than "ranking member."
The resolution forming the committee authorizes the committee to compel witnesses to appear for depositions through subpoena. The chairman has that authority in consultation with the ranking member. Because the committee does not have a ranking member due to its composition problems, there has, by definition, been no consultation between the chairman and the ranking member. This lack of consultation invalidates the subpoena. The subpoena was not properly issued.
Once again, I want to note Ms. McCallum is here today and is not asserting that objection today to not appear or to not testify, but is merely preserving that objection in case it needs to be raised in the future.
The third objection is Ms. McCallum's subpoena is not supported by a committee function.
We acknowledge the committee is tasked with investigating the causes of January 6th, and we are aware of the general assertions of the committee that this will entail an investigation into the certification of election results and allegations of election irregularities.
However, information regarding allegations of election irregularities and arguments regarding election results certification is already well-known through public litigation, public statements, and media statements from numerous individuals.
Our position is the committee has all the information it needs to inform its inquiry into what potential legislation in this area may be necessary, and there is no need to probe the internal operations of a major Presidential campaign through this witness.
We do not believe Ms. McCallum's subpoena is in furtherance of a legitimate committee function. And, once again, we are just asserting this objection to preserve it for the record, not to prevent Ms. McCallum from appearing today or from answering
