Former FBI Director James Comey just got a shred torn off him by Republican attorneys who have had it with his antics.
Lawyers for the Republican-run House Judiciary Committee are ridiculing former FBI Director James Comey for a ‘grandiose’ demand to ‘dictate’ the terms of his testimony after getting a subpoena.
The lawyers responded Friday to a motion filed by Comey’s lawyers seeking to resist a subpoena to appear behind closed doors in Congress by claiming lawmakers were likely to leak the contents to his own disadvantage.
‘Putting aside the procedural and constitutional infirmities of Mr. Comey’s ill-conceived litigation, Mr. Comey has identified no colorable basis to object to his deposition,’ write three lawyers for the House General Counsel in response to Comey’s suit.
‘Instead, he wishes to dictate the terms of his appearance by demanding a public hearing,’ the House lawyers add in one of many passages seeking to torch his claims in highly personalized terms.
‘No other witness involved in this investigation has made such a grandiose demand, and this Court should not countenance Mr. Comey’s temerity in attempting to dictate the terms on which he will deign to comply with his constitutional obligations,’ argue the attorneys, Thomas Hungar, Todd Tatelman, and Kimberly Hamm.
The filing is laced with terms that disparage Comey’s position, saying he ‘brazenly demands’ the court grant his request, and terms his effort ‘extraordinary and frivolous.’
‘As far as undersigned counsel is aware, no district court in the history of the Republic has ever granted such a request,’ the lawyers write.
Judge Trevor McFadden postponed a ruling until Monday, giving both sides the weekend to bolster their arguments, The Hill reported.
The lawyers site the authority and jurisdiction of the House Judiciary Committee, and say the federal court lacks jurisdiction to rule on a ‘legislative act’ protected by the Constitution’s ‘Speech or Debate Clause,’ which provides for Congress to exercise its power outside of interference from other branches.
The lawyers claim Comey made ‘fatal concessions’ in his own filing when he said the FBI, which he used to head, and the Justice Department are ‘appropriately subject to congressional oversight.’
They also cite the Constitution’s stipulation that each House of Congress ‘may determine the Rules of its Proceedings’ – something properly delegated to committees.
A declaration by the general counsel and parliamentarian for the House Judiciary makes the case for why Comey’s testimony is in bounds – while also spelling out how Republicans plan to use it to try to go after the origins of the Russia probe as well as his handling of the Clinton email scandal.
The statement notes that Comey ‘ultimately made the decision’ and was the ‘primary author of the press statement’ announcing the decision not to prosecute Clinton. And it says he was ‘personally involved’ with the Russia probe and ‘signed off’ on the surveillance warrant for Trump advisor Carter Page, who came under scrutiny for his Russia ties during the campaign.
The furious response came after Comey filed a motion to quash a House subpoena ordering him to testify in private – arguing the conditions would lead to ‘selective leaks’ and is ‘abusive to witnesses.’
Comey, who has previously gotten grilled by both the House and Senate in public over his handling of the Clinton email scandal and his firing by President Donald Trump, has been ordered to appear December 3.
The GOP-run House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committees are demanding he appear as part of their probe into decisions not to prosecute Clinton, as well as FBI conduct during the Russia investigation.
But Comey argues that a closed hearing would allow for ‘selective leaks, is abusive to witnesses, and furthers no legitimate congressional purpose,’ according to a court filing by his lawyers.
