Posted on 06/19/2012 1:14:35 PM PDT by smoothsailing
June 19, 2012
Today’s Meeting is at 5 p.m. in the Capitol
Possibility of postponement is and always has been about whether DOJ produces a described subset of documents before Wednesday’s vote
This evening’s meeting between Chairman Issa and Attorney General Holder is NOT being done “in exchange” for a postponement of Wednesday’s vote. Chairman Issa has repeatedly stated over the past week that a postponement of Wednesday’s vote would only come after the delivery of a subset of Post February 4 documents that Attorney General Holder said he was prepared to produce and the Department of Justice further outlined to Committee investigators on Thursday, June 14. The length of any postponement would depend on the amount and substance of documents delivered.
• On June 15, 2012, Chairman Issa wrote to the Attorney General that, “production of the documents noted in your letter and outlined yesterday in a meeting with Committee staff would be sufficient for me to justify a postponement of the Committee’s scheduled vote on contempt to facilitate their review and discussions with the Department. I am prepared to announce this delay once the Department produces these documents.”
• On June 18, 2012, Chairman Issa reiterated this position writing, “only the delivery of documents outlined and offered by the Department of Justice last Thursday to staff will be sufficient to justify a postponement of Wednesday’s scheduled vote.”
The Committee is not in a position to take contempt completely and permanently off the table at this evening’s meeting
• On June 18, 2012, Chairman Issa reiterated this position: “I will not be in a position tomorrow to negotiate over whether certain actions – short of full compliance – are sufficient to warrant more than a delay of contempt proceedings.”
Chairman Issa has explained what DOJ needs to do to have serious discussions about fully and finally ending contempt proceedings
On June 18, Chairman Issa explained that full information is necessary for the Committee to determine exactly what post February 4, 2011, documents the Department may not need to produce:
“The Department has also failed to provide a log that includes descriptions of documents, the dates they were created, who created them, and individualized explanations for why the Department believes these documents should not be produced pursuant to the subpoena. Only the Department knows what it possesses. A full understanding of the post-February 4, 2011, documents under subpoena that the Department is not prepared to produce is essential for the Committee to determine whether the Department has substantially met its obligations.”
Chairman Issa ultimately seeks an agreement rendering contempt unnecessary
On June 13, Chairman Issa wrote to Attorney General Holder: “I believe the interests of the Department, Congress, and those directly affected by reckless conduct in Operation Fast and Furious are best served by an agreement that renders the process of contempt unnecessary.”
Chairman Issa, as outlined above, has indicated that he will continue to pursue contempt if the Justice Department does not agree to produce documents they have indicated they will produce prior to the scheduled contempt vote.
House has narrowed its request to accommodate DOJ’s concerns about material gathered that could affect prosecutions
Chairman Issa has outlined the substantial efforts he and House leadership have made to accommodate the Justice Department’s wish to avoid producing materials gathered during the Fast and Furious investigation. This has been done by narrowing the focus to subpoenaed documents created after the investigation ended and indictments had been announced.
Why are the post February 4, 2011, documents critically important?
On February 4, 2011, the Department of Justice denied whistleblower allegations that guns in Operation Fast and Furious had been allowed to “walk” to Mexico and defended the Operation itself. Ten months later, on December 2, 2011, the Justice Department formally withdrew this denial and acknowledged that Fast and Furious was “fundamentally flawed.” In responding to Congress, however, the Justice Department has taken the position that it will not share its internal deliberations related to Operation Fast and Furious that occurred after it denied anything inappropriate occurred on February 4, 2011. This position effectively denies Congress and the American people information about:
o Hiding the identity of officials who led the charge to call whistleblowers liars and retaliate against them.
o The reactions of top officials when confronted with evidence about gunwalking in Fast and Furious, including whether they were surprised or were already aware.
o The Justice Department’s assessment of responsibility for officials who knew about reckless conduct or were negligent.
o Whether senior officials and political appointees at fault in Operation Fast and Furious were held to the same standards as lower level career employees whom the Department has primarily blamed.
While officials at the Department of Justice had earlier claimed that divulging this information would have a “chilling effect” on future internal deliberations, they have more recently expressed a greater willingness to produce this material. Congress, under both Democratic and Republican leadership, has never recognized internal agency discussions as privileged and protected.
From an earlier thread:
FNC (Megyn Kelly) is now reporting the House has the votes for contempt and that Speaker Boehner is willing to proceed since Holder hasn’t complied with Issa’s request.
167 posted on Tuesday, June 19, 2012 11:25:20 AM by smoothsailing
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2896737/posts?page=167#167
Wonder how many shredder trucks are running full-tilt-boogie at the DOJ today?
Good question. The first suprise would be a contempt citation, but it would be a huge shock, at least to me, if Boehner allowed a House vote. He says the whole Fast & Furious investigation is just a distraction.
Issa reported via twitter feed as of 1:12 PST Holder has turned over nothing.
http://twitter.com/DarrellIssa/status/215175171156361216
“As of 4:15 PM ET, a contempt vote for Holder is still set for Wednesday at 10 AM.”
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/06/19/before_5_pm_meeting_holder_doesnt_deliver
Holder must be held in contempt. Does anyone think this piece of garbage will turn anything over that would implicate him or King Obama? Then I have a bridge I’d like to sell.
Thanks much, Smooth.
Not surprising Holder hasn’t turned over anything and very happy to see the vote is still scheduled if nothing is turned over.
http://twitter.com/ricandersen/status/215194414522437632/photo/1
Maybe he’ll announce he needs to spend more time with his family! :)
Then delay that family time with a prosecution, conviction and trip to the slammer in stripes and as you said, pink underwear! :-)
JUST ON FNC-Issa just came out of the meeting, no docs yet, tomorrow’s vote still scheduled.
ISSA GOT PLAYED AGAIN.
Happy to see the turkey golfer getting hit on this. He's too busy playing golf and campaigning to worry about the country.
Issa Statement Following Meeting with Attorney General Eric Holder June 19, 2012
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa made the following statement after his meeting with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder:
“I had hoped that after this evening’s meeting I would be able to tell you that the Department had delivered documents that would justify the postponement of tomorrow’s vote on contempt. The Department told the Committee on Thursday that it had documents it could produce that would answer our questions. Today, the Attorney General informed us that the Department would not be producing those documents. The only offer they made involved us ending our investigation.
“While I still hope the Department will reconsider its decision so tomorrow’s vote can be postponed, after this meeting I cannot say that I am optimistic. At this point, we simply do not have the documents we have repeatedly said we need to justify the postponement of a contempt vote in committee.”
If that’s what was said WithHolder is lying through his teeth in front of multiple cameras at this time.
He should be held in contempt just for these antics.
What will be the consequences of being held in contempt? Will he be fined? imprisoned? Removed from office?
Here’s a pdf link to Issa’s official statement...
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/issa_holder.pdf
Holder is full of beans.
This excerpt from the WSJ is the best answer I’ve seen to your question......
........................................................................................
[ ... Should the House hold him in contempt, Mr. Holder would be left with three choices: standing by as a U.S. attorney begins prosecuting him; directing the U.S. attorney not to prosecute him; or invoking executive privilege to justify not releasing the documents Congress seeks.
There are huge downsides to all three. Let’s take them one by one.
A sitting attorney general under federal prosecution would be fatally weakened, with his continuing presence in the job a fat target for the president’s political opponents. On the other hand, ordering a U.S. attorney not to prosecute him suggests a massive conflict-of-interest, not to mention conveying that he has something to hide. Ditto for “executive privilege.” Not only does executive privilege have a tainted history, it couldn’t be invoked without admitting that the White House is also implicated in Fast and Furious. ...]
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303836404577474922406534442.html
Was thinking Holder was full of it, but it wasn’t beans.
The rubber will meet the road only when the contempt citation comes out of committee. Boehner oould decide that Holder has complied even if Issa disagrees. I don’t trust Boehner who will do whatever he can to avoid a confrontation. Talk is cheap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.