What’s with this? Congress and Attorney General sneaking around together? Why don’t they want YOU to hear this?
On May 15th, in testimony before Congress, and in answer to questions about the seizure of AP records, Attorney General Eric Holder said this (in part):
“…With regard to the potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material, that is not something that I’ve been involved in, heard of, or would think a wise policy…”
A few days later it came out that the Attorney General had authorized the seeking of a search warrant of FNC’s James Rosen’s records. In that affidavit seeking the warrant, and in sworn testimony to a Federal Magistrate, Rosen was called a “co-conspirator.”
The spotlight was then put on the Attorney General and the question whether he lied, or even committed perjury, in his May 15th testimony. (see blue text above.)
Subsequently, there was a volley of letters between the House Judiciary Committee and DOJ about the Attorney General’s May 15 testimony.
The most recent letter was from the Attorney General himself and dated June 19. He admits an investigation of Rosen but insists that an investigation not a prosecution. That may be true technically true (I am not sure I agree but whatever) but his June 19 letter misses the point whether he lied under oath on the 15th of May. The letter, unfortunately, is a dodge.
On May 15 in his testimony, the Attorney General said he was not part of a POTENTIAL prosecution. In his June 19 letter, the Attorney General ignores that he said POTENTIAL as he now scrambles to explain or even deflect.
In the June 19th letter, the Attorney General wrote, in part:
“…As explained in our prior letters, the government’s decision to seek this search warrant [of FNC's James Rosen records] was an investigative step, and at no time during this matter have prosecutors sought approval from me to bring criminal charges against [James Rosen.]
Time for the Attorney General to fully explain and answer fully - not behind closed doors – but out in the open like his May 15th testimony.
If you note, and highlighted in RED above, his testimony (under oath) was “POTENTIAL PROSECUTION.”
THIS IS A FACT: An INVESTIGATION IS A “POTENTIAL” PROSECUTION. Seeking a warrant from a Federal Magistrate to seize someone’s private records is an investigation, and yes, is a potential prosecution.
Attorney General Holder owes the American people a full explanation IN PUBLIC – not behind closed doors which Congress has now agreed to with him. Shame on Congress for agreeing to meet with him privately. Congress dragged this issue out in open and now is willing to “play ball” and meet privately.
National security matters should be behind closed doors — not whether the Attorney General, the highest law enforcement officer in the nation was dishonest under oath. This started in public and should end in public.
I hope the Attorney General can explain this to the satisfaction of Americans. I want to be wrong about my suspicions on this one. I want the Attorney General to tell me something that satisfied me that he is not slippery and ignores oaths. If he meets behind closed doors, I will be more suspicious of him and more suspicious of Republicans in Congress that this is merely their political stunt.
What do you think?
PS – if DOJ didn’t intend to prosecute FNC’s James Rosen, why were they accusing him of a crime by calling him a co-conspirator? and is that the gossip of James, that he is a criminal? and is/was that the gossip floating around the Justice Department? Is that fair to James or anyone else who gets this DOJ treatment? Since he was accused in secret, James had no opportunity to point out he was just doing his job as a journalist? This was a DOJ ‘hit and run’ on James! At least with the story getting exposed, James has a chance to correct the record and point out that he was doing his job.
And finally, if DOJ and Attorney General Holder did not intend to prosecute James Rosen, but they believed him to be a co-conspirator, a criminal, why would they not prosecute him and only investigate? Does DOJ now look the other way on criminals? Is Holder telling us that the DOJ was going to let James ‘off the hook’ even though they believed he was a criminal? Aren’t they supposed to prosecute criminals? Isn’t that their job? (The fact they did not prosecute him and believed him to be a co-conspirator and told that to a Federal Magistrate under oath shows this was dirty from the get-go!)
This is all very messed up…