WASHINGTON — The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol encountered a known roadblock on Thursday as yet another prominent witness invoked his right to self-incrimination rather than answer questions about the events leading up to an attack by the mob in Congress.
Michael T. Flynn, a former national security adviser who was one of the most extreme voices in former President Donald J. Trump’s drive to undo the election, repeatedly cited the Fifth Amendment before the committee because, his attorney said, he believes that the panel is investigating criminal references against Mr. Trump and his allies.
“This privilege protects all Americans, not just General Flynn,” Mr Flynn’s attorney David Warrington said in a statement.
Mr Flynn became at least the fifth prominent witness to attend a lengthy panel interview, but refused – time and again – to answer the committee’s questions. Others citing the Fifth Amendment before the committee include Jeffrey Clark, a former Justice Department attorney who participated in Mr Trump’s frenzied efforts to reverse the election; John Eastman, a conservative lawyer who wrote a memo that has been compared by some in both parties to a blueprint for a coup d’état; political agent Roger J. Stone Jr.; and the conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.
Mr. Eastman and his attorney invoked the Fifth Amendment 146 times during his statement, repeatedly mentioning the word “fifth” instead of pronouncing complete sentences. Mr. Jones said he invoked the Fifth Amendment nearly 100 times. Mr. Stone said he did that to every question asked.
Some high-profile witnesses came to that strategy after the committee initially recommended three witnesses for criminal contempt of Congress — former Trump adviser Stephen K. Bannon, former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and Mr. Clark — who declined to answer. to ask.
But before the committee forwarded a contempt recommendation to the full House, Mr. Clark’s attorney informed the panel that he would attend another interview in which he repeatedly called for his right to self-incrimination. That effectively put an end to the possible contempt charge against him.
Despite the refusal of some high-profile witnesses to answer questions, the commission has used other tactics to get answers, including questioning lower-ranking staffers. The panel also discussed the possibility of granting immunity to some witnesses to encourage them to participate, a strategy used dozens of times during Congress’ investigation into the Iran-contra scandal in the 1980s.
The House committee has said it wants information from Mr Flynn as he attended a meeting in the Oval Office on Dec. 18, 2020, where participants discussed how voting machines were confiscated, a national emergency was declared, certain emergency powers for the national security and continued to spread the false idea that the elections had been tainted by widespread fraud.
That meeting came after Mr Flynn gave an interview to the right-wing media site Newsmax, in which he spoke about the alleged precedent for deploying military forces and declaring martial law to “repeat” the election.
The Aftermath of Capitol Riot: Key Developments
After the statement on Thursday, Mr. Warrington took offense at what he said were insinuations by committee staff that Mr. Flynn’s “decision not to answer their questions constituted an admission of guilt”.
“The committee’s view that invoking the Fifth Amendment constitutes an admission of guilt runs counter to nearly 250 years of US jurisprudence and constitutes a disturbing denial of the meaning and existence of this vital constitutional right,” said Mr Warrington. .
Mr Flynn sued the committee to try to block her subpoena, and Mr Warrington argued that the panel should have waited to impeach Mr Flynn until his lawsuit was resolved. He also accused the committee of basing some of its questions on information from “edge news and conspiracy websites and rumours.”