A Congressman Asked Matt Whitaker About the Mueller Probe. The AG’s Response Drew Gasps.

The moment brought loud gasps at a congressional hearing.

Tom Williams/Zumapress

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Testifying on Friday before the House Judiciary Committee, acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker replied to a question by the panel’s chair, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), with a response that stunned the room and drew audible gasps.

As the temporary head of the Justice Department, Whitaker now oversees Robert Mueller’s probe into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Given his critical comments about the Mueller probe before joining the DOJ—he called the investigation a “witch-hunt” in one op-ed—Democrats have been eager to question him about his views on the inquiry and any actions he’s taken in connection with it since taking the helm of the agency.

But when Nadler tried to ask Whitaker whether he had ever been asked to approve any of Mueller’s actions, the interim AG declined to answer, telling the committee chair that his allotted five minutes were up. 

In addition to the uproar at the hearing, journalists who cover Congress, including CNN’s Phil Mattingly, were gobsmacked by Whitaker’s chutzpah:

Whitaker is unlikely to be formally rebuked for his intransigence. While a congressional hearing witness can be held in contempt of Congress, such cases are typically referred to the DOJ—which could mean that Whitaker would have to decide to prosecute himself.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend