Eric Holder on Contempt Vote: I'm Getting Back to Work, Republicans Should Too

By Jeralyn, Section Obama Administration
Posted on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 04:14:13 PM EST
Tags: Eric Holder (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Update: Via Politico: Holder's hanging tough. He issued this statement (video here):

[The vote to hold him in contempt] "may make for good political theater in the minds of some, but it is - at base - both a crass effort and a grave disservice to the American people."
"Whatever the path that this matter will now follow, it will not distract me or the men and women of the Department of Justice from the important tasks that are our responsibility," Holder said. "A great deal of work for the American people remains to be done - I'm getting back to it. I suggest that those who orchestrated today's vote do the same."

The House has approved a civil contempt of Congress resolution against Holder. The vote was 258-95. Earlier, via Politico:

The House has voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, the latest fallout from the "Fast and Furious" scandal. The vote was 255-67, with 17 Democrats joining the majority Republicans in voting yes.

[More...]

Democrats walked out during the vote in protest.

Holder should not give in to the Republican's whine-fest. They could care less about guns going to Mexico. They care about creating an issue in November.

The Leadership Conference on Human and Civil Rights:

In the 16-month investigation by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Democrats were not allowed to call one witness; and they were refused the chance to call former key players in these operations to testify, including former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and former ATF Director Ken Melson. The oversight committee has no credibility in calling this an investigation; it’s pure political theatre.

Also today, New e-mails were disclosed today showing Holder didn't know and demanded answers.

Republicans make disastrous choices when they get to appoint Attorney Generals: John Ashcroft? Alberto Gonzales? Just like they make bad choices when they get to appoint federal judges and Supreme Court Justices.

The Republicans are really showing their desperation. At least we get a chance to vote them out in November. And we will.

Memo to Eric Holder: Hang tough.

< Supreme Court Upholds Affordable Care Act | City of Sanford Wants Help With Expenses of George Zimmerman Prosecution >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Eric Holder on Contempt Vote: I'm Getting Back to Work, Republicans Should Too | 27 comments (27 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

If today's contempt vote (3.67 / 3) (#7)
by NYShooter on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 12:42:15 AM EST

didn't put the final nail in Obama's "working together" delusion, nothing will. Holder did his part, now it's time for "O" to pick up the spear and drive it right through the lying, corrupt, anti-American mutants masquerading as a political party.

I don't care if Obama doesn't get a single bill passed the next four years. If he spends every day of his Presidency calling out those Neanderthal heathens for what they are, the Jim Jones Party of America, he will have left a great legacy.

How can anyone defend the DOJ's coverup? (2.00 / 1) (#9)
by lousy1 on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 05:57:45 AM EST

As a mildly interested spectator, it seems that the DOJ was obviously engaged in a cover up (witness the withdrawn letter) of facts pertinent to a real crime; the murder of an ATF agent. Once an agency is caught lying it is disingenuous to assert that they are thoroughly investigating themselves internally, particularly when the investigation is shielded.

Its hard to envision a more compelling candidate for congressional oversight. The protracted, obstinacy and delay by the DOJ is obvious.

The DOJ must fess up and deliver all material even remotely relevant to this investigation. They have lost the public trust.

The underlying facts of this case are certainly more relevant to most Americans than the question of what lawyer/ client communications are privileged as in the case of Harriet Myers where there was no underlying crime.

The contempt citation was required and overdue.

BTW
Does anybody besides me think that the CBC's walkout was based solely on race. Would they have walked out had the AG been of Japanese extraction? I find this distasteful. The facts are more than sufficient for the citation.

do you also think the contempt citation itself (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by DFLer on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 07:03:03 AM EST

may have been based solely on race?


I don't (none / 0) (#12)
by jbindc on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 07:25:20 AM EST

I think they want the documents and a privilege log because they know the administration screwed up big time and it could be embarassing and could possibly be an election issue. (Which is not to say that if the administration screwed up, it also shouldn't be held to account). It wouldn't have mattered if the AG was black, white, or green with purple polka dots.


Nice guess, but (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by gyrfalcon on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 11:09:12 PM EST

Wrong.

This well-sourced article in Fortune magazine, of all things, blows the whole premise of the Issa "investigation" right out of the water.


I think that's what you want... (3.50 / 2) (#16)
by Anne on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 09:48:24 PM EST

you seem as anxious for it as any Republican.


That would be a great theory (none / 0) (#25)
by jbindc on Mon Jul 02, 2012 at 06:33:04 AM EST

Wrong, on your part of course, but a great theory.

I say, a border patrol agent is dead because of guns we sold to drug runners.

You apparently think there is nothing to hide. you are entitled to your opinion of course, but I think you are terribly wrong.


: Given that those who seemed most (none / 0) (#26)
by Anne on Mon Jul 02, 2012 at 08:02:50 AM EST

outraged and apoplectic over the administration's failure to turn over documents seem to have had a lot of their anger cooled and their desire for information reduced by having held the attorney general in contempt of Congress, I would say that this has been a year-long show with a goal of embarrassing the administration.
As for theories, you once again have put words in my mouth that just weren't there. My comment had to do with your inability to see that while there very well may be something there that needs to be examined, that's not what drives Republicans; they don't care about gun-walking, they care about the things they always care about: embarrassing a Democratic administration.
When your love for punishment meets Republicans, you end up sounding like a cheerleader not just for their fake law-and-order show, but for all the other repressive, restrictive, austere goals they have for the lives of those with the least power.

: "We" sold no guns to anybody (none / 0) (#27)
by gyrfalcon on Mon Jul 02, 2012 at 11:23:12 PM EST

in this operation.
For God's sake, go read some other sources, particularly but not exclusively the Fortune article, before you "opine" any further on this because you don't have your facts straight. You're regurgitating Issa-generated misdirection and flat-out lies.

I think I pointed out why the contempt charge was (none / 0) (#13)
by lousy1 on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 07:57:17 AM EST

warranted.

I don't remember race being a remote issue. However if you can find evidence that race played a important part in the deliberations please feel free to edify me.


: Why the sudden need for "evidence"? (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Yman on Sat Jun 30, 2012 at 04:07:24 PM EST

You cited no evidence for your speculation that the walkout was based solely on race.

Darrell, is that you? (5.00 / 2) (#17)
by gyrfalcon on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 11:03:23 PM EST

the documents (5.00 / 3) (#20)
by Tov on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 11:11:55 PM EST

at issue are not relevant to the initial investigation of Fast and Furious. They are dept. documents relating to the inner deliberations within the JD concerning the response to Sen.Grassley's letter which the JD admitted was factually incorrect. That is why they are covered by the deliberative process privilege invoked by POTUS. IMO this is a fishing expedition. If Con. Issa was truly concerned with the errors made by the ATF and others he would wait until the IG's report is complete and try to draft legislation that prevents this from happening again. There is a very interesting piece of investigative journalism in Fortune magazine on FandF which debunks many myths about this sad program. BTW Fortune mag. is hardly a liberal leaning publication. I choose to wait for the investigation to conclude before charging Holder with contempt. I predicted in an earlier post that the DA for DC would not prosecute the AJ. I was right.


Oh puhleeze! (2.00 / 2) (#15)
by lobo58 on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 09:28:11 PM EST

Had Holder and Obama taken a road trip to Guadalajara and capped 300 Mexicans and two border guards, on their own, over a long weekend, and the entire hunting trip had been filmed, you'd still be claiming there was nothing to see.

Just release the documents the committee requires and the problem goes away.

Or does lying to congress only matter if you're a MLB pitcher?

The criminal contempt (none / 0) (#1)
by jbindc on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 04:17:32 PM EST

Will go nowhere. It gets referred to the US Attorney for DC, who works for (wait for it)....Eric Holder (and is an Obama appointee).

The civil contempt allows the Committee to file suit forcing Holder to turn over the documents and a privilege log.

Just like they make bad choices when they get to appoint federal judges and Supreme Court Justices.

Seems like one particular Bush appointee saved Obama's bacon today.

: I think the referenced (none / 0) (#3)