Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, delivered the following opening statement at a hearing with the Department of Justice Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz:

“Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  And thank you, Inspector General Horowitz, for being here today.

“In the days since you released your report, Mr. Inspector General, I am struck by the total disconnect between the Republican party line and your actual findings. The report does not find, as President Trump continues to complain, that the FBI ‘plotted against [his] election.’  The report also does not ‘totally exonerate’ the President on the Russia matter, no matter how you read it.

“It does not give any reason to conclude, as the President’s increasingly untethered attorney Rudy Giuliani argues, that ‘Mueller should be suspended and honest people should be brought in,’ or that the Attorney General should violate his recusal and end the Special Counsel’s investigation altogether.

“Nor does it suggest, as Chairman Goodlatte and Chairman Gowdy insist, that Hillary Clinton received special treatment from the FBI.  The key findings in this report are quite simple.  The Inspector General ‘found no evidence that the conclusions by the prosecutors were affected by bias or other improper considerations; rather, we determined that they were based on the prosecutors’ assessment of the facts, the law, and past Department practice.’

“The report criticizes the FBI and its former leadership—but virtually every action criticized ultimately harmed the candidacy of Secretary Clinton, and inured to the benefit of Donald Trump. And the report has nothing whatsoever to say about the ongoing work of the Special Counsel. President Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and some of my Republican colleagues are desperate to make that leap—who wouldn’t be, in their position, with 23 indictments and the President’s campaign manager in jail?  But their argument is based on innuendo, not on the facts, and certainly on not this report.

“Now, I am not shy about my criticism of the former FBI Director. When James Comey testified before the Judiciary Committee last year, I told him that he was wrong to have applied a double standard to the presidential campaigns—speaking publicly and at length about the Clinton investigation, but refusing even to acknowledge the existence of the investigation into the Trump campaign.

“I also told Mr. Comey that he was wrong to have criticized Secretary Clinton after announcing that he would not charge her with a crime—not because of the content of the criticism, but because issuing that statement was simply not his job.  It is also wrong, as well as against DOJ guidelines, for the investigative agency to criticize the subject of an investigation for uncharged conduct.  The Inspector General’s report describes both of these failings in detail.  The report’s analysis of Mr. Comey’s July 5 statement reads, in pertinent part:

“‘In our criminal justice system, the investigative and prosecutive functions are intentionally kept separate as a check on the government’s power to bring criminal charges.’ 

“The report concludes that Mr. Comey’s statement assumed an authority that did not belong to the office of the Director of the FBI.  I am grateful for this important analysis, Mr. Horowitz. Unfortunately, sir, your key finding—that the decision not to charge Secretary Clinton was based on an assessment of the facts, the law, and past Department practice, and not on bias or improper consideration—is now subject to the treatment that President Trump will give it.  

“‘I mean, there was total bias,’ the President argued on the White House lawn just last week. What are we to make of this disconnect between what the report says and what the President and his allies say it says?

“Why is it that, no matter how many times we litigate this question, House Republicans can think of nothing better to do than endlessly investigate Hillary Clinton for the same conduct?

“Why is it that after half a dozen investigations found no wrongdoing at Benghazi, the Majority spent millions of dollars on their own Benghazi select committee?  And when that body found no wrongdoing either, why is it that the Majority moved to legitimize conspiracy theories about the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One? 

“Why is it that after the Department of Justice and the FBI concluded it should not charge Secretary Clinton with a crime, rather than accepting the conclusion as we would in most criminal cases, the Judiciary and Oversight majorities launched an investigation into the Department of Justice and the FBI?

“Why is it that, after you released this report, Mr. Horowitz, some of my colleagues seriously suggested that we open an investigation into your investigation of the investigation?

“Why is it that, here and now, in June of 2018, we are still talking about Hillary Clinton’s emails at all? I suspect it has something to do with the way Republicans have squandered their opportunity to govern, and the consequences of abdicating that responsibility.

“House Republicans have done little or nothing to secure our next election from foreign attack, or to push back against the Attorney General’s unprecedented refusal to defend the key protections of the Affordable Care Act, or to address an immigration crisis with anything other than a cruel and reactionary policy proposal that will never become law.

“They don’t even make credible arguments about Hillary Clinton’s emails. I suspect that if the Majority were actually motivated by the sensitivity of classified information in the Clinton case, then they would have also said something by now about the highly sensitive Israeli operation revealed to Russian officials by President Trump, or about the way the President handles classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, or about the confidential human source who was exposed while our colleagues tried to force the Deputy Attorney General to reveal his identity, or about the totally inappropriate—if not outright unlawful—dangling of pardons by the President and his attorney to those accused of participating in a conspiracy against the United States.

“No, too many of my Republican colleagues instead seem stuck at a perpetual Trump campaign rally, shouting ‘lock her up’ with the rest of the crowd, hoping that the public won’t notice how little they have accomplished with their time in the Majority.

“I look forward to your testimony today, Mr. Inspector General.  I hope our conversation can be the beginning of the end of this long preoccupation with Secretary Clinton.  We have so many more important things to do. I yield back.”

###