House Judiciary investigating whether Holder lied under oath

The Hill ^ | 28 May 2013 | Jonathan Easley

[ScaniaBoy]

The House Judiciary Committee is investigating whether Attorney General Eric Holder lied under oath during his May 15 testimony on the Justice Department’s (DOJ) surveillance of reporters, an aide close to the matter told The Hill.

The panel is looking at a statement Holder made during a back and forth with Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) about whether the DOJ could prosecute reporters under the Espionage Act of 1917.

“In regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material -- this is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy,” Holder said during the hearing. However, NBC News reported last week that Holder personally approved a search warrant that labeled Fox News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen a co-conspirator in a national security leaks case.

[mbarker12474]

I may be wrong, but I think there is a different kind of word parsing that went on. I believe Holder said he did not know of anyone who wanted to PROSECUTE members of the press.

He didn’t. He was INVESTIGATING a reporter. His out is that his warrant declared the reporter as an “unindicted co-conspirator”; he wasn’t indicted, so he was not being prosecuted, just investigated.

Correct. This is not perjury. Holder spoke first to a question regarding prosecution. He spoke later to a question regarding investigation. The cops can gather all sorts of evidence under warrant from the property of a person who in no-way is the target of prosecution.

Now... if we can find a DOJ internal informant who knew that Rosen was himself a target for prosecution, and not merely the holder of evidence related to a separate targeted person, then circumstances will have changed.

By the way... we need to stop thinking and talking as if "journalists" employed by a "news" organization somehow have greater or distinctly different Constitutional protections than other citizens. They do not. Or at least they shouldn't. Plumbers have IDENTICAL rights as journalists. Both can gather news, investigate news, and report news.