Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., on Thursday wrote a lengthy letter to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, unrest at the Capitol, detailing his feelings about being subpoenaed for testimony and questioning the fairness of hearings that don’t provide opportunities for witness cross-examination.
Brooks also submitted a series of conditions for providing sworn testimony to the House panel, all of which were available for public consumption on his Twitter account.
The letter initially reads:
“I understand the Committee wishes to depose me concerning January 6 events and have heard rumor the Committee ‘issued’ a subpoena for my appearance. I have on countless occasions been in public venues in Alabama, in my Congressional office, on the House Floor, and numerous places in between, yet no Committee subpoena has been served. This is puzzling.
“I don’t believe I have knowledge of January 6 events that are not already known or that add to what the Committee already knows.
”As the Committee knows, I have already made multiple, lengthy sworn statements in the Eric Swalwell lawsuit in federal court and made multiple, lengthy written and oral statements elsewhere.
”Presumably, the Committee has already obtained and reviewed these statements,” said Brooks, who recently lost Alabama’s GOP runoff primary for a U.S. Senate seat to Republican Katie Britt.
“I have numerous reservations about the Committee. Here are a few examples:
- “The Committee refused to seat all of the majority party’s Republican appointees (a first in the history of the House of Representatives). This means minority party witnesses who might illuminate different views are less likely to be called and appropriate cross-examination questions are not asked, thereby failing to reveal truth (the purported goal of the Committee). No court of law would use such a flawed process. Why? Because judicial processes are designed to find truth.”
- “The Committee insists on doing the public’s business (deposing witnesses) clandestinely and in secrecy. Hence, the Committee’s processes conflict with time-honored judicial processes designed to maximize the likelihood that viewers reach a fair, just and accurate impression of the truth of a matter.”
- “I have read about leaked witness testimony. This distorts truth perception among the American people because the testimony leaked is in bits and pieces, not the whole, thereby depriving Americans of testimony and facts needed to make an informed decision about January 6 events.”
- “A witness’s demeanor is critical to determining veracity and truth. This is one of the reason why judges and juries responsible for discerning truth view witness testimony in person. Failure to observe live testimony, in its entirety, reduces the ability of Americans to determine the truth of this matter.”
Regarding the conditions for offering sworn testimony, Brooks is seeking:
(1) A public hearing: The testimony must be provided in an open setting, meaning that TV/Web viewers would have live access to Brooks’ comments.
(2) Jan. 6 scope: Every question must have relevance to the events of that day in 2021.
(3) Questions by congressional leaders only; congressional staffers and any other non-elected leaders would not be permitted to submit queries to Brooks.
(4) Document disclosure: Brooks would require a minimum of seven days of preparation time, before commenting on prior statements, electronic communications, written communications, etc.
(5) Deposition date options: The testimony must be provided on days when Brooks was already slated to be in Washington.