House Judiciary investigating whether Holder lied under oath

The Hill ^ | 28 May 2013 | Jonathan Easley

[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.