1/6 Committee Poised Today to Hear Perhaps the Most Critical Testimony Yet from Former DOJ Official Jeffery Clark

According to The Guardian, a congressional source says that former DOJ official Jeffery Clark will testify before the House Select Committee today. Clark’s testimony would likely be the most significant testimony (publicly known) to date.

Clark is the former head of the Trump administration DOJ’s Civil Division and was Trump’s most servile DOJ  official in pushing baseless claims of fraud in multiple incidents. As The Guardian reports:

In January, the DoJ’s inspector general announced his office was launching an investigation into whether Clark plotted to oust then acting attorney general Jeff Rosen so he could take over the department and help pursue Trump’s baseless claims by opening an investigation into voter fraud in Georgia.

A US Senate judiciary committee report found Clark also drafted a letter he wanted Rosen to approve which urged Georgia to convene a special legislative session to investigate voter fraud claims.

It would seem inconceivable that Clark would push such an agenda without direct instruction, or – at least permission, from Trump himself. Multiple reports have already found during the relevant period in late December and early January, Trump considered firing acting-Attorney General Jeffery Rosen for refusing to sign a letter stating that DOJ found significant fraud in the election and promoting Clark to the position. Only the threat of mass resignations in protest stopped Trump, according to those same reports.

There is likely no former Department of Justice official better-positioned to testify as to Trump’s direct involvement in whatever actions took place within DOJ during that critical point leading up to January 6th. This leads to the next obvious question. Given that other former officials inside and outside Trump’s DOJ are fighting subpoenas, why is one of the most exposed individuals readily complying with the subpoena?

No one but Clark and his attorney can know with certainty, but one can responsibly speculate that Clark’s motivation might be directly rooted in his near-obvious culpability. Clark might be betting on the fact that the others will lose their fight against the subpoenas and will eventually testify about Clark’s role. It would help Clark considerably if he could point to the fact that he’s voluntarily assisted in the investigation all along, perhaps even coming to some agreement concerning possible immunity.

It is not speculation to say that this might be the day in which the House Select Committee hears its most significant and powerful testimony yet. Clark’s testimony could reveal information that had previously been known only by the precious few directly involved. The public is unlikely to hear specifics as to Clark’s testimony today. But it will be interesting to watch the body language and hear the members’ statements later in the day after hearing from Clark.