Durbin Questions Election Denier & Conspiracy Theorist, Jeffrey Clark, During Latest Arctic Frost Hearing

Durbin Questions Election Denier & Conspiracy Theorist, Jeffrey Clark, During Latest Arctic Frost Hearing

Despite public records about Mr. Clark's interactions with the President and others in December 2020 and January 2021, he refused to answer Durbin's questions, citing "privileged matters"

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today questioned Jeffrey Clark at a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing entitled "Arctic Frost: Conspiracy and Coordination Against President Trump and the American Right." Mr. Clark is an environmental lawyer who was the Acting Assistant Attorney General for DOJ's Civil Division at the end of 2020 and played a key role in President Trump's failed efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Last year, the D.C. Board on Professional Responsibility recommended that Mr. Clark be disbarred, a decision that Mr. Clark has appealed.

Durbin first asked Mr. Clark about his conversations with President Trump.

"The White House Visitors Logs only appear to record appointments with you on December 22, 2020, and January 3, 2021, but we know that you had more conversations with President Trump between those dates, because Acting Deputy Attorney General Donoghue reprimanded you on January 2, 2021, for continuing to violate the DOJ-White House Contacts Policy. Mr. Clark, what was your primary form of communication with President Trump during this time?" Durbin asked.

Mr. Clark refused to answer.

"[Was] there a conversation where President Trump indicated he would appoint you Acting Attorney General in person or not?" Durbin asked.

Again, Mr. Clark did not respond to Durbin's question and claimed Durbin was asking about matters that are "privileged."

"You have avoided answering key questions by consistently invoking the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination while under oath. However, like nearly 1,600 January 6 insurrectionists and other election deniers, you now [have] received an inappropriate but equally legally valid presidential pardon for your conduct. And now you have no basis to invoke the privilege-so can you explain to us why you won't even tell us if you met with the President during this period?" Durbin asked.

Mr. Clark responded, "I didn't invoke that privilege."

Despite public records from December 2020 and January 2021 documenting his actions, Mr. Clark continued to dodge questions from Durbin, claiming that they related to "privileged" matters.

Durbin then asked Mr. Clark if he had reached out to Kash Patel in January 2021. Instead of answering, Mr. Clark went on a rant about Special Counsel Jack Smith. Finally, Mr. Clark responded that he did not speak to Mr. Patel but acknowledged that he did speak to then-Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe.

Durbin then asked Mr. Clark about election conspiracy theories that Rudy Giuliani was peddling, including the claim that Italian IT contractors worked with the CIA to use military satellites to manipulate American voting machines.

"Did you make a public statement that this Italian IT contractor conspiracy theory needed to be investigated?" Durbin asked.

Mr. Clark responded, "I did not to my knowledge or memory. I investigated it after… and I don't believe that is a valid theory."

Video of Durbin's questions in Committee is available here.

Audio of Durbin's questions in Committee is available here.

Footage of Durbin's questions in Committee is available here for TV Stations.

In November 2021, Durbin's staff released a report, Subverting Justice: How the Former President and His Allies Pressured DOJ to Overturn the 2020 Election, which highlighted the extent to which Mr. Clark pressured Justice Department leaders to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

In February, Durbin led all Senate Judiciary Democrats in again calling for Smith to testify publicly under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee, as he has offered to do, as well as requesting unredacted versions of the Special Counsel's report, including Volume II, which has been blocked from public release. Today's subcommittee hearing is the third in a series of eight announced subcommittee hearings to relitigate the 2020 presidential election, despite numerous other issues worth examining within the Committee's jurisdiction.

-30-