GOP considers contempt of Congress due to FBI deposition no-show.
Senior FBI Official Fails to Appear for Deposition Amidst Controversy
Elvis Chan, a senior FBI official based in San Francisco, has stirred up controversy by refusing to appear for a deposition requested by Republicans. The deposition was related to his alleged involvement in social media companies’ decision to censor certain content surrounding the 2020 election. Despite a subpoena issued last month, Chan was a no-show at the scheduled interview, leaving a House Judiciary Committee room filled with staffers waiting in anticipation.
Republicans Consider Contempt of Congress
The committee, frustrated by Chan’s absence, is now considering taking further action. One senior GOP aide involved in the talks revealed that they may document Chan as a no-show and potentially hold him in contempt of Congress. However, the situation is complicated by recent events in the House, where Rep. Kevin McCarthy was removed from his role as speaker. This has put the House in a holding pattern, preventing any votes on contempt or referrals to the Department of Justice.
Unprecedented Holding Pattern
The House is currently in an unprecedented holding pattern, with floor activity at a standstill. The absence of a speaker has created uncertainty, making it difficult to move forward with any actions against Chan. Lawmakers are expected to vote on a new speaker soon, but there is no guarantee of a united decision. Until a speaker emerges, the committee may have to delay any votes on contempt.
Options for the Committee
While the committee explores its options, one possibility is to sue Chan for failing to appear. The senior GOP aide indicated that escalating the matter and pursuing contempt charges are on the table, but the committee members need to confer before making a decision. This no-show incident is just the latest development in a series of exchanges between the committee and Chan, who has insisted on having both personal and DOJ counsel present during interviews.
Behind-the-Scenes Exchanges
The committee has provided a rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes exchanges with Chan’s lawyer, Larry Berger. They have repeatedly warned Chan about their practice of allowing either personal or department counsel at interviews, but not both. Berger believes the committee’s refusal to honor Chan’s counsel choices is arbitrary. He argues that there is no clear rule defining which counsel can attend voluntary interviews.
Republicans’ Quest for Answers
Republicans have been eager to speak with Chan due to allegations of his involvement in social media censorship efforts.”>pressuring social media companies to censor First Amendment-protected speech. This includes the controversial New York Post story about Hunter Biden’s laptop and discussions about the 2020 election and COVID-19. Chan was previously deposed as a witness in Missouri v. Biden, a case where Republican attorneys general made similar allegations against federal government entities.
The committee had planned to question Chan about his communication during industry meetings with social media companies before the 2020 election. They were particularly interested in what he may have said about Hunter Biden’s laptop. However, with Chan’s failure to appear, the committee’s pursuit of answers has hit a roadblock.
The FBI has declined to comment on this specific incident but has previously stated that the committee’s approach to Chan deviates significantly from normal procedures. They emphasize Chan’s willingness to participate in a voluntary interview as long as he has appropriate legal representation.
What legal and professional consequences could Chan face for failing to comply with the congressional subpoena
He situation to a lawsuit could be on the table, as it would allow the committee to seek a court order compelling Chan to testify. This would likely lead to a lengthy legal battle and further delays in resolving the controversy surrounding Chan’s alleged involvement in social media censorship. Another option would be to reschedule the deposition and issue a new subpoena, hoping that Chan will comply this time. However, given his previous refusal to appear, it is uncertain if this approach would yield any different results.
Concerns Over Censorship and Free Speech
The controversy surrounding Chan’s alleged involvement in social media censorship highlights the ongoing concerns over freedom of speech and political bias. Many Republicans have accused social media companies of suppressing conservative voices and manipulating information during the 2020 election. This deposition was seen as an opportunity to gain insight into the decision-making processes behind these alleged actions. However, Chan’s absence only serves to fuel speculation and distrust, leaving many unanswered questions.
Implications for the FBI and Chan’s Reputation
Chan’s refusal to appear for the deposition not only raises questions about his alleged involvement in social media censorship but also raises concerns about his credibility and integrity as a senior FBI official. The FBI is already under scrutiny for its handling of various investigations, and Chan’s absence further undermines public confidence in the agency. Additionally, failing to comply with a subpoena from Congress could have significant legal and professional consequences for Chan, including potential charges of contempt of Congress and damage to his reputation.
Conclusion
The failure of senior FBI official Elvis Chan to appear for his scheduled deposition amidst the controversy surrounding his alleged involvement in social media censorship raises significant concerns about transparency, free speech, and the credibility of the FBI. While the House Judiciary Committee explores its options, the unprecedented holding pattern in the House further complicates any potential actions against Chan. It remains to be seen how this situation will unfold and what repercussions it may have for both the FBI and Chan himself.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...