Gowdy: Lynch’s Testimony Was ‘A Total Waste Of Time And A Total Disservice’

Screen Grab FNC

Steve Guest Media Reporter
Font Size:

Rep. Trey Gowdy blasted Attorney General Loretta Lynch on Wednesday, arguing her testimony before Congress was “a total waste of time and a total disservice to my fellow citizens.

During testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, Rep. David Trott said that Lynch refused to answer questions 74 times during the hearing. (RELATED: Issa: Lynch ‘Misled The American People’ About Hillary FBI Investigation)

In the hearing, Lynch provided answers such as: “I as Attorney General am not able to provide any further comment on the facts or substance of the investigation” and “Again, I would have to refer to you Director Comey’s statements for the basis for his recommendation” and “Again, I would refer you to Director Comey for any further explanation as to the basis for his recommendation.” (RELATED: Comey Confirms Hillary Clinton Lied To The Public About Her Emails [VIDEO])

Appearing on Fox News’s “America’s Newsroom,” when asked by host Bill Hemmer what he learned from Lynch’s testimony, the South Carolina congressman replied, “Nothing. It was a total waste of time and a total disservice to my fellow citizens.”

“Prosecutors have  a lot of power in our justice system,” Gowdy said. “And it’s not asking too much to ask prosecutors to explain their charging decisions or their decision not to charge. She could have answered every one of those questions. She just chose not to. There’s no legal prohibition. There’s no grand jury prohibition, there’s no rule that doesn’t allow her to answer the questions. She just chose not to.”

Gowdy went on to argue, “What we asked her to do was apply the facts to the law. And it’s not that complicated. You take the facts as Director Comey gave them to us and as he found and you apply the law which is public and everybody knows what it is. But the facts are embarrassing for her presidential candidate.”

“So discussing the facts necessarily leads to more questions like if you have all those good facts, why didn’t you indict,” Gowdy said. “She doesn’t do well in that conversation.”

Hemmer followed up, “So your suggestion in that answer is that she is protecting Hillary Clinton. True?

“That is the only reasonable interpretation of what we witnessed yesterday,” Gowdy replied. “There is no other reason for a detached neutral attorney general not to say, ‘This is the law, these are the facts, we applied them and this is the result we got.’ Jim Comey did it last week. I disagree with his conclusion. But give the man credit for going through the analysis. [Lynch] wouldn’t go through the analysis.”

Follow Steve on Twitter and Facebook