for fear of a leak and there's has been such incredible built up, committee members annoying us with "OMG it's bad, worse than you can imagine!..stay tuned"..arrrrgh...
Bev54
(10,052 posts)it is anybody involve on either side.
Bev54
(10,052 posts)but right now they are still organizing and vetting as well as getting transcripts and documents ready for public hearings. There is no turf war, there is no bad blood, it will be done. There is just so much, it is more a matter of tell us what you need or want and we will get it for you. They are busy getting ready for hearings and need the transcripts and documents for now. They will not get in the way of any prosecutions that DOJ are intending so there needs to be communications between them and I have no doubt that is happening.
agingdem
(7,849 posts)the headline read "House 1/6 panel rejects Justice Dept.'s transcript request"...a finite headline if ever there was one..and yes, I know Garland's DOJ doesn't leak..I had a feeling Garland was going to wait until the J6 committee gave us a non-fiction anthology so as not to diminish the committee's telling of the tale...