Front Page
NMJ Search
International
Islamofascism
Government & Politics
National & Local
Progressivism
Culture Wars
Editorials
Commentary
Archive
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
Islamofascism
Progressivism
Books
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Facebook
Twitter
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House
  Anti-Google




Both sides said they were reluctant to approach the vote -- the first time an attorney general, the nation’s top law enforcement official, would have been cited for contempt. But their last-minute efforts to reach an agreement to head off the vote appeared to have failed.
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
Contempt Vote on Holder Looms
The Washington Times
The House careened toward a Thursday vote to hold Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in contempt of Congress after Republicans rejected the Justice Department’s final offer for turning over a limited set of documents, saying it wasn’t sufficient to complete their investigation into the botched gunwalking operation known as Fast and Furious.

At least a handful of Democrats have said they would vote with the GOP majority to hold Mr. Holder in contempt, raising the bipartisan peril for the White House, which has argued that the investigation is Republican-led “political theater.”

Amping up pressure on lawmakers, the National Rifle Association said it will penalize lawmakers who vote against the contempt motion in its powerful year-end scorecard -- a prod some Democrats will be reluctant to ignore.

Both sides said they were reluctant to approach the vote -- the first time an attorney general, the nation’s top law enforcement official, would have been cited for contempt. But their last-minute efforts to reach an agreement to head off the vote appeared to have failed, and House Speaker John A. Boehner said his troops were moving ahead.

“It’s an unfortunate place where we are. But our members raise their right hand and swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the laws of the United States. And we’re going to do our job,” said Mr. Boehner, Ohio Republican.

But Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, pleaded with Mr. Boehner to avert the vote, saying the investigation has been too partisan. He identified a list of what he called 100 “errors, omissions and mischaracterizations” in the report that the committee drew up recommending the contempt citation...

Fast and Furious was intended to track sales of U.S. guns and watch the guns be shipped across the border to a Mexican drug cartel. But the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) lost track of the roughly 2,000 weapons after they were sold. Some of the guns eventually began showing up at crime scenes, including two that were recovered at the site of a 2010 Arizona shootout that left Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry dead.

Mr. Terry’s family has demanded answers, which has helped push the investigation forward.

Indeed, that was one of the considerations that won over Rep. Jim Matheson, Utah Democrat, who told his hometown newspapers this week that he will vote for the contempt citation.

“It just compounds the tragedy when both sides play politics instead of releasing the facts. The Terry family, the public and Congress deserve answers,” he told the Salt Lake Tribune. “Sadly, it seems that it will take holding the attorney general in contempt to communicate that evasiveness is unacceptable.”

But Rep. Jim Cooper, Tennessee Democrat, said he would vote against contempt because the GOP was “rushing to judgment.” He urged all sides to wait for a Justice Department inspector general’s report, which has been in the works for more than a year.

The administration initially said it never knowingly let guns “walk,” but months later officially recanted that assertion and acknowledged it had done so.

Mr. Holder shut down Fast and Furious, and the Justice Department has turned over thousands of pages of documents related to the operation, but it has rejected the House oversight committee’s request for records that would shed light on Justice officials’ deliberations as they realized and, after months of delay, corrected their claim that no guns had been allowed to walk.

After months of defying a subpoena for the documents, President Obama last week claimed the documents were protected from congressional scrutiny by executive privilege, which shields White House decision-making so the president can get the best advice from his advisers.

READ FULL SOURCE ARTICLE


The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...


The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on tax deductible donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a tax deductible donation today.







Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The New Media Journal, BasicsProject.org, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The New Media Journal.  The New Media Journal is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations.  The New Media Journal is not supported by any political organization. The New Media Journal is a division of BasicsProject.org, a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and educational initiative.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org is copyrighted. Basics Project's goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


The Media Journal.us © 1998-2013    Content Copyright © Individual authors
A Division of BasicsProject.org
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server