The former acting attorney general for the final month of the Trump presidency distanced the Justice Department from former President Donald Trump’s claims of widespread voter fraud and defended the DOJ’s actions in the lead-up to and in response to the Capitol riot on Jan. 6.
Jeffrey Rosen, who took over as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer from Christmas Eve until President Joe Biden’s inauguration following the resignation of William Barr, testified before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday and mounted a defense of his short tenure, noting that the Justice Department under himself and his predecessor did not believe there was widespread fraud that could’ve changed the outcome of the 2020 election, and arguing that the DOJ responded appropriately to the Capitol riot before, during, and after, including launching an investigation that has resulted in hundreds of arrests so far.
“During my tenure, DOJ maintained the position publicly announced previously that the Department had been presented with no evidence of widespread voter fraud at a scale sufficient to change the outcome of the 2020 election, that it would not participate in any campaign’s or political party’s legal challenges to the certification of the Electoral College votes, and that there would be an orderly and peaceful transfer of power under the Constitution,” Rosen said in prepared remarks. “During my tenure, no special prosecutors were appointed, whether for election fraud or otherwise, no public statements were made questioning the election, no letters were sent to state officials seeking to overturn the election results, no DOJ court actions or filings were submitted seeking to overturn election results.”
Trump has continued to insist the election was stolen, with a Monday post from the “Desk of Donald Trump” claiming: “If a thief robs a jewelry store of all of its diamonds (the 2020 Presidential Election), the diamonds must be returned. The Fake News media refuses to cover the greatest Election Fraud in the history of our Country.”
BARR BREAKS WITH TRUMP OVER VOTER FRAUD CLAIMS
Barr was a critic of the Trump-Russia investigations, but he rejected calls to appoint special counsels to investigate either Hunter Biden or allegations of voter fraud.
“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr said in December, also shooting down allegations that millions of votes were flipped from Trump to Biden by voting machines nationwide. “The DHS and DOJ have looked into that, and so far, we haven’t seen anything to substantiate that.”
During his final Justice Department press conference a few days before Christmas, Barr repeated that he had not seen evidence of enough fraud to change the outcome of the vote.
“Let me just say that there is fraud, unfortunately, in most elections, and we are too tolerant of it, but I was commenting on the extent to which we have looked at suggestions or allegations of systemic or broad-based fraud that would affect the outcome of the election, and I’ve already spoken to that, and I stand by that statement,” Barr said.
Barr was asked in an interview in January about the role he thought the debate about the integrity of the 2020 election played in the siege of the Capitol.
“I think that that was the thing that precipitated the riots on the Hill. Now, I think it’s always important to remember that most people are exercising their First Amendment rights, but there’s a substantial group, obviously, that went far beyond that and broke into the Capitol and tried to interfere with the proceedings, and that’s unacceptable,” Barr said.
Trump spent the weeks after the election claiming it had been stolen from him by Biden. The Democratic-led House voted to impeach Trump, with the article of impeachment accusing him of inciting an insurrection, but he was acquitted after a Senate trial.
Barr had issued a scathing statement about Trump’s behavior the day after the Capitol riot. “Orchestrating a mob to pressure Congress is inexcusable,” Barr said. “The President’s conduct yesterday was a betrayal of his office and supporters.”
During his Wednesday testimony, Rosen said, “My focus was consistently on following the rule of law and enabling the orderly transition of power in the manner contemplated in our Constitution and laws. Upon learning of the events at the Capitol on January 6, my priorities were threefold: securing the Capitol following the breach, supporting the Congress as it sought to fulfill its duty to certify the Electoral College vote, and beginning the critical work of holding accountable those who committed wrongful acts at the Capitol.”
In a footnote for his prepared remarks, Rosen also said that “as it was conceivable that some protesters might be unhappy with DOJ’s not having filed court actions regarding the election outcome, DOJ arranged for tactical support from Bureau of Prisons personnel to supplement existing security at its own RFK Building” on Jan. 6.
Rosen claimed, “I believe that DOJ reasonably prepared for contingencies ahead of January 6, understanding that there was considerable uncertainty as to how many people would arrive, who those people would be, and precisely what purposes they would pursue. Unlike the police, DOJ had no front-line role with respect to crowd control.”
The former attorney general stressed that DOJ helped regain control of the Capitol after the riot.
“With the achievement of the twin objectives of restoring order at the Capitol and enabling Congress to fulfill its electoral count obligation under the Constitution, I was and remain extremely appreciative for the work done that afternoon and into the night by the women and men of the FBI, ATF, and USMS, as well as others at the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office and elsewhere in DOJ,” Rosen said, adding that “DOJ also immediately began work to ensure that those responsible for the attack on the Capitol would face the full consequences of their actions under the law.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Rosen also said he would not weigh in on some of the key questions at the House hearing.
“I will leave it to others to assess why the security at the Capitol was not sufficient to protect the building that afternoon in the first instance, but the assistance that was provided after the breach occurred is something that deserves appreciation,” Rosen said. “I will also leave it to appropriate authorities to assess responsibility for what happened and determine any precipitating causes.”
