Brooks Lays Out Demands For Jan. 6 Committee Before He’d Agree To Testify

UNITED STATES - JUNE 15: Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., conducts a news conference in the Capitol Visitor Center on the Fire Fauci Act, which aims to strip the salary of Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute... UNITED STATES - JUNE 15: Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., conducts a news conference in the Capitol Visitor Center on the Fire Fauci Act, which aims to strip the salary of Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, for his handling of COVID-19 on Tuesday, June 15, 2021. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images) MORE LESS

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) on Sunday outlined his demands for the Jan. 6 Select Committee before he would commit to testifying before the panel, following its subpoena of Brooks and four other GOP House members earlier this month.

During an interview on Fox News Sunday, Brooks got into a heated exchange with guest host Sandra Smith as he pushed bogus claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election.

“The congressmen and senators disagree with you, with what you just said,” Brooks told Smith after she pointed out fruitless legal efforts by former President Trump and his allies to subvert the election results. “Elections are going to be stolen if we don’t fix these problems.”

After Brooks and Smith talked over each other, Smith switched the topic to the Jan. 6 Select Committee’s subpoena to Brooks and four other GOP lawmakers: House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) along with Reps. Scott Perry (R-PA), Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Andy Biggs (R-AZ). Brooks claimed that he had “not been served with any kind of documentation.”

Asked whether the public can expect to see his testimony before the committee, Brooks said he would consult with his other GOP colleagues who have been subpoenaed.

“I have to get with my colleagues who have been purportedly subpoenaed — at least they say they have been served,” Brooks said. “I don’t know why I haven’t and some of them have.”

Brooks said he would refuse to testify before the committee if it’s not public.

“The things with me that I require is first it’s got to be public, it’s got to be something that you at Fox News can have a camera on, so that the American people can see it,” Brooks said. “No more of this clandestine meeting stuff, secret meeting stuff involving the public’s business.”

Brooks added that he would also refuse to testify before the panel if it happens before his Alabama Senate GOP primary runoff election against Katie Britt next month.

“It’s got to be in public, it’s got to be congressman to congressman. It’s going to be limited to issues associated with January the 6th and has to be after the Senate primary is over with,” Brooks said. “I don’t want this witch hunt committee and Nancy Pelosi trying to interfere with a Republican primary election for the United States Senate in Alabama.”

Brook’s comments follows McCarthy’s letter to the committee stating his refusal to comply with the panel’s subpoena. In the letter, McCarthy’s lawyer, Elliot S. Berke, claims the subpoena is constitutionally invalid because it did not meet certain legal standards. Berke claimed the make-up of the committee — which only two Republicans, Reps. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), serve on after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (R-CA) rejected McCarthy’s GOP picks for the panel — is unjustly partisan.

“In addition to the failure of the Speaker to properly constitute the Select Committee within the structure voted on and approved by the majority of the House, the subsequent decisions to deny the minority even the patina of representation of a Ranking Minority Member makes compliance with the Select Committee’s subpoena issuing authority and subsequent deposition authority of the House impossible,” Berke wrote.

Like Brooks, Jordan reportedly shared a list of demands with the committee in a letter last week as he accused the panel of pursuing “political vendettas” against Trump and his allies.

Jordan reportedly demanded the committee provide him with all of the materials it would use to question him if he sits for a deposition, including documents and testimony that reference him and an explanation of the legal authority the committee has in issuing a subpoena.

If the committee meets his conditions, Jordan wrote, he could then “adequately further respond to [the] subpoena,” according to the Washington Post.

Watch Brooks’ remarks below:

Dear Reader,

When we asked recently what makes TPM different from other outlets, readers cited factors like honesty, curiosity, transparency, and our vibrant community. They also pointed to our ability to report on important stories and trends long before they are picked up by mainstream outlets; our ability to contextualize information within the arc of history; and our focus on the real-world consequences of the news.

Our unique approach to reporting and presenting the news, however, wouldn’t be possible without our readers’ support. That’s not just marketing speak, it’s true: our work would literally not be possible without readers deciding to become members. Not only does member support account for more than 80% of TPM’s revenue, our members have helped us build an engaged and informed community. Many of our best stories were born from reader tips and valuable member feedback.

We do what other news outlets can’t or won’t do because our members’ support gives us real independence.

If you enjoy reading TPM and value what we do, become a member today.

Latest News
Comments
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Investigations Desk:
Reporters:
Newswriters:
Director of Audience:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: