Rep. Barry Loudermilk's push for a Department of Justice investigation into former Representative Liz Cheney's actions during the January 6 Committee hearings has ignited fresh controversy in Washington.
According to the Washington Examiner, the Administration Oversight Subcommittee has accused Cheney of witness tampering during her tenure on the January 6 Committee, potentially exposing her to the same legal scrutiny she previously directed at former President Donald Trump.
The allegations center around Cheney's communications with Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Hutchinson, who provided over 24 hours of testimony about her final days in the White House, allegedly changed her testimony following interactions with Cheney.
The communications included Cheney advising Hutchinson to fire her lawyer, Stefan Passantino, and helping her secure new legal representation.
The subcommittee's investigation has focused on potential violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1512, a federal statute that prohibits witness tampering.
If found guilty of violating this law, Cheney could face up to 20 years in prison. The report specifically notes that since her actions did not affect the legislative process, she may not be protected by the Constitution's speech and debate clause.
Rep. Loudermilk, appearing on Life, Liberty, and Levin, emphasized that the investigation request aims to apply the same standards Cheney previously used against Trump. Here's what Loudermilk stated:
I am only using Liz's own standards that she used. If you go back to July of 2022, in one of their televised hearings, Liz Cheney started talking about Donald Trump making a phone call to one of their witnesses. It wasn't even successful; he just attempted to make a phone call to someone they interviewed. She then referred that to the Department of Justice of potential witness tampering just because he attempted to make a phone call.
The Georgia representative further highlighted the contrast between Trump's alleged actions and Cheney's confirmed communications with Hutchinson. The subcommittee's findings suggest that Cheney's interactions with Hutchinson were more direct and consequential than the attempted phone call in which she had previously criticized Trump.
The situation has raised significant questions about the ethical boundaries of congressional investigations. Passantino, Hutchinson's former lawyer, was reportedly unaware of Cheney's communications with his client during the period in question. This detail has added another layer of complexity to the legal implications of the case.
Loudermilk has emphasized that while he cannot make determinations about legal violations, the Department of Justice has the authority to investigate these allegations. The parallel between these accusations and those previously leveled against Trump has created a notable political dynamic, particularly given Cheney's prominent role in the January 6 investigations.
The referral to the DOJ represents a significant escalation in the scrutiny of the January 6 Committee's internal operations. These developments have sparked renewed debate about the committee's methods and the standards applied to different political figures.
The Department of Justice faces pressure to investigate allegations against former Representative Liz Cheney regarding witness tampering during the January 6 Committee proceedings. The accusations stem from her communications with former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, which allegedly led to changes in Hutchinson's testimony and the dismissal of her original legal counsel.
The investigation request, spearheaded by Rep. Barry Loudermilk, aims to apply the same legal standards that Cheney previously used to scrutinize former President Trump's actions. If the DOJ proceeds with an investigation, it could set a precedent for examining the conduct of congressional committee members in high-profile investigations.
