Lawyer accuses January 6 committee of ‘false’ accusations and distortions

LAttorney Ken Klukowski accused the Jan. 6 House Select Committee of peddling a “false narrative” about him during a public hearing last Thursday and demanded that he release the full transcripts.

Last week, during the panel’s fifth public hearing, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) indicated that Klukowski was serving as something of an intermediary for the architects of a plan to “cancel” the 2020 election by favor of then-President Donald Trump. However, Klukowski insists he disagreed with the theory put forward, to reject voters from battleground states won by President Joe Biden, and was just doing his job.

JIM JORDAN BLASTS JAN. 6 COMMITTEE: INVESTIGATORS ‘ALTERED EVIDENCE AND LIED’

“The January 6 Committee falsely accused me on Thursday of being an intermediary in a plot to annul the 2020 elections. This accusation is false in both outline and detail,” he said in a statement. by Breitbart. “The information produced from these efforts completely contradicts the Committee’s statements regarding my actions, but the Committee has chosen to keep this information to itself rather than share it with the public.”

A centerpiece of the fifth public hearing was a letter that former Justice Department official Jeff Clark sought to send to Georgia election officials, saying the department had uncovered ‘significant concerns’ about the election of State. In the end, senior department officials refused to sign the letter, and it was never sent.

Cheney suggested that Klukowski helped draft the letter for Clark, who was his boss, and worked with Trump-linked attorney John Eastman, who had formulated many of the legal frameworks that Trump’s inner circle considered. when he sought to contest the election.

“The committee also learned that Mr. Clark was working with another department attorney named Ken Klukowski, who wrote this letter to Georgia with Mr. Clark,” Cheney said, according at NPR. “Mr. Klukowski also worked with John Eastman, who we showed you during our hearing last week, was a key architect of President Trump’s plan to void the election. The letter from Georgia we discussed speaks specifically to some of Dr. Eastman’s theories.”

Klukowski countered that he had been assigned to work under Clark at the time and pointed out that “the letter was Clark’s idea, largely dictated or described by him”. He added that at the time he had been under the false impression that senior Justice Department officials, such as Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, would approve of the letter.

“My role as a subordinate was to validate his dictations and outlines in writing and complete legal subpoenas under the direction of my then boss in a single day,” he said. “I had no knowledge at the time that neither General Rosen nor his deputy intended to sign such a letter. letter.”

Additionally, Klukowski pointed out that he disagreed with Eastman’s legal theories on the election.

“As I testified before the Committee, I disagreed with John Eastman’s theory of the Vice President’s powers during the Jan. 6 Joint Session of Congress. My view is – and has always been – that because the Constitution specifies that Congress sets the date for the Electoral College to vote, any electoral challenges in court or direct action by state legislatures to appoint voters must occur no later than December 14 2020,” he said.

CLICK HERE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The Washington Examiner contacted Klukowski and a representative of the January 6 committee for comment.

Klukowski is not the first person to challenge the panel’s account of the testimony or the events. Earlier this month, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) slammed the committee for posting an edited text message between him and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. The committee has since apologized for this error. Former Trump spokesman Jason Miller does the same accused the committee to show an excerpt from his statement taken out of context.

On Monday, the committee announced an unexpected hearing on Tuesday to uncover “newly obtained evidence.”

Jon J. Epps