October 4, 2011

Holder, Gunwalker, Fast and Furious: Definitely Impeachable, Into the Realm of Criminal (Update: No Do-overs, Eric)

Filed under: 2nd Amendment,Activism,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 12:45 pm

Via Bob Owens at Pajamas Media (internal links in original):

Gunwalker: Holder Appears To Be Fast, Furious, and Finished
New documents indicate that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder more than likely perjured himself in congressional testimony about Operation Fast and Furious earlier this year.

Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News and William LaJeunesse of Fox News have been the only mainstream media reporters diligently working on the most important scandal in White House history, and it is no surprise that they concurrently released information indicating that the attorney general, who claimed in direct testimony on May 3 of this year in front of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that he first heard about Operation Fast and Furious “over the last few weeks,” had actually been briefed on the program in a memo by the director of the National Drug Intelligence Center almost a year earlier on July 5, 2010.

copy of the heavily redacted weekly report posted by CBS News offers direct evidence that not only was the attorney general briefed on Operation Fast and Furious, but that he was briefed on it regularly and was well aware that the program was sending thousands of weapons into the hands of the Sinaloa cartel.

Scooter Libby went to jail for far, far less (“lying” to Tim Russert?).

Martha Stewart, among several others, went to jail for something quite similar — lying to investigators. That the “investigators” are members of Congress in Holder’s case and not FBI agents as in Stewart’s case hardly matters, given that testimonies in both instances were given under penalty of perjury.

It matters far more that Eric Holder is the sitting Attorney General of the United States, and clearly should be held to at least as high a standard as a kitchen, housewares, and home-decorating queen — and that a sitting president was impeached by the House (but, sadly, not convicted by the Senate) 12-1/2 years ago for perjury.

On Monday night, Justice Department officials told CBS News that “Holder misunderstood that question from the committee – he did know about Fast and Furious – just not the details.” That would appear to be the posturing of someone who wants to be fired or resign — because the other choices are much, much worse.

______________________________________

UPDATE, 3 p.m.: Via the LA Times, the excuse cited in the previous paragraph doesn’t pass the stench test —

On May 3, he was asked by Issa when he first learned about Fast and Furious. “I’m not sure of the exact date,” Holder testified. “But I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”

Justice Department officials said Holder was referring to the date when he first learned about the operational details of Fast and Furious, not the program itself.

There’s no “hedging” (a word the LAT used in a Holder pic caption) around “first learned.” If he had meant that he “first learned about the details,” he would have said “I first learned about the details.” Otherwise, we have to assume that he was referring to when he first learned of the existence of the operation.

Holder doesn’t deserve any kind of a do-over. Scooter Libby didn’t get one, and Martha Stewart didn’t get one.

Share

3 Comments

  1. Barry Bonds might be a closer fit to Holder than Scooter Libby, as Barry did know and do the deed just as Holder did.

    http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2011-04-13-verdict-barry-bonds-guilty_N.htm

    “The odds are he will not get jail time, as athletes convicted of perjury (in the BALCO case) did not,” said Robert Talbot, a University of San Francisco law professor who expressed surprise at the verdict. “He will appeal, and there are grounds.”

    The obstruction-of-justice count requires the prosecution to prove the defendant “obstructed, influenced or impeded by knowingly giving material testimony that was intentionally evasive, false or misleading.”

    Juror cites evasive answers
    The charges against Bonds, who left baseball in 2007, stemmed from his 2003 testimony to a grand jury as part of the federal investigation into the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative (BALCO), which grew into the biggest sports-doping scandal in the country’s history. Indicted in November 2007, Bonds is the 11th to be convicted in the case and represents its conclusion…

    …In summation

    The verdict: A 12-person jury found Barry Bonds guilty on one count of obstruction of justice after four days of deliberation.

    Count 5, from indictment filed Nov. 15, 2007: On or about Dec. 4, 2003, in the Northern District of California, and elsewhere, the defendant, Barry Lamar Bonds, unlawfully, willfully, and knowingly, did corruptly endeavor to influence, obstruct and impede the due administration of justice, by knowingly giving Grand Jury testimony that was intentionally evasive, false, and misleading.

    Comment by dscott — October 4, 2011 @ 4:23 pm

  2. hat tip instapundit:

    http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2011/10/cbs-reporter-says-wh-screamed-at-her.html

    6:05 – Laura: So they were literally screaming at you?
    Attkisson: Yes. Well the DOJ woman was just yelling at me. The guy from the White House on Friday night literally screamed at me and cussed at me. [Laura: Who was the person? Who was the person at Justice screaming?] Eric Schultz. Oh, the person screaming was [DOJ spokeswoman] Tracy Schmaler, she was yelling not screaming. And the person who screamed at me was Eric Schultz at the White House.”

    The WH is feeling worried… You know when the target knows its painted when the octaves get up there. The question becomes, does this rate a C7 or C8?

    But then they should have something to be concerned:

    Gunwalker: House Wants Special Counsel To Investigate Eric Holder

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/gunwalker-house-wants-special-counsel-to-investigate-eric-holder/?singlepage=true

    Comment by dscott — October 4, 2011 @ 4:47 pm

  3. Agree. My point was that Libby went to jail for a far lesser “crime” which wouldn’t even be considered a crime by the person on the street.

    Comment by TBlumer — October 4, 2011 @ 4:50 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.