First formal steps taken to charge Holder with Contempt of Congress over Gunrunning scandal

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57426710-503544/house-gop-to-distribute-draft-contempt-citation-against-eric-holder-over-gunwalking/?tag=stack

(CBS News) Republicans on the House Oversight Committee were to take the first formal step Thursday toward contempt proceedings against Attorney General Eric Holder over the Fast and Furious "gunwalking" operation, CBS News has learned.

The case for a citation declaring Holder in contempt will be laid out in a briefing paper and 48-page draft citation distributed to Democrats and Republicans on the committee. CBS News has obtained copies of both documents. In them, Republican members use strong language to accuse Holder of obstructing the committee's investigation, which is now in its second year.

The documents allege that the Justice Department has issued, "false denials, given answers intended to misdirect investigators, sought to intimidate witnesses, unlawfully withheld subpoenaed documents, and waited to be confronted with indisputable evidence before acknowledging uncomfortable facts."

Gov't answers CBS News "Fast and Furious" records requests with blank pages
Republicans prep contempt citation against Holder over Fast and Furious
ATF let "gunwalking" suspect go after arrest

"The Justice Department's demonstrable contempt for the congressional investigation has inflicted harm on the people of two nations seeking the truth - and very pointedly on the family of fallen Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and ATF whistleblowers who now face retaliation in the wake of their own heroic efforts to expose wrongdoing," says the brief to be distributed Thursday.

For its part, the Justice Department says it has complied with the congressional investigations, led by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa).

"We've done twice-a-month (document) productions since last year, and the Attorney General has testified about this matter no less than seven times," a Justice official tells CBS News.

There have been at least three House contempt actions against the Executive Branch in the past 30 years.

In 1983, Congress found EPA administrator Anne Gorsuch Burford in contempt for failing to produce subpoenaed documents.

In 1998, the GOP-controlled House Oversight committee found Attorney General Janet Reno in contempt for failing to comply with a subpoena on campaign finance law violations.

In 2008, the Democrat-controlled House found former White House counsel Harriet Miers and Chief of Staff John Bolton in contempt for failing to cooperate with an inquiry into whether a purge of federal prosecutors was politically motivated.

In 2008, the Democratic-led Oversight Committee found two White House officials in contempt in the probe of Bush Administration firings of U.S. Attorneys. Congress went to federal court to seek enforcement of that contempt action, but a compromise was reached with the Executive Branch before any court decision was final.

**Melissia**

Ah yes, a witch hunt.

**LordofHats**

Well, step one is to see if he weighs as much as a duck.

**Frazzled**

THREE dead now in the US linked to those weapons. No count on the number of Mexican dead. Thats no witch hunt.

LordofHats wrote:Well, step one is to see if he weighs as much as a duck.

I think the essential thing to ask yourself is, if he turns you into a newt, can you get better?

**Melissia**

Frazzled wrote:Thats no witch hunt.

The republicans wouldn't give a damn about it if it were an R administration that did this.

**Frazzled**

You're right because they aren't stupid enough to do that. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. I don't think he's stupid at all, in fact probably a lot smarter than me (thats not much of an accomplishment...). I'm just giving him the benefit of the doubt, as otherwise he had the intentions all the supposed crazy Second Amendment guys were saying.

**Melissia**

Frazzled wrote:You're right because they aren't stupid enough to do that.

If you had said "too stupid", I might happen to agree with you, but no.

**mattyrm**

You two, you fight like cat and sausage dog.

**Frazzled**

mattyrm wrote: You two, you fight like cat and sausage dog.

I always miss TBone and the Rocket a lot about this time of the week.

**ShumaGorath**

Frazzled wrote:THREE dead now in the US linked to those weapons. No count on the number of Mexican dead. Thats no witch hunt.

Where are the WMDs fraz? Wonder how many people died there. If this isn't a witch hunt than you better expect hundreds of inquiries shot back by the democrats.

**HonorHarrington**

Melissia wrote:Ah yes, a witch hunt.

It's funny I heard someone with a D next to their name say that on a reel on the morning news and here you are saying the same thing. Do you have opinions of your own?
Just because you disagree with it doesn't make it a witch hunt. People have died, officials behaved inappropriately. Holding them responsible isn't a witch hunt it's balanced government and accountability.

**biccat**

Witch hunts aren't necessarily bad if there really are witches. Or, in this case, accessories to murder.

It's quite amusing that some people think this is OK simply because of the actor's political affiliation.

**SilverMK2**

HonorHarrington wrote:Do you have opinions of your own?

Surprisingly people can have the same opinion as others on certain topics without being some kind of mind slave

**LordofHats**

SilverMK2 wrote:
HonorHarrington wrote:Do you have opinions of your own?

Surprisingly people can have the same opinion as others on certain topics without being some kind of mind slave

He said to get an opinion, not to make up absurdities

Where I come from we call that plagerism /sarcasm

**Ouze**

I'd like to hear more about why, precisely, he is in contempt before I make up my mind on this. As I understand it he's testified before Congress half a dozen times, right? On the other hand, if he showed up and gave them the finger 6 times...

Besides, didn't we establish in the Bush administration that the executive doesn't even have the produce the AG at all? Or do I misremember that?

**Frazzled**

Ouze wrote:I'd like to hear more about why, precisely, he is in contempt before I make up my mind on this. As I understand it he's testified before Congress half a dozen times, right? On the other hand, if he showed up and gave them the finger 6 times...

Besides, didn't we establish in the Bush administration that the executive doesn't even have the produce the AG at all? Or do I misremember that?

He was caught lying, then he started stonewalling.

**HonorHarrington**

Frazzled wrote:
Ouze wrote:I'd like to hear more about why, precisely, he is in contempt before I make up my mind on this. As I understand it he's testified before Congress half a dozen times, right? On the other hand, if he showed up and gave them the finger 6 times...

Besides, didn't we establish in the Bush administration that the executive doesn't even have the produce the AG at all? Or do I misremember that?

He was caught lying, then he started stonewalling.

Was he really lying or just passing false information that was given to him. If he was just responsible and not directly involved that could be different.

**Frazzled**

HonorHarrington wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Ouze wrote:I'd like to hear more about why, precisely, he is in contempt before I make up my mind on this. As I understand it he's testified before Congress half a dozen times, right? On the other hand, if he showed up and gave them the finger 6 times...

Besides, didn't we establish in the Bush administration that the executive doesn't even have the produce the AG at all? Or do I misremember that?

He was caught lying, then he started stonewalling.

Was he really lying or just passing false information that was given to him. If he was just responsible and not directly involved that could be different.

Stuff like saying he never knew about it until XX when ther are memos to him nearly a year before, that sort of thing. Its another one of those if you had just talked about the original issue and not tried to stonewall it wouldn't have caught. Of course the MSM tried to bury it.