(Ken Silva, Headline USA) The House Judiciary Committee has sued one of the key FBI agents in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal for refusing to comply with a subpoena over the matter—revealing that the Justice Department is directing the agent avoid testifying about how the government pressured social media companies to censor the Biden laptop story ahead of the 2020 election.
The Judiciary Committee’s lawsuit against Elvis Chan, the assistant special agent in charge of the FBI’s cyber branch in San Francisco, came on Tuesday after Chan repeatedly refused to be interviewed by the committee.
“Neither Chan nor DOJ has disputed that the Committee’s investigation is lawful. Nor have they disputed that Congress has the authority to pass legislation addressing the topic of the Committee’s investigation. Indeed, multiple other Executive Branch officials have appeared before the Committee as part of its inquiry,” the lawsuit said.
“Rather, DOJ has directed Chan to defy the Committee’s Subpoena only because, under House Rules, agency counsel (a lawyer who represents the Executive Branch’s interests, not Chan’s) cannot attend.”
According to the lawsuit, Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, first wrote to FBI Director Chris Wray in January 2023 to have Chan testify.
After numerous requests, the DOJ finally agreed last August to make Chan available for a voluntary transcribed interview on Sept. 15, 2023. However, the DOJ insisted that Chan be allowed to have both a personal attorney and an FBI attorney at the interview—a violation of the committee policy.
“Under the Committee’s protocol, Chan could appear with one or the other, not both, and Committee staff told FBI personnel that an exception to this practice was unlikely to be permitted,” the lawsuit said.
“Over the next two days, on September 13 and 14, 2023, Committee staff told both DOJ personnel and Chan’s personal counsel that the Committee’s standard practice would apply, and no exception would be made for Chan; he could bring agency counsel or personal counsel, but not both.”
The lawsuit further explained that the an FBI attorney won’t advocate for Chan’s personal interests the same way a personal attorney would.
The committee alleged that Chan made multiple contradictory statements when he was deposed in the Missouri v. Biden case—suggesting that the reason for his is because he was represented by an FBI attorney, not his personal one. Because Chan was represented by agency counsel there, Chairman Jordan explained, “it is reasonable for the Committee to believe that Mr. Chan will be more veracious outside the presence of agency counsel.”
The DOJ, for its part, contends that a subpoena compelling testimony about an agency employee’s official duties, without agency counsel present, is unconstitutional and thus unenforceable, according to the lawsuit.
The committee said it disagrees with the DOJ’s position, but offered accommodations such as allowing the FBI’s attorney to be present just outside the room where the deposition would be held, and to be available whenever Chan wanted to take a break and confer with him or her. The DOJ is still telling Chan to defy the subpoena, the lawsuit alleged.
The lawsuit seeks a court order for Chan to testify before the committee immediately.
Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.
