Attorney General Merrick Garland wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post a few weeks ago, calling on Republicans in Congress to show some partisan restraint.
“People’s differences about politics are good for our democracy. They are normal,” the country’s top law enforcement official wrote. “But using conspiracy theories, untruths, violence and threats of violence to influence political outcomes is not normal. The short-term political benefits of these tactics will never offset the long-term costs to our country.”
Literally the next day, members of the Republican Party voted to hold Garland in contempt.
The stunt didn’t accomplish much — Justice Department officials quickly made it clear they see no reason to prosecute their boss — though some Republican lawmakers are apparently eager to take additional action. Axios reported this morning:
At issue is a letter that Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida sent to her Republican Party colleagues in the House of Representatives on Monday, announcing her intention to force a vote this week — whether party leaders will like it or not – about a measure of “inherent contempt” directed against Garland. .
And what is, say, a measure of “inherent contempt”? In practical terms, Luna wants lawmakers to order the House sergeant-at-arms to take Garland into custody — essentially: arrest of the attorney general.
Such efforts are almost never considered — Politico spoke to several members this week who didn’t even know what the tactic was — but the far-right Floridian apparently plans to try anyway.
All of this stems from an unexpected GOP priority. Former special counsel Robert Hur investigated the president Joe Biden for accidentally taking some classified documents after his vice presidential term ended. Not surprisingly, prosecutors decided not to indict the sitting Democratic president.
Shortly thereafter, Hur completed his work and released a report, including a transcript of an interview in which Biden volunteered to participate. (Donald Trump, on the other hand, declined to be interviewed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller or Special Counsel Jack Smith.)
In theory, that was the end of the story. In practice, however, there was one additional element that Republicans decided to pursue: the sound recording of the incumbent president’s Q&A with researchers.
The Biden administration has rejected Republican lawmakers’ requests for the tape, and there’s no great mystery why: Officials realize Republicans are simply looking for a political toy to play with ahead of Election Day 2024. Former Republican Ken Buck recently admittedly so muchand explained that Congress already has the transcript and relevant information, adding that his former GOP colleagues are “just looking for something for political purposes.”
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer went even further to prove Democrats right, stating in a recent fundraising appeal that he wanted the recordings as part of an effort to target “swinging voters across the country’.
With that in mind, and given that there is no legitimate or legislative reason to release the audio, Team Biden has asserted executive privilege. White House lawyer Ed Siskel said in a letter to congressional Republicans last month, “The absence of a legitimate need for the audio recordings exposes your likely goal: to dismember, distort, and use it for partisan political purposes.” (NBC News and other media organizations are suing to compel the release of the audio on the grounds that it is part of the public record.)
Nevertheless, some GOP members are so desperate to exploit the audio recording that they are getting creative, as evidenced by the inherent contempt.
Given the margins in the House of Representatives, Luna’s effort would require the support of virtually every member of the House Republican Conference, and the latest reporting suggests that is unlikely.
As for what would happen if the effort succeeds, Politico reported that the inherent contempt process “could take months.”
Watch this space.
This message updates our related previous reporting.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
