Where Is The J6 Committee Beef?

From the Washington Post up all night desk:

Many close observers of the Jan. 6 committee are still looking for testimony transcripts, particularly with key White House advisers and campaign aides. Transcripts involving most of those names are still unreleased — and have been promised in the coming days. Many days of testimony by Trump aide Cassidy Hutchinson are not yet out, nor are transcripts for Trump’s family, lawyers and top campaign advisers. The committee talked to a remarkable number of people, and their exact words will be closely examined when the transcripts are released — including by Republicans looking for ammunition against the report.

Yeah, where are those?? It is Christmas weekend and they have released a whopping 34 of their supposed 1,000 or so transcripts. Why are they dribbling them out when their work is done? Have they given it all to the DOJ yet? My understanding is no, but cannot confirm that. DC, including DOJ, are going into holiday mode and this goofy Committee is still playing keep away. Why? What the hell are they doing? This is just ridiculous.

88 replies
  1. pcpablo321 says:

    They better release it all ASAP because come January 3 ain’t nothing coming out of the House. Every thing will be encased in carbonite.

  2. dimmsdale says:

    bmaz, I want to thank you for your continual commentary here. Your respect for the rule and practice of law and DISrespect for what I’d call ‘show-pony-ism’) has been illuminating and a useful guide to temper my expectations (IA decidedly NOT AL).

    In fact, let me extend my thanks to the whole community here–the gatekeepers and the regular commenters–for the immense amount of care, heart, and intelligence you put into the blog. I’m very grateful.

  3. Bay State Librul says:

    Hey, what’s taking so long?

    Probable cause: delays in reviewing the material, production snafus, such as editing, design changes, typos, time pressures due to Republican takeover of the House.
    Many pieces to this outrageous puzzle must come together, from start to finish, especially after 17 months, to produce the 800+-page report.
    In my opinion, delays aren’t necessarily a bad thing. We’d much rather delay any phase of the process in order to get it right.
    Patience is a virtue?

  4. GeeSizzle says:

    And now all this preening and infighting to produce a report has taken up far too much time. They knew long ago they’d likely lose the house, and made no accommodation for getting this done in time to be able to enact any legislation during the remainder of the lame duck session. Gawd, they really are so bad at this it’s painful to watch.

  5. Peterr says:

    It seems to me that the process of redacting documents (what gets redacted, and who decides?) and then uploading them individually is something that takes a bit of time, especially if you are talking about 1000 documents.

    • Rayne says:

      After interviewing hundreds if not a thousand witnesses, too. Oh, and the committee members both had a full time job along with running for re-election and making the occasional visit home.

      We’re asking a lot of terror victims.

      • bmaz says:

        No, we are not. And this is party of their full time job. Not to mention they have tons of staff. What is being asked is that they do what they promised, and they have not. And still are not.

        • Rayne says:

          And none of their staff are terror victims, either.

          Can you point to the specific portions of the House J6 Committee’s mission which they’ve failed, keeping in mind they have 30 days from the final report’s release to disband?

          And can you say with absolute certainty that no classified annex or law enforcement-sensitive annex was released at any time to DOJ?

          • bmaz says:

            I don’t give a flying fuck about them being terrorized or victimized, if they were too traumatized, they should not have taken on the job. They certainly were not so afflicted that every damn one off them could not sprint to any camera they could find. The rest is irrelevant. The Committee is a joke, and long has been.

          • P J Evans says:

            That might require admitting that the committee’s work is a political investigation, not a legal investigation with perps and victims and all that.

            • Dave_MB says:

              Of course it is. That was clear from the beginning. They shined a light on what happened and brought a lot of information to the forefront of just how detailed and organized it was.

              Congress is not a law enforcement agency.

              • bmaz says:

                Nobody said they were a “law enforcement agency”. But they sure as hell should not be inhibiting the actual law enforcement agency that could do something toward accountability.

      • Lemoco says:

        It’s a Congressional investigation with recommendations, not a legal case that is shovel ready for prosecution. Hopefully it will provide Jack Smith with a roadmap to the puzzle pieces not yet fleshed out. I think a constant drip, drip, drip of revelations is more powerful politically than a single comprehensive dump.

        • bmaz says:

          Yeah, shit, you would not want them to actually do what they said and cooperate with the DOJ and actually turn over materials when appropriate. Can’t have that. Please identify who here, anybody, who said they need turn over a “case that is shovel ready for prosecution”. You can’t do it, and that is an absurd statement. “Provide a roadmap for Jack Smith’? That is patently laughable. Neither Smith nor DOJ needs their fucking “roadmap”.

          “I think a constant drip, drip, drip of revelations is more powerful politically than a single comprehensive dump.”

          So that type of showboat hype is more important to you, for political reasons, than actual criminal accountability? Because that is exactly what you are arguing.

          • CAzen says:

            bmaz – two separate efforts with two independent objectives – niether designed to suport the other – but if it does – just a bonus.
            I do not undnderstand why there is any rush to get this to the DOJ – J6C’s audiance was the political arena. Job done.

  6. wetzel says:

    Yes. Especially now that they have made criminal referrals. Legislative fact-finding is done. A possible explanation is that they are sharing first with DOJ and may want DOJ feedback on public releases of transcripts which may or may not impede the DOJ investigation because the people who talked to the committee still aren’t exactly sure what each other may have said, so the committee may be giving DOJ a short window of information asymmetry advantage to have the committee information and conduct their own interviews before full public release. That does not seem improper or kangaroo-court like. It’s an impossible communications problem for a fact-finding committee, though, because it just looks like they are preening and manipulating, which does seem kangaroo-court like after making referrals. I dunno.

      • Peterr says:

        I suspect — without any direct knowledge — that some of the delay is the negotiating with DOJ about what is released directly, what is redacted and released, and what is not released at all.

    • Rayne says:

      “preening and manipulating” is opinion.

      Shall we once again compare the House J6 Committee’s performance to that of the Benghazi committee, which produced zero legislation and no criminal referrals?

  7. Vinnie Gambone says:

    Bmaz reminds me of a nun we had in school nicknamed Sister Mary Crack-yer-knuckles. She was never loved because she was always right that you were wrong.
    It does seem the committee is dawdling.
    I am relieved DOJ has no game clock

  8. joel fisher says:

    “Why? What the hell are they doing? This is just ridiculous.”
    Good question. Good question. Accurate statement, although in the “ridiculous” weird vein and not the laugh producing vein. Ripe for speculation? Or an excellent opportunity to STFU?

          • Dave_MB says:

            No. The Committee has not been saying this for months. There was issues because the J6 Committee was was refusing to turn over their witness interviews while they were still conducting their investigation. DOJ has charged more than 800 people and it’s very possible Committee transcripts would have to be turned over to defendants in their criminal cases and despite protective orders could fall into the wrong hands and harm the Committee’s investigation.

            Now that they’ve finished their investigation, they’re turning over everything to DOJ.

            You’re being way too harsh on the J6 Committee, they went wide and uncovered and published a lot of dirt on Trump, the fake electors, the lawyers and a lot of stuff.

            Their investigation helped push DOJ.

            Now that the Committee’s work is done, they’re turning everything over to DOJ. By the way, DOJ shouldn’t need info from a Congressional committee. they have far more reaching subpoena power and ability to compel witnesses to testify.

            The very fact, that you’re upset that the Committee hasn’t given all their evidence to DOJ shows that they did a good job. Of course, nothing is perfect and there’s lots of legitimate criticism, but saying the Committee was a publicity seeking shit show that didn’t do anything is plain wrong.

            • bmaz says:

              You are full of it. And, no, the vaunted “Committee” did not “push DOJ”, they inhibited it. And, again, back to your comment being full of it, do you have any idea how DOJ preps witnesses for grand juries? Do you know what Brady material is? Do you understand anything about the real criminal justice system as opposed to the little stupid TV informercials the Committee slickly produced and relentless practiced their staging on? Clearly you do not. Don’t try to splain me, I am pretty up to date.

  9. bmaz says:

    By the way, this morning I have confirmed that DOJ has NOT received all the material they are due and they are not happy about it. One comment was “the Committee is a mess”.

      • bmaz says:

        I know you are intent on doing everything possible to buck up these charlatans, but that is pitifully thin argument. And, no, that was certainly not a “leak”.

        • Rayne says:

          LOL Just as you are intent on undermining anything the committee has done because “preening and manipulation”?

          • bmaz says:

            Yes because they are self serving assholes that have not just inhibited DOJ but arguably obstructed them. And I believe a great deal of my concerns have been borne out.

            • Rayne says:

              Commenter Curious George has a point in his last sentence wrt sharing information, but I’ll let that go and ask instead where’s your proof the committee obstructed the DOJ? Not mere “not cooperated fully” but obstructed.

              You expect evidence from community members. Let’s go with this evidence production about obstruction.

              • bmaz says:

                I think I have demonstrated that consistently. They need the transcripts to evaluate witnesses for grand jury presentation. Could use the documentary evidence to compare to what has been produced to DOJ as well. At this point, inhibiting DOJ is rising to the status of obstruction. The Committee is lame and obstreperous. They are a day late, several dollars short and feckless. If you want to float that boat of bullshit have at it. I am not going to engage in a semantical discussion over these jackholes.

  10. Curious George says:

    When I don’t know who did what, as is the case here with what if anything the J6 Committee has passed on to DOJ, I look to motives, incentives, and disincentives to form an educated guess. In this case, it seems obvious to me that the Dem leadership in the House have been highly motivated from the outset to see successful criminal prosecution of the (failed) coup leaders. Without criminal prosecutions, they must surely know that their 800 page report and 1,000 transcripts will very quickly turn into yesterday’s stale news. Based on this assumption, I would expect that the Committee has been in some kind of meaningful communication and cooperation with DOJ leadership. If they have not, then I would share BMAZ’s lacerating frustration.
    My question is this: Is there evidence that the J6 committee has NOT been sharing information with DOJ, or is there just an absence of evidence that they have?

    • bmaz says:

      Yes, abundant evidence including letters from DAG Lisa Monaco to the Committee. Heck, the Committee itself has stated they have not cooperated fully.

    • Rayne says:

      The House J6 Committee’s purview is not and never has been criminal prosecution. That’s not the function of Congress. Criminal prosecution is an executive branch function.

      • bmaz says:

        Well, their “purview” sure as hell is not to obstruct criminal investigation and prosecution, yet that is exactly what they have relentlessly done.

        • timbozone says:

          “Relentlessly” seems a bit hyperbolic term to us. I think we might all agree that both the DOJ and Congress could have done a better job here when it comes to timely accountability on the part of the seditionist conspiracy that seems to have been afoot. But I ask if having no J6 Committee would have been the better option… since there appears to be some ongoing concern about preening, etc?

          • bmaz says:

            I seriously do not care how it “seems” to you. I’ll stick with what I have said, and think I have been borne out pretty well. And, no, I think it is absurd to equate DOJ with this pisant Committee that has been inhibiting DOJ.

  11. rattlemullet says:

    If the J6 is and has been as inept as you characterize why should the DoJ have expected any material from them let alone communicate they are not be “happy about it”. As I’m sure you would expect the DoJ should stand on their own two feet so to speak and continue as they will their investigations, be damn the J6. The DoJ has a responsibility to receive the referral, that is my assumption, then just make a decision to act upon or not, certainly not complain. Who among us thinks the J6 is not political, as all congressional committees are and have been, and they all suffer the slings and arrows of outrage from disgruntled outside observers. The committee got their 5 minutes of airtime, basically that all politics is these days, airtime and ratings. I think any chance to state trump is a criminal POS then it’s a good thing and the J6 did that at least. It has always been the DoJ’s responsibly to convict people who commit crimes against the United States and not just the low hanging fruit.

    • bmaz says:

      For starters, the Committee, despite their self serving showboating and preening did, mostly through staff, collect an immense amount off information. They had previously avowed they wanted real accountability and would work with DOJ. As to “standing on their own legs”, what a crock. Prose tutors seek pertinent information from any source they can find, and J6 has a lot of it. To act like DOJ is not beyond desirous of getting it is putting your head in the sand. Your entire comment is gaslighting apologia for a lame Committee.

      • rattlemullet says:

        Trust me I am not “gaslighting apologia for a lame Committee” that who “through staff, collect an immense amount of information”. I am desirous of both J6 and DoJ to get their shit together and do their fucking best at sharing evidence and communication to bring the likes of trump, bannon, stone, jones, jordan, and every other coconspirator convicted in a court law for Seditious Conspiracy. That was basically broadcast on live TV.

  12. earlofhuntingdon says:

    The Committee either always expected to cooperate fully with DoJ or it didn’t. If it didn’t, why not? If it did, what’s the source of these apparent potentially destructive delays?

    What the Committee has provided to date has been insufficient, late and ill-organized. One would assume that with a Democratic Committee and House leadership, it could have had whatever resources it needed. Did it not have them or not use them? Did politics or poor management play an important role?

    The loss of the House and, therefore, control over the Committee was always a possibility: the majority party in a mid-term election routinely loses bigly. Preparations were needed; they were apparently insufficient.

    After the loss of the House, this Committee, in particular, should have had staff working overtime to finish its work and copy or send it to DoJ and/or the Senate, given that a GOP House would certainly bury or lie about it. The preparations seem inadequate.

    Especially burdensome is that many staffers working for this Committee will lose their jobs immediately after the holidays, presumably with little more than a handshake for thanks. Only the most dedicated or financially independent would be working flat out to finish this work by January 2nd, instead of focusing on the next job that will pay their rent in exorbitantly priced DC.

    • Rayne says:

      Please recall the committee disbands 30 days after the final report. We don’t actually know right now when the last paycheck to committee staffers will be, let alone if there is any residual work product to be completed between now and disbandment which wasn’t necessary to the final report, or may end up in an annex.

      • bmaz says:

        Please recall that is entirely meaningless once the GOP has control of the House, and it does not even matter if there is a Speaker set yet.

        • Rayne says:

          Read the mission, counselor. It says nothing about the end of the term. It only addresses the disposition of records under the Speaker. Here, I’ll spoon feed it to you:


          (a) Termination.—The Select Committee shall terminate 30 days after filing the final report under section 4.

          (b) Disposition Of Records.—Upon termination of the Select Committee—

          (1) the records of the Select Committee shall become the records of such committee or committees designated by the Speaker; and

          (2) the copies of records provided to the Select Committee by a committee of the House under section 6(a) shall be returned to the committee.

          Funding for this committee was already allocated under the previous budget.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Doesn’t seem responsive. Do you think the Goopers will keep any staff beyond January 3rd if they can help it? They want to shut it down and corrupt its work.

        Besides, and as you note, the Committee disbands within 30 days after issuing its final report, which is an outside time limit. Jobs are going away and nobody who has any choice waits until the last day, unless they already have somewhere else to go. But that only deals with part of the motivation for this staff.

    • Peterr says:

      A number of these staffers came from other Congressional staff positions, and I would expect that they will either be able to return to those posts or they will be offered posts at least as good as the ones they had. They were hired by the J6 committee because they were damn good high-level staffers, and there will be a line to hire them once they are done with the J6 committee.

        • FiestyBlueBird says:

          Now there’s a thought.

          Per David Remnick’s intro to the committee’s report, some committee staff members were former DOJ investigators. I hadn’t realized that, though maybe some folks here knew that already.

  13. Randy Baker says:

    Can’t tell you whether there has been a delay by the Committee, and if so, whether it is justified or unjustified. However, given the overwhelming reason to believe DOJ had done nothing to investigate Trump for roughly 1 year, the folks there really aren’t in any position to complain about delay.

  14. ChicagoDD says:

    I learn a lot from this site, though I’m not a lawyer, much legalese flies over my head…. honestly, though, the omnipresent sniping gets in the way of what is highly intelligent, probing, revelatory conversation and analysis: if people get hot over every picayune thing, then it’s boy-cried-wolf time IMO, all disagreements seem rendered equal in importance and it’s harder to weed out what’s really worthy of being pissed about. I’m confident I’m not alone in wishing that stuff abated a bit, but it’s not my choice. Whatever.

    ANYWAY: Once the GOP take over committees, can they legally dispose or somehow expunge all the interviews, evidence, etc accumulated by J6? Either way has the J6 Cmte decided to forward all that info to appropriate parties in the (ostensibly, Sinema kind of a wild card) Dem led Senate so as to preserve it, possibly act on it, or possibly hold it as a cautionary kind of Ace in the hole making the GOP House think twice about adventuring about with Biden-Laptop-type investigations? Have only heard speculation and time is drawing nigh.

  15. Snowdog of the North says:

    I agree wholeheartedly that the J6 committee should have been sharing this with DOJ long ago – not waiting to the last minute like this. I would also say, just give all of it, right now. Don’t try to make it all pretty and such. DOJ has staff that is capable of sifting through it all, and getting the important parts out. Dribbling it out is ridiculous, especially since it is the holidays and just before a changing of the guard where it might not get out at all if not now.

    The only thing I would disagree with you about is the value of the J6 committee. I think this is ultimately a political process and public perception counts for that. People don’t follow proceedings in the courts so much, except for what they are told by the media (and that always comes with opinion about what it all means). Also, Congress has an important part to play in making the historical record for an occurrence like this.

    Lets face it, while this country has had corrupt presidents before, there is not a single one that has taken corruption as far as Trump, and that includes Nixon, Andrew Johnson, Harding, Buchanan, Grant, and anyone else in the rogue’s gallery of presidents. I understand all about the strict definition of treason in the Constitution, but I would say we’ve never had someone in the office of President of the United States who you could say was so clearly not aligned with the interests of the country. All of those in the rogue’s gallery got Congressional investigations, and it helped to flesh out the historical record. I see no reason for limiting investigations of Trump to what happens in the judicial branch.

    For those reasons, I think the judicial actions are vitally important, but not sufficient.

    • xy xy says:

      I would say the Stone and Cheney (Bush, Trump) presidential/vice-presidential corruption started with the 2000 presidential election.
      As this corruption has carried to the other two branches, how do we get the interests of the country back into the people’s control?

      • bmaz says:

        How exactly do you define “corruption”? Politics you don’t like? Are you alleging there were payoffs, bribes etc. in 2000?

  16. Konny_2022 says:

    I found this in the transcript of the J6C interview of Cassidy Hutchinson on Sep. 14, 2022 (released Dec. 22, page 5 lines 18-20):

    “Q And we understand that the information that you’ve — you’re going to provide, you’ve also provided to the Department of Justice before today. Is that right?
    A That’s correct.”

    I assume Hutchinson was not the only witness who gave depositions to both the J6C and the DOJ.

    BTW, just almost 50 additional transcripts released.

  17. wasD4v1d says:

    I was just reading a piece in The Atlantic, and though couched in more polite language than bmaz can muster at this particular moment, essentially implies the J6C has coughed up a hairball. Though it knits together a tapestry, their ‘conclusion’ doesn’t bother to consider the real threat, which is not tfg.

    • wasD4v1d says:

      To be sure, the J6C tapestry is possibly the reason tfg is no longer a threat. But taking a lesson from William of Normandy, getting to the huscarls (Eastman, Stone, Bannon, et al) is the key to victory – and I expect this is what the DOJ is working on, and the Justice Dept has no need of a camera ready distraction.

      And thus I have arrived at a unified theory of emptywheel: Marcy, Rayne, and bmaz are a superposition.

      And to all a good night.

  18. dejavuagain says:

    Thank you Bmaz. Missing from the transcripts are the exhibits shown to the witnesses during the deposition. Indeed, a list of the exhibits is also missing. It is not unusual for deposition transcripts to included both a list of exhibits and the exhibits themselves, or at least relevant pages.

    Similarly, I note that the endnotes to the Final Report have citations such as “Documents on file with the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (Secret Service Production), CTRL0000882478”.

    I wonder how these documents are being produced to DOJ and also what happens to “Documents on file with the Select Committee” after January 1, 2023.

    • bmaz says:

      Yes, exhibits to depos are usually attached. These were not normal depos, but yes I would expect exhibits to be attached. No, my information is that the documentary items have still not been disclosed to the DOJ.

  19. Bay State Librul says:

    A June blessing and some levity from Dave Barry on J6

    “The House Select Committee To Investigate The Living Hell Out Of January 6 hears testimony, much of it from former members of the Trump administration, that leaves objective observers with only two possible interpretations of Donald Trump’s actions on that day:

    One: Trump is a pathological narcissist who, in his delusional effort to cling to power, ignored the sane adults on his staff and listened instead to Rudy Giuliani — which is like getting legal counsel from a Magic 8 Ball — and in the end showed an utter disregard for the sanctity of his office, the rule of law, the welfare of the nation, and the physical safety of thousands of people.

    Two: There is no Two.”

  20. Stevo60 says:

    My guess is that a lot of the documents might embarrass or implicate people who belong to the class that can’t be sanctioned in our country. Even if Trump goes down–and that’s a big if—there won’t be any consequences for Ginni Thomas, members of Congress or the people who financed it.

Comments are closed.