This article at The New York Times web site bears the headline:
For Trump and Allies, a Waiting Game as Georgia Indictment Decisions Loom.
The article describes what is known about the efforts by Donald Trump and his allies and minions to hijack Georgia's sixteen Electoral-College votes. The article also describes what is known about Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' investigation into those efforts.
Toward the end of the New York Times’ article, the following appears:
In addition, Ms. Willis and her staff took considerable interest in the conduct of Mr. Clark, though the Justice Department blocked their efforts to have him testify.
[Emphasis added.]
The referenced Mr. Clark was one Jeffrey Clark. To put it mildly, Jeffrey Clark was all in for Donald Trump.
After a stint in private practice at the Chicago-based law firm known as Kirkland & Ellis, Jeffrey Clark worked in the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. In September 2020, Donald Trump appointed Jeffrey Clark to also be the Acting Head of the Civil Division of the Justice Department.
After the election, Jeffrey Clark tried to get the Department of Justice to publicly state that the DoJ had concerns about the legitimacy of the reported results. He also drafted a letter to be sent to Georgia officials, on DoJ letterhead, stating that the DoJ had "significant concerns" about the election results in several States, including Georgia. The draft letter urged the State Legislature to intervene.
Then-Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen rejected the draft out of hand. He told Jeffrey Clark that there was no evidentiary basis for such claims, and that the Department should not inject itself into the post-election fracas.
Clark then tried to strong-arm Rosen into sending the draft. Clark told Rosen that Trump was going to dismiss Rosen and to appoint Clark himself to the position of Acting Attorney General, whereupon AG Clark would issue the letter. Rosen told Clark that he needed to hear that directly from Trump.
In a hastily set-up meeting at the White House, Rosen and his top deputy told Trump that, if Trump went ahead with Clark's plan, the remaining senior leadership of the DoJ would resign en masse, and warned Trump that the political fallout would be immense and that the Department would be paralyzed by the mass exodus of its leadership. (Prior to going to the White House, Jeffrey Rosen had convened a meeting or conference call with all of the senior leadership of the Department other than Jeffrey Clark, and let everyone know what was afoot. Everyone participating had agreed to resign immediately if Trump were to fire Jeffrey Rosen or to otherwise try to take direct control of the Justice Department.)
Trump thereupon abandoned the idea of firing Jeffrey Rosen or of putting Jeffrey Clark in charge of the Department of Justice.
Jeffrey Clark left the DoJ on January 14, 2021. Months later, the January 6 Select Committee subpoenaed Clark. He initially ignored the subpoena. The Select Committee then threatened him with a criminal-contempt referral. Clark ultimately relented and testified. However, he did not say anything of substance. He repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment.
The above-linked New York Times article does not say when the DoJ blocked Clark from talking to Fani Willis or testifying in front of the special grand jury that she was running, or why the DoJ would adopt that posture. It would have to have been well after Jeffrey Clark had left the Justice Department. Nor does the article say how the Justice Department blocked Fani Willis from interviewing its former employee, Jeffrey Clark, or from bringing him before the Special Grand Jury that she had convened to investigate Trump’s effort to hijack Georgia’s sixteen Electoral-College votes.
I have not previously heard of any action or effort by the Department of Justice to block Jeffrey Clark from talking to Fani Willis or from testifying before the Special Grand Jury in Georgia.
This article in The Atlanta Journal Constitution listed seven people from Trump’s inner circle of advisers and confidantes, each of whom had reportedly received a Certificate of Material Witness. (Such a Certificate apparently functions as a subpoena for a witnesses who live outside the State of Georgia.) Jeffrey Clark was not on that list.
So, there is no public indication that Fani Willis has ever attempted to subpoena Jeffrey Clark. It therefore seems that the Department of Justice did not formally attempt to quash any subpoena, as no subpoena had ever issued.
Perhaps the reported blockage consisted of the Department of Justice jawboning Fani Willis and asking her, as a matter of comity, not to subpoena Jeffrey Clark, but rather to leave Clark to the DoJ to investigate. Perhaps the DoJ thought that it might get Clark to agree to testify in any relevant Federal proceeding or proceedings either in return for a grant of immunity or pursuant to a plea deal, and the Department did not want Fani Willis to throw a monkey wrench into such negotiations. (I’ve not heard anything about a plea deal or grant of immunity.)
I am having a hard time coming up with any other explanation as to why the DoJ would so act, if it so acted.
Myself, I would think that Jeffrey Clark would have an awful lot to say about the attempt to steal Georgia’s Electoral-College votes, if he were willing to talk (as the result of a plea agreement), or if he were compelled to talk (as the result of a grant of immunity from prosecution). Jeffrey Clark would therefore definitely be someone whom Fani Willis would naturally at least want to try to interview.
I would also think that, as a matter of Federalism and 10th-Amendment considerations, it would be very, very difficult for the U.S. Department of Justice to justify any attempt to block a State-Government law-enforcement official from talking to an actual or potential witness (or a potential defendant) in connection with the investigation of a serious State-law crime, or to justify any attempt to block bringing such a person before a State Grand Jury to testify.
Your thoughts?
Have any of you heard anything about the DoJ trying to block Fani Willis from talking to or from subpoenaing Jeffrey Clark?