Snyder will soon be served with a summons to swear an oath to the committee next week, as announced by committee chairman Carolyn B. Maloney (DN.Y.).
The deposit of the Congressional Committee shall be in private, with the attorneys of both parties to the Committee present, as well as the person to be removed and his or her attorney. The interview will be fully transcribed; it may also be in the video. It is up to the Commission to decide whether to make the transcript and / or videotape public.
Given that the committee released more than 700 pages of documents related to the investigation this week, including full transcripts of sworn statements by former commanders Brian Lafemina and Dave Pauken, the committee also appears to be forwarding Snyder’s statement.
Snyder has little to do with compliance.
Like all Americans, Snyder has the constitutional right to defend his Fifth Amendment if he refuses to answer questions, citing his right not to blame himself. However, according to David Rapallo, a professor of law at Georgetown and a former director of personnel at the House of Representatives’ supervisory board, this privilege is not available just because someone can argue over potential issues.
“If he wants to win the fifth, he has every right to do so, although he has not announced that he intends to do so,” Rapallo said on Thursday. “Others have done it.”
Snyder could also try to agree on specific disposal options, such as timing.
Rapallo said lawmakers are generally trying to meet reasonable requests. However, in this case, Snyder may be refused to appear twice.
The first reason mentioned by his lawyer – that he had a conflict with the date of the hearing on 22 June – has now been addressed, with Maloney announcing that his deposit will take place next week.
The second reason given by Snyder ‘s lawyer – that he requested pre – copies of the documents on which the hearing was based – also seems controversial now that the Commission has posted the documents on its website. Moreover, Snyder may have run out of the goodwill of the panel’s democratic leaders, who want to question him about his role in both the long history of job complaints and the recent attempt to obstruct the committee’s “shelter” investigation into the NFL. investigation ”to intimidate and silence former employees.
Maloney referred to the same plans to issue a subpoena, stating that Snyder was “more concerned with defending himself than being cleansed before the American public.”
Maloney took the step after asking Goodell what the NFL was going to do to hold Snyder accountable to Congress for refusing to testify.
“Madam President, I am not responsible for whether he appears before Congress,” Goodell said. “It’s not my choice. It’s his choice.”
Asked about Snyder’s refusal to appear, Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) Said: “We live in a time when there are people who feel they are above the law. Unfortunately, this feeling of impunity and arrogance is a bit socially contagious today.
Raskin noted that the vast majority of people who were invited to the January 6 selection committee, where he also works, have resigned and cooperated, although a dozen have not.< /p>
“Maybe Dan Snyder took his advice from those who think they are somehow superior to the people in Congress,” Raskin said.
Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.): “Congress with a nose thumb is not a good strategy.”
According to Rapallo, if Snyder firmly refuses to comply with Maloney’s summons, “it would be a pretty serious move.”
Then the Commission would have a couple of options.
Congress may despise him. Rapallo said the committee could also expand its scope and invite other people around Snyder to a statement and a hearing: his assistants, deputies and others who may have information.
“It’s a tactical issue, but if he had attended the session, he would have confessed in a few hours,” Rapallo said. “He now faces a deposit, which usually takes much longer to be carried out by the committee’s lawyers, and he will be summoned. And even then, it is certainly possible for the Commission to hear him after the deposit. Witnesses facing this type of concluded that it is in their interest to cooperate and to be heard.
It is believed that any NFL rules would not require Snyder to comply with a congressional summons or punish him. The NFL declined to comment on Thursday after hearing Goodell’s answer to Maloney’s question.
The commanders’ property representative did not respond to the request for comment on Thursday.
In the end, Snyder could simply get bogged down in prolonging negotiations and challenging any subsequent court rulings in an effort to reach the by-elections in November, in the hope that Republicans will gain parliamentary control.
If that happens, James Comer (R-Ky.), Who has consistently mocked investigating the workplace of commanders as a waste of legislators ‘time and taxpayers’ money, is likely to replace Maloney’s House of Commons oversight committee.
“If Republicans take back Parliament in January, the monitoring Republicans will not continue to investigate Washington commanders and will return the committee to its primary task of eradicating waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government,” Austin Hacker said. , a committee spokesman for the republic said on Thursday.
Paul Kane and Nicki Jhabvala contributed to this report.
#failing #House #panel #Daniel #Snyder #increased #legal #risk