Holder offers to "compromise" with congress
For those of you who aren't political junkies, a fascinating power struggle is taking place right now on Capitol Hill, between attorney-general Eric Holder and congress, regarding whether congress can require an office of the government to produce documents that could show gross malfeasance in office.
Specifically, the notoriously goofy BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; old name; it has a new name now) a branch of the Justice Department, was running a harebrained scheme under which gun stores in Arizona were ordered to sell high-powered weapons to straw buyers, in violation of federal law. These guns were then re-sold to Mexican drug cartels and were subsequently used in numerous murders. At last estimate, 300 Mexican citizens and one U.S. agent had been killed by these guns.
A few good members of the BATF were stunned that their agency was doing this, and went public. The agency responded with firings, demotions and slanders.
With the newly-elected House having a Republican majority (thank you Lord!), a House committee began investigating. They asked Holder directly, "Did you approve of this program or know about it, and if so, when did you know?" Holder denied approving it or even knowing about it until mid-2011. As he told it, no one in his department had anything to do with the program--and no one authorized it.
However, the whistleblowers inside DOJ and BATF gave the committee copies of emails and letters showing this was a flat-out lie. Needless to say, this didn't sit well with the representatives.
Now, government--like all human enterprises--is filled with stupid ideas and programs, and that alone is obviously not a criminal offense. But since the program did in fact violate federal law, the representatives had a hard time believing some underling would take it on himself to do something like that without approval from the top. So either Holder was lying when he denied earlier knowledge of the program, or he was grossly incompetent to head the "justice" department.
Accordingly, congressman Darrell Issa--in his official capacity as head of a House committee--asked Holder to produce specific documents that the whistleblowers at Justice had told him implicated Holder and cronies.
Holder told Issa to pound sand.
Issa responded by telling Holder he would be charged with contempt of congress (is that really a big deal today?) if he refused the committee's request to do its job of monitoring government.
Finally yesterday Holder wrote Issa offering to "compromise" on the documents requested. The Democrat-loving media are characterizing his reply as a compromise, but it strikes me more as another GFY memo. His letter is here, and you need to read it to see how much of a "compromise" you think it is.
Moreover, in the letter Holder reiterates his earlier denials of any approval or knowledge before the matter was reported in the press. Thus it seems highly unlikely that he would turn over anything that would show this to be false.
Interesting. Like Watergate, except in Watergate no one was killed.
Specifically, the notoriously goofy BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; old name; it has a new name now) a branch of the Justice Department, was running a harebrained scheme under which gun stores in Arizona were ordered to sell high-powered weapons to straw buyers, in violation of federal law. These guns were then re-sold to Mexican drug cartels and were subsequently used in numerous murders. At last estimate, 300 Mexican citizens and one U.S. agent had been killed by these guns.
A few good members of the BATF were stunned that their agency was doing this, and went public. The agency responded with firings, demotions and slanders.
With the newly-elected House having a Republican majority (thank you Lord!), a House committee began investigating. They asked Holder directly, "Did you approve of this program or know about it, and if so, when did you know?" Holder denied approving it or even knowing about it until mid-2011. As he told it, no one in his department had anything to do with the program--and no one authorized it.
However, the whistleblowers inside DOJ and BATF gave the committee copies of emails and letters showing this was a flat-out lie. Needless to say, this didn't sit well with the representatives.
Now, government--like all human enterprises--is filled with stupid ideas and programs, and that alone is obviously not a criminal offense. But since the program did in fact violate federal law, the representatives had a hard time believing some underling would take it on himself to do something like that without approval from the top. So either Holder was lying when he denied earlier knowledge of the program, or he was grossly incompetent to head the "justice" department.
Accordingly, congressman Darrell Issa--in his official capacity as head of a House committee--asked Holder to produce specific documents that the whistleblowers at Justice had told him implicated Holder and cronies.
Holder told Issa to pound sand.
Issa responded by telling Holder he would be charged with contempt of congress (is that really a big deal today?) if he refused the committee's request to do its job of monitoring government.
Finally yesterday Holder wrote Issa offering to "compromise" on the documents requested. The Democrat-loving media are characterizing his reply as a compromise, but it strikes me more as another GFY memo. His letter is here, and you need to read it to see how much of a "compromise" you think it is.
Moreover, in the letter Holder reiterates his earlier denials of any approval or knowledge before the matter was reported in the press. Thus it seems highly unlikely that he would turn over anything that would show this to be false.
Interesting. Like Watergate, except in Watergate no one was killed.
posted by SF at
8:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home