Congressman Blake Farenthold: "I Don't Think Mr. Holder Should Be Here"

Blake Farenthold's Press Release ^ | April 8, 2014 | Blake Farenthold

[FR_addict]

Today, U.S. Congressman Blake Farenthold (TX-27) attended a House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Attorney General Eric Holder was the sole witness. Today marked the seventh time General Holder has testified before the Judiciary Committee since his confirmation in 2009.

Congressman Farenthold did not question Holder during the hearing because he felt that, since the Attorney General has been held in contempt of Congress, it was not appropriate for him to appear before Congress as if nothing was wrong. Instead, Congressman Farenthold made the following remarks during his designated questioning round in today’s hearing:

“Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

You know, I understand that this Committee has the constitutional duty of oversight over the Department of Justice and that's why we have Mr. Holder here today – but I don't think I can be a part of eroding the constitutional balance of power, favoring the executive over the legislative.

I don't think Mr. Holder should be here. He's in contempt of this body. I've called for his resignation, I've sponsored articles of impeachment and, this week, I'm going to be introducing legislation that would prevent federal employees who are held in contempt of Congress or who fail to fully comply with a Congressional subpoena from being paid their taxpayer-funded salary. I'm going to try and get that [the legislation] included with the appropriations bills that’ll be going through.

I’m committed to maintaining the constitutional balance of power and the authority this branch – this Legislative Branch – has, and I just don’t think it’s appropriate [that] Mr. Holder be here. If an American citizen had not complied with one of the Justice Department subpoenas, they would be in jail – not sitting here testifying.

But I realize there are questions to be asked, and I’ll yield the remainder of my time to Mr. Gowdy.”

[Psalm 144]

Thanks for that link. Holder has to be taken down. His lawlessness is so intentionally displayed that if he is -not- taken down it is proof that the executive branch is utterly unbound by law.

[MrB]

Why isn’t this holder SOB in jail?

'cuz he's a liberal with a higher than average melanin expression.

[twyn1]

When I read this story, all I can think of is the song "Show Me" from "My Fair Lady"

Words, words, words!
I'm so sick of words
I get words all day through
First from him, now from you
Is that all you blighters can do?

[null and void]

Holder's flippant “don't go their buddy” remark to Rep. Gohmert was despicable and shows what little regard he has for this country and our laws.

I heard it as a direct threat to a member of Congress.

[null and void]

Oh? Demonstrate to me how you can believe that our country, as a Constitutional nation of laws still exists right now.

[no-to-illegals]

I heard the remark also in that manner. The white hut must have their army in place or holder would not have made the threat. Full agreement, Nully, I heard it as a threat too.

[tumblindice]

“Why isn’t this holder SOB in jail?”

Don’ be trippin’!

He was given a ceremonial punishment shortly after being held in contempt for failing to cooperate with the committee over Lois Lerner’s nefarious activities.
Here’s how it went down
Chairman Issa: And what is your plea?
Attorney General Holder: Insanity your Honor!
CM Issa: INSANITY? How can you plead insanity?
AG Holder: I’m crazy about the Bitch!
CM Issa: Bailiff! Whack his pee-pee!

So the Sgt-at-Arms ordered Holder front and center, had him stand still, and simulated whacking Holder using a little plastic swizzle stick.

That was pretty much it.

[jeffc]

I’d like to know what Mr. Gowdy had to say after that!

[noinfringers2]

I have a question as to the meaning/intent of the expression “contempt of Congress”. Congress to my learning and understanding is made of two bodies i.e. House of Representatives and the Senate. Question! Can “contempt of Congress” be based on only one of the bodies? If both bodies must be affected I can see where Holder can have a smug attitude.

[hosepipe]

Duuuugh.. if the top cop is corrupt justice does not exist..
Holder STOLE justice from the Department of Justice..
He embezzled justice......... the DOJ has an empty vault..

Merely because he’s a mullatto acting like he was black..
But that seems to be going around.. Kabuki blackness..

Many others are no blacker than they are white..
IF you have one white parent you’re NOT black..
When bastards rule....... the family unit is bastardized..

Is a Mullattocracy possible?...

[no-to-illegals]

Here is what NBC says regarding Contempt of Congress ... http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19693051/ns/politics/t/what-contempt-congress/

[muir_redwoods]

I’d love to see the next constitutional president appoint an AG that would respond adorably to a request from Mexico the Holder be extradited to Mexico to answer charges related to F&F

[no-to-illegals]

Another link in relation to Contempt of Congress ... https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34097.pdf ... extremely long read.

[no-to-illegals]

My apology Nully for stepping in with some links.

[fieldmarshaldj]

That’s why I call him “Flounder.”

[Steely Tom]

Oh? Demonstrate to me how you can believe that our country, as a Constitutional nation of laws still exists right now.

Well, you're here, expressing yourself on the internet, aren't you?.

If our Constitutional nation no longer exists, what's the point of doing anything?

[no-to-illegals]

I went fishing once. Thought it would be nice quiet trip. But once I arrived, baited the hook, cast out the bait and had one hooked the fish pull a firearm. Those big ones always seem to do that. Or the big fish calls in all the little fish and dang ...

[EQAndyBuzz]

Hopefully we will have a Conservative President (I did not Republican) in 2016 and the first order of business is firing every attorney in working in the justice department. The second order of business is creating a law stating that no employee receiving taxpayer money can join a union. And third, padlock the EPA.

[bdfromlv]

I always wonder when the government officials and mouthpieces talk about not being informed about subjects relating to their part of the government. I worked for the Bureau of Prisons until 2003 and during my 26 years with the bureau, the Director in Washington had an information office as do all other agencies in the executive branch. The info office had offices in all 6 regions of the country and they each collected all news articles from all over the country that had any possible interest to the bureau, things like escapes court cases about old or future inmates of notoriety or happenings in other correctional areas that might affect the bureau. This information was compiled for the Monday morning briefings in all of the regions and provided to keep the directors and wardens up to date sometimes it was only 20-30 pages sometimes 80+. All executive staff read and passed on needed information to the wardens so none were caught off guard by reporters or others questions. I know that now it is far easier to gather the information and sort it as important or not. Only a lazy bastard would not be informed on all issues and some one that did not like to attend daily briefings etc.
They all get the information what they do with it is up to them.

[no-to-illegals]

Amen.