CNN Legal Analyst Debunks DOJ Excuse About Bondi’s Epstein Subpoena: ‘A Bogus Argument’ | EUROtoday

CNN senior authorized analyst Elie Honig on Wednesday debunked the “bogus” Department of Justice declare that former Attorney General Pam Bondi needn’t adjust to a subpoena to reply questions on how the DOJ dealt with its launch of the Jeffrey Epstein recordsdata.

Honig joined “The Source” after visitor host John King cited Assistant Attorney General Patrick D. Davis, who stated in a letter obtained by CNN that Bondi gained’t sit for questioning subsequent week as she was subpoenaed “in her official role” and “not in a personal capacity.”

Asked if this reasoning was sound, Honig acknowledged plainly, “No, that’s a bogus argument, John.”

He defined, “A subpoena is simply a command to a witness to provide relevant information, if they have any. As we sit here right now, former Attorney General Pam Bondi has the exact same information that she had a week ago when she was still the sitting AG.”

“Now, DOJ has come up with this distinction of, ‘Well, she’s not the AG anymore, therefore the subpoena’s invalid,’” Honig continued. “First of all, the subpoena is to Pam Bondi. It’s not to the current occupant of the office.”

The argument from Davis definitely seems to be “bogus” on its face, as any authorities official who’s subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee may merely go away their place earlier than questioning happens with a view to keep away from complying with the mandate if it weren’t.

“Second of all, if that subpoena meant whoever the current AG is, DOJ would be offering up [acting Attorney General] Todd Blanche, which they’re not doing,” stated Honig. “And third of all, John, this committee has already subpoenaed several prior AGs.”

The working towards authorized lawyer famous these embrace Eric Holder, Bill Barr and Merrick Garland.

He stated that the subpoena “remains valid” regardless of the declare from Davis, however added that it could possibly be tough for rating Oversight Committee member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) to legally maintain Bondi in contempt if she failed to look, which he stated Wednesday he would do.

The authorized analyst defined that the 21 Democrats on the committee would wish three of 26 Republican members “to get a majority” vote with a view to carry a contempt cost, and that Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) at the moment seems to be the one one who would be part of them.

He famous the contempt cost would solely attain the House after a majority committee vote.

“But here’s the thing, John,” stated Honig. “If the full House votes contempt, then it goes over to DOJ for potential prosecution, I am quite certain that Todd Blanche will not authorize a prosecution of Pam Bondi.”

Honig continued, “But it’s worth saying, for a DOJ, Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche alike — who love to congratulate themselves for being the most transparent in history — that would be a bad look to take a contempt charge from the Oversight Committee or the full House.”

Bondi is predicted to look for questioning on April 14.