Whitehouse has to approve contempt vote?

[bornhunter04]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/20/house-republicans-tee-up-imminent-contempt-vote-against-holder/

 

 

President Obama has granted an 11th-hour request by Attorney General Eric Holder to exert executive privilege over Fast and Furious documents, a last-minute maneuver that appears unlikely to head off a contempt vote against Holder by Republicans in the House.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is expected to forge ahead Wednesday morning with its meeting on the contempt resolution anyway.

If the vote proceeds, Republicans have more than enough votes on committee to pass the resolution. However, Holder would not be considered held in contempt of Congress unless and until the full House approves the measure.

The move by Holder and Obama to lock down some requested documents only complicates the fight over the botched anti-gunrunning operation between the legislative and executive branches.

After Holder made the request to Obama via letter on Tuesday, Deputy Attorney General James Cole wrote to Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., on Wednesday informing him that the president has granted the request.

"We regret that we have arrived at this point, after the many steps we have taken to address the committee's concerns and to accommodate the committee's legitimate oversight interests regarding Operation Fast and Furious," Cole wrote. "Although we are deeply disappointed that the committee appears intent on proceeding with a contempt vote, the department remains willing to work with the committee to reach a mutually satisfactory resolution of the outstanding issues."

Obama's decision pertains to documents from February 2011 and afterward examining how Justice officials learned about the Fast and Furious probe.

Holder, in his letter to Obama, said those documents pertain to the "deliberative process" on how to respond to congressional and media inquiries.

Wednesday's developments follow a flurry of activity Tuesday, as Holder tried to negotiate a way to avert the contempt proceedings. Issa had earlier indicated a willingness to postpone the vote after Holder indicated a willingness to make compromises and supply some documents in response to House Republicans' subpoena.

But Issa told reporters after a roughly 20-minute meeting with Holder Tuesday that the attorney general instead briefed them on the documents in lieu of delivering them.

Issa told Fox News that Holder didn't provide "anything in writing," and said the family of murdered Border Patrol agent Brian Terry wants the documents as much as he does.

"We want the documents. Brian Terry's family would like the documents that are responsive to how in fact their son was gunned down with weapons that came from lawful dealers but at the ... behest of the Justice Department," Issa told Fox News.

Weapons from the Fast and Furious anti-gunrunning operation were found at Terry's murder scene.

Issa suggested earlier Tuesday that the vote could still be up in the air.

"The deadline will always move to the last minute," said Issa, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. "We're not looking to hold people responsible. We're looking for document production."

The failed Fast and Furious operation attempted selling thousands of guns to arms dealers along the U.S.-Mexico border to trace them to leaders of drug cartels. However, many of them showed up in crime scenes.

Congressional investigators have been trying to determine if and when high-level Justice officials knew about problems with the operation.

Holder said Issa rejected what he thought was "an extraordinary offer."

"We offered the documents that we thought would resolve the subpoenas," he said. "The ball is in their court."

The contempt vote in the oversight committee will likely pass considering Republicans outnumber Democrats 22 to 16.

GOP House leadership has given Issa the green light to proceed how he sees fit, sources told Fox News, which suggests the vote would reach the House floor.

Holder called for the Capitol Hill meeting late Monday in a possible attempt to make a deal with Issa and avoid the contempt vote.

Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House oversight panel, said he after the meeting he is confident that Justice officials are not attempting a cover-up by withholding documents.

Holder's letter stated the Justice Department "has offered a serious, good faith proposal to bring this matter to an amicable resolution in the form of a briefing based on documents that the committee could retain."

Issa had demanded to see a trove of documents on the controversial Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives operation. He also wants to know who prepared a now-retracted letter from Feb. 4, 2011, in which the department claimed the U.S. did not knowingly help smuggle guns to Mexico, including those found where Terry was killed.

Issa wrote back to Holder later Monday requesting he deliver roughly 1,300 documents pertaining to the Feb. 4 letter.

The letter also stated Holder needed to deliver a description of all the documents he will not produce. Issa said the log is "essential for the committee to determine whether the department has substantially met its obligations" -- a statement he repeated Tuesday after the meeting.

Fox News' William LaJeunesse and Chad Pergram contributed to this report.

 

Okay, so let me get this straight. Congress votes to find the White House appointed head of DOJ in contempt, but before the contempt vote carries any weight, the White House (read same folks that put holder in charge) must approve/accept the contempt vote? What kind of crap is that? Whatever happened to check's and balances?

[Bud]

The President invoked the Executive Privlege because there are documents that confirm that the President was involved in this up to his eyeballs.

 

Hundred of Mexicans were killed by these weapons that the ATF allowed to be transported over the Border as well as Border Patrol Officer Brian Terry.

 

This will not end well. The President himself is trying to hide his involvement directly or by the White House staff including Axelrod.

[bornhunter04]

The President invoked the Executive Privlege because there are documents that confirm that the President was involved in this up to his eyeballs.

 

Hundred of Mexicans were killed by these weapons that the ATF allowed to be transported over the Border as well as Border Patrol Officer Brian Terry.

 

This will not end well. The President himself is trying to hide his involvement directly or by the White House staff including Axelrod.

 

This is what I've been thinking......I'm sure they're trying to figure out how to set someone up to take the fall for it all......

[oneshot]

Documents? What documents?

[Tompo]

Issa was on his way to becoming an object of ridicule for his obvious witch hunt tactics in the face of evidence he had no real case. He should accept this invocation of executive privilege as a gift, and end this charade as gracefully as possible.Bush invoked the privilege repeatedly: to block a Congressional committee’s subpoena for documents relating to the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to reject California’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, in the US attorneys scandal that brought down Alberto Gonzales.

The move is certainly not unprecedented: President George W. Bush asserted executive privilege six times during his eight years in office, while President Bill Clinton did so 14 times.

[TyGuy]

Live video of the House Committee right now on foxnews.com

 

2012-06-20 @ 10:40am

[BadWaterBill]

"Issa was on his way to becoming an object of ridicule for his obvious witch hunt tactics in the face of evidence he had no real case."

 

You mean the video tapes of the ATFE agents wheeling hand trucks of firearms to the back of pickups was a product of a Hollywood sound stage crew?

[gravyboy77]

Issa was on his way to becoming an object of ridicule for his obvious witch hunt tactics in the face of evidence he had no real case. He should accept this invocation of executive privilege as a gift, and end this charade as gracefully as possible.Bush invoked the privilege repeatedly: to block a Congressional committee’s subpoena for documents relating to the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to reject California’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, in the US attorneys scandal that brought down Alberto Gonzales.

The move is certainly not unprecedented: President George W. Bush asserted executive privilege six times during his eight years in office, while President Bill Clinton did so 14 times.

 

Are you kidding me, your comparing this to the EPA and a few attorneys getting fired? People DIED from this. Two Border guards were murdered plus hundreds of Mexican civilians killed because of this program.

 

This opens a huge can of worms for Obama since he has been denying that neither he nor his administration knew anything whatsoever about F&F yet he just granted executive privilege over these documents. In other words the Obama administration flat out lied:

 

http://hotair.com/ar...vilege-in-2007/

The assertion of executive privilege creates a huge problem for the White House. As Rep. Darrell Issa said today at the Fast & Furious hearing, Attorney General Eric Holder and other DoJ officials have repeatedly asserted that the White House and President Obama had no involvement or knowledge of the gun-running operation. If that was true, then executive privilege cannot apply. That only relates to the President, as that office is separately elected and accountable to the voters. Attorneys General answer to both the President and to Congress, and do not have executive privilege.

 

In other words, this could very well be analogous to the Watergate scandal. One has to wonder what those documents contain that would force the Obama administration to risk this kind of scandal by first refusing to comply with the subpoenas and then issuing a de facto admission that Obama himself was involved in the operation and/or its aftermath. The next venue for this scandal will be the federal courts, which is going to take a very dim view of executive privilege assertions to keep Congress from exercising its normal oversight functions for a federal agency rather than the White House itself. The assertion of the privilege at this point could open Holder and others to charges of perjury and obstruction of justice, not just contempt of Congress, once those documents get released — and they almost certainly will by the courts, if not before.

 

In a way I'm pretty glad that the king decided to lock up the documents, now FINALLY the mainstream media will be forced to talk about Fast & Furious-something they have been avoiding for years. I'm sure there are plenty of people who have either never heard of F&F or heard about it but didn't know what it was. This is the BIGGEST story right now!

 

Here's Obama in 2007 and lets just say he wasn't a big fan of Executive Privilege:

[Drylok]

Issa was on his way to becoming an object of ridicule for his obvious witch hunt tactics in the face of evidence he had no real case. He should accept this invocation of executive privilege as a gift, and end this charade as gracefully as possible.Bush invoked the privilege repeatedly: to block a Congressional committee’s subpoena for documents relating to the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to reject California’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, in the US attorneys scandal that brought down Alberto Gonzales. The move is certainly not unprecedented: President George W. Bush asserted executive privilege six times during his eight years in office, while President Bill Clinton did so 14 times.

 

You're not concerned about the contents of the thousands of pages of documents that Holder refuses to release to the committee?

[ike]

Issa was on his way to becoming an object of ridicule for his obvious witch hunt tactics in the face of evidence he had no real case. He should accept this invocation of executive privilege as a gift, and end this charade as gracefully as possible.Bush invoked the privilege repeatedly: to block a Congressional committee’s subpoena for documents relating to the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to reject California’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, in the US attorneys scandal that brought down Alberto Gonzales.

The move is certainly not unprecedented: President George W. Bush asserted executive privilege six times during his eight years in office, while President Bill Clinton did so 14 times.

HOW BLIND ARE YOU ? YOU SURE THAT YOU CAN DEFEND THIS, SLAM ISSA AND BE ON A PROGUN SITE .TALK ABOUT CONFUSED. AND HOW MANY OF THE 14 TIME CLINTON INVOKED E.P'S HAD TO DO WITH RENO AND WACO ?

YOU NEED TO GET OFF THE BLAME BUSH/DEMOCRACTS ARE RIGHT BUS AND LOOK AT WHAT IS HAPPENING. EXPLAIN TO ALL OF US HERE HOW THIS WASN'T A BACKDOOR GUN GRAB ? EXPLAIN TO THE FFL DEALERS IN THE BORDER STATES THAT THE NEW RULE {EX. ORDER} HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH F/F. EXPLAIN TO ME HOW YOU CAN WANT A CCW PERMIT BUT CAN DEFEND F/F ?

[TheHud]

This Exec Priv. move to supresss the release of all F&F documents, documents which most likely reveal exactly who is guilty of helping bring about the deaths of many Mexican civilians and one or more U.S. law enforcement personel, seems would constitute charges of interfering with a criminal investigation involving a capital crime.

 

Would that be ....hmmm...impeachable?

[RECarry]

The Chastiser in Chief and his constipated DOJ must go. I applaud Congressman Issa for leading this (stonewalled and executive-privileged) investigation.

[bornhunter04]

This Exec Priv. move to supresss the release of all F&F documents, documents which most likely reveal exactly who is guilty of helping bring about the deaths of many Mexican civilians and one or more U.S. law enforcement personel, seems would constitute charges of interfering with a criminal investigation involving a capital crime.

 

Would that be ....hmmm...impeachable?

 

at least 2 problems with that. 1. we have to get the documents to know what's in them and 2. Impeachment starts in the senate, guess who's in control of that

 

My guess, unless there's an incredible amount of public pressure, those documents will never see the light of day. In fact they're probably trying to figure way to incinerate them as the hearing is taking place. Bonfire anyone?

[TyGuy]

Ms. Speier just said that no one in this country needs an AK-47. No one in this country needs a red car either but some may want one. Also, what does wanting an AK-47 have to do with the AG breaking the law?

[Xwing]

Obama is the "crook in chief". He's hiding his embarrassing involvement in this federal scam. The Obama administration tried to make gun owners look bad; and instead they resulted in deaths of Border Patrol agents and made themselves look bad. Now they whitewash everything, and the media barely mentions it.

[3ddiver]

I think this pretty much sums up what we all know. Fast and Furious goes all the way to the top

[RECarry]

Ms. Speier just said that no one in this country needs an AK-47. No one in this country needs a red car either but some may want one. Also, what does wanting an AK-47 have to do with the AG breaking the law?

No one in Mexico needed more weapons either. DOJ never got that memo.

[TyGuy]

The committee stands at recess until the final vote for the whole house concludes today. They will vote when they return this afternoon.

2012-06-20 @ 12:22pm

[gravyboy77]

This Exec Priv. move to supresss the release of all F&F documents, documents which most likely reveal exactly who is guilty of helping bring about the deaths of many Mexican civilians and one or more U.S. law enforcement personel, seems would constitute charges of interfering with a criminal investigation involving a capital crime.

 

Would that be ....hmmm...impeachable?

 

at least 2 problems with that. 1. we have to get the documents to know what's in them and 2. Impeachment starts in the senate, guess who's in control of that

 

My guess, unless there's an incredible amount of public pressure, those documents will never see the light of day. In fact they're probably trying to figure way to incinerate them as the hearing is taking place. Bonfire anyone?

 

This is pretty serious. For the last year and a half the W.H has denied that neither the administration or the President knew anything about F&F, yet by issuing executive privilege the president is acknowledging that they knew about this. They just got caught lying.

[Tompo]

Issa was on his way to becoming an object of ridicule for his obvious witch hunt tactics in the face of evidence he had no real case. He should accept this invocation of executive privilege as a gift, and end this charade as gracefully as possible.Bush invoked the privilege repeatedly: to block a Congressional committee’s subpoena for documents relating to the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to reject California’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, in the US attorneys scandal that brought down Alberto Gonzales. The move is certainly not unprecedented: President George W. Bush asserted executive privilege six times during his eight years in office, while President Bill Clinton did so 14 times.

 

You're not concerned about the contents of the thousands of pages of documents that Holder refuses to release to the committee?

 

Issa needed to re-write his subpoena because he was asking for material he has no legal right to. This is nothing more than a political witch hunt.

[Tompo]

This Exec Priv. move to supresss the release of all F&F documents, documents which most likely reveal exactly who is guilty of helping bring about the deaths of many Mexican civilians and one or more U.S. law enforcement personel, seems would constitute charges of interfering with a criminal investigation involving a capital crime.

 

Would that be ....hmmm...impeachable?

 

at least 2 problems with that. 1. we have to get the documents to know what's in them and 2. Impeachment starts in the senate, guess who's in control of that

 

My guess, unless there's an incredible amount of public pressure, those documents will never see the light of day. In fact they're probably trying to figure way to incinerate them as the hearing is taking place. Bonfire anyone?

 

This is pretty serious. For the last year and a half the W.H has denied that neither the administration or the President knew anything about F&F, yet by issuing executive privilege the president is acknowledging that they knew about this. They just got caught lying.

 

 

 

there are two types of executive privilege: the robust “presidential communications privilege” and the more limited “deliberative process privilege.” The White House may invoke the latter to apply to executive branch officials outside of the president’s inner circle, as long as they were involved with the government’s decision-making process. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and G.W. Bush all asserted executive privilege in matters not involving presidential communications. Darrell Issa has in the past recognized that same privilege for Bush administration deliberations.

[Jeffrey]

[

 

 

there are two types of executive privilege: the robust “presidential communications privilege” and the more limited “deliberative process privilege.” The White House may invoke the latter to apply to executive branch officials outside of the president’s inner circle, as long as they were involved with the government’s decision-making process. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and G.W. Bush all asserted executive privilege in matters not involving presidential communications. Darrell Issa has in the past recognized that same privilege for Bush administration deliberations.

 

Great work pointing out the last 3 republican presidents. Why no mention of the last few democrats? How about the last one? What was Clintons reason for it?

[bornhunter04]

[

 

 

there are two types of executive privilege: the robust “presidential communications privilege” and the more limited “deliberative process privilege.” The White House may invoke the latter to apply to executive branch officials outside of the president’s inner circle, as long as they were involved with the government’s decision-making process. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and G.W. Bush all asserted executive privilege in matters not involving presidential communications. Darrell Issa has in the past recognized that same privilege for Bush administration deliberations.

 

Great work pointing out the last 3 republican presidents. Why no mention of the last few democrats? How about the last one? What was Clintons reason for it?

 

Exactly. You know slick willy used the same powers. Personally, I don't agree with these powers without restriction. As in they should only be allowed to be used in matters of national security, not to protect your own political a** or your cronies a**es.

 

I also, believe that the number of executive orders that a president issues should be limited per term. This bs of circumventing congress every time they deny the furthering of one's agenda has got to stop.

 

Another, thing anyone that leaks classified material needs to be nailed to the wall. When you get a security clearance, you go through training and understand the penalties of a leak/breach, same thing should apply to all politicians. No matter how high up the chain you are.

[TyGuy]

Now Mr Lynch is crying about the length and cost of the investigation. If Holder turned over the docs like he should have then it wouldn't have taken so long or cost as much. Apparently now in the US if a court case takes too long then it should just be dropped over cost. Good to know.

 

I agree with the other Rep. where he pointed out that the Clemens hearings were a waste of money but doggedly persued.

[bornhunter04]

Issa, with all do respect it is my time, so i will reclaim my time (basically shut up mr. lynch, this is about the facts)

[TyGuy]

Ugh, just vote already.

[bornhunter04]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/20/what-is-executive-privilege/

 

During Wednesday's hearing, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, suggested to chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., that the dispute be resolved by the courts before Congress proceeded with a contempt vote. But Issa said the committee is "concurrently evaluating" the executive privilege claim and trying to get a "log" of executive privilege assertions from the White House. He also said the letter he received claiming executive privilege, which was from Deputy Attorney General James Cole, was not sufficient. "Only the president can do it," Issa said. "A letter saying the president has done it is not sufficient."

 

So, basically unless the anointed one comes straight out and signs the order it's not sufficient, and if congress votes to hold holder in contempt, then the "letter" null in void unless he beats them to it? Do i have that right? Basically does the executive privilege have to be issued before the vote or after the vote?

[ryr8828]

Just imagine Watergate, except instead of the media out for blood they're trying to defend the President and help with the coverup.

 

If the doj would pursue this with the vigor that they did the Valerie Plame nonsense Obama and Holder would already be facing charges.

[Buzzard]

Have they held the vote yet?

[Tompo]

Issa was on his way to becoming an object of ridicule for his obvious witch hunt tactics in the face of evidence he had no real case. He should accept this invocation of executive privilege as a gift, and end this charade as gracefully as possible.Bush invoked the privilege repeatedly: to block a Congressional committee’s subpoena for documents relating to the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to reject California’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, in the US attorneys scandal that brought down Alberto Gonzales.

The move is certainly not unprecedented: President George W. Bush asserted executive privilege six times during his eight years in office, while President Bill Clinton did so 14 times.

HOW BLIND ARE YOU ? YOU SURE THAT YOU CAN DEFEND THIS, SLAM ISSA AND BE ON A PROGUN SITE .TALK ABOUT CONFUSED. AND HOW MANY OF THE 14 TIME CLINTON INVOKED E.P'S HAD TO DO WITH RENO AND WACO ?

YOU NEED TO GET OFF THE BLAME BUSH/DEMOCRACTS ARE RIGHT BUS AND LOOK AT WHAT IS HAPPENING. EXPLAIN TO ALL OF US HERE HOW THIS WASN'T A BACKDOOR GUN GRAB ? EXPLAIN TO THE FFL DEALERS IN THE BORDER STATES THAT THE NEW RULE {EX. ORDER} HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH F/F. EXPLAIN TO ME HOW YOU CAN WANT A CCW PERMIT BUT CAN DEFEND F/F ?

 

 

I'm not blind--no need for you to type in capitals, either.

 

One, I didn't 'slam issa'. I stated fact. Two, what does that have to do with an Illinois concealed carry website?

 

This is nothing but a political witch hunt. Issa’s uncovered no evidence showing Holder bears any blame for the botched operations begun under George W. Bush, even though the Justice Department turned over thousands of pages of documents concerning the operations. Instead of accepting this fact, Issa has requested many more documents containing confidential information regarding ongoing law enforcement investigations, and is now threatening to hold Holder in contempt if these documents are not turned over. Holder is entirely correct to withhold these documents Republicans have said the same thing themselves.

Tea Party Caucus member Steve King (R-Iowa) said Republican leadership is wary of using investigations it's conducting of the administration for political gain, especially when it comes to Operation Fast and Furious, a botched gun-tracking program.

"I think leadership doesn't want to be seen as using the gavels here for political purposes," King said in an interview. "I think there's a bit of an aversion to that. Me? I have no reservations about that.

This is politics."

 

Republicans have even admitted this is political. http://thehill.com/homenews/house/217475-house-gop-leadership-rankled-by-calls-for-attorney-generals-head?tmpl=component&print=1&layout=default&page=