Eric Holder: Attorney General and Perjurer

I just want to hear the statists defend this guy some more. Here he is, caught red-handed in a lie, and he STILL won't resign, and Obama WON'T fire him.

Corruption and dishonesty. Business as usual in the Obama administration. Here's the story:

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday expressing "great concern" about the possibility that Holder lied under oath during his testimony earlier this month on the Justice Department's seizing of journalists' records, CBS News has learned.

On May 15, Holder told the committee he wasn't involved in "the potential prosecution" of a member of the press under the Espionage Act for disclosing classified information. "This is not something I've ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy," he said.

WH: "Self-evident" that Holder's congressional testimony was truthful
Shortly thereafter, reports began to surface that the Justice Department, in addition to seizing telephone and email records of Associated Press reporters, had seized the the emails and phone records of Fox News correspondent James Rosen. While Holder had recused himself from the AP proceedings, the Washington Post reported that the attorney general had personally signed off on the search warrant for Rosen's records.

In the search warrant, the FBI called Rosen a "criminal co-conspirator" and suggested there's probable cause that he violated federal law. Rosen was not charged with any crime.

House Judiciary Republicans, in their letter, raise the possibility that Holder perjured himself by issuing an ironclad denial of any involvement in the investigation and potential prosecution of reporters. "The media reports and statements issued by the Department regarding the search warrants for Mr. Rosen's emails appear to be at odds with your sworn testimony before the Committee," they wrote. "We believe - and we hope you will agree - it is imperative that the Committee, the Congress and the American people be provided a full and accurate account of your involvement in and approval of these search warrants."

The White House defended Holder on Wednesday, with press secretary Jay Carney saying it was "self-evident" that Holder told the truth. "I think based on what he said, he testified truthfully," Carney said. "The attorney general talked about prosecution," he explained, while the case in question was completed with no further charges or prosecution slated.

Asked Tuesday if he regrets signing off on the warrant, Holder told reporters: "I'm not satisfied (with the Justice Department's guidelines involving the news media in criminal investigations)."

Holder in the hot seat at congressional hearing

Holder: I wasn't involved in AP secret phone probe
The leak investigation sprang from Rosen's report in 2009 that North Korea would respond to sanctions with more nuclear tests. That information was classified when Rosen reported it, leading to an FBI investigation to uncover Rosen's source that quickly shifted focus to scrutinize Rosen himself.

Agents monitored Rosen's movements in and out of the State Department. They searched his personal emails and combed through his cell phone records, an unprecedented level of government surveillance of a journalist.

Last week, President Obama, who's come under bipartisan criticism for the digging into journalists' records, said he directed Holder to conduct a review of Justice Department's guidelines for probes that involve journalists and said Holder would meet with media groups as part of that review.

Those meetings will begin on Thursday, with Holder scheduled to meet the Washington bureau chiefs of several major media organizations to chart a path forward for leak investigations that balances law enforcement and national security concerns with a respect for press freedom.

An official close to Holder told CBS News the meetings would be "forward looking," and will not include a discussion of the facts surrounding the AP subpoena and the Rosen search warrant.

On Tuesday, Holder voiced optimism about the likelihood that the meetings will result in a truce of sorts between the Justice Department and the press, which has savaged Holder's department and the rest of the Obama administration for what they see as an overzealous prosecution of security leaks.

Well, it is CBS. The problem is our corrupt AG and tyrannical President. It's the "guidelines" for violating the First Amendment.

Perjury. Plain and simple. He should be out of office, and in jail.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-...older-perjury/

I just want to hear the statists defend this guy some more. Here he is, caught red-handed in a lie, and he STILL won't resign, and Obama WON'T fire him.

Corruption and dishonesty. Business as usual in the Obama administration. Here's the story:

Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday expressing "great concern" about the possibility that Holder lied under oath during his testimony earlier this month on the Justice Department's seizing of journalists' records, CBS News has learned.

On May 15, Holder told the committee he wasn't involved in "the potential prosecution" of a member of the press under the Espionage Act for disclosing classified information. "This is not something I've ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy," he said.

WH: "Self-evident" that Holder's congressional testimony was truthful
Shortly thereafter, reports began to surface that the Justice Department, in addition to seizing telephone and email records of Associated Press reporters, had seized the the emails and phone records of Fox News correspondent James Rosen. While Holder had recused himself from the AP proceedings, the Washington Post reported that the attorney general had personally signed off on the search warrant for Rosen's records.

In the search warrant, the FBI called Rosen a "criminal co-conspirator" and suggested there's probable cause that he violated federal law. Rosen was not charged with any crime.

House Judiciary Republicans, in their letter, raise the possibility that Holder perjured himself by issuing an ironclad denial of any involvement in the investigation and potential prosecution of reporters. "The media reports and statements issued by the Department regarding the search warrants for Mr. Rosen's emails appear to be at odds with your sworn testimony before the Committee," they wrote. "We believe - and we hope you will agree - it is imperative that the Committee, the Congress and the American people be provided a full and accurate account of your involvement in and approval of these search warrants."

The White House defended Holder on Wednesday, with press secretary Jay Carney saying it was "self-evident" that Holder told the truth. "I think based on what he said, he testified truthfully," Carney said. "The attorney general talked about prosecution," he explained, while the case in question was completed with no further charges or prosecution slated.

Asked Tuesday if he regrets signing off on the warrant, Holder told reporters: "I'm not satisfied (with the Justice Department's guidelines involving the news media in criminal investigations)."

Holder in the hot seat at congressional hearing

Holder: I wasn't involved in AP secret phone probe
The leak investigation sprang from Rosen's report in 2009 that North Korea would respond to sanctions with more nuclear tests. That information was classified when Rosen reported it, leading to an FBI investigation to uncover Rosen's source that quickly shifted focus to scrutinize Rosen himself.

Agents monitored Rosen's movements in and out of the State Department. They searched his personal emails and combed through his cell phone records, an unprecedented level of government surveillance of a journalist.

Last week, President Obama, who's come under bipartisan criticism for the digging into journalists' records, said he directed Holder to conduct a review of Justice Department's guidelines for probes that involve journalists and said Holder would meet with media groups as part of that review.

Those meetings will begin on Thursday, with Holder scheduled to meet the Washington bureau chiefs of several major media organizations to chart a path forward for leak investigations that balances law enforcement and national security concerns with a respect for press freedom.

An official close to Holder told CBS News the meetings would be "forward looking," and will not include a discussion of the facts surrounding the AP subpoena and the Rosen search warrant.

On Tuesday, Holder voiced optimism about the likelihood that the meetings will result in a truce of sorts between the Justice Department and the press, which has savaged Holder's department and the rest of the Obama administration for what they see as an overzealous prosecution of security leaks.

Well, it is CBS. The problem is our corrupt AG and tyrannical President. It's the "guidelines" for violating the First Amendment.

Perjury. Plain and simple. He should be out of office, and in jail.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-...older-perjury/ Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Holder wanted to step aside after the election. Odumbo wouldn't let Holder go. Evidently, Odumbo had reason to suspect he'd need a body to throw under the bus when the MSM took off its blinders. None of the Kool Aid sotted crowd in this forum has even attempted to defend Holder. Holder either lied to Congress, or he lied to the judges.

you should have added "an expedient" to the title

you should have added "racist" to the title

you should have added who gives a shit to the title

you should have added who gives a shit to the title Originally Posted by CJ7

So the people should not be concerned about possible corruption from the top law enforcement official in the country? "What does it matter"?

Corruption is ramped in Washington You just have to pick and choose who you want to blame at any particular moment.

This video pretty much sums it up. If it's hard to accept for a few of you, tough shit. Crime is Crime it shouldn't matter who commits it. Grow up and wise up. We aren't in the best of hands with these people.



http://youtu.be/2eRDz7VmOZs

So the people should not be concerned about possible corruption from the top law enforcement official in the country? "What does it matter"? Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

nothing better than "possible" conjecture is there?

so, IMO, people in general should let the committee hearing the case decide who is guilty of perjury, and not form their opinion based on opinions from a media source. If in fact, the committee hearing the testimony had a ligit perjury offense, they would have set the legal process in motion rather than send a letter suggesting Holder committed perjury. Unless I missed my guess, the republicans aren't real hesitant to move forward when they have solid ground under foot. and would make no bones about hammering Holder... its not like there aren't any republican lawyers in congress who would like to drive a nail in this admin's coffin ....

nothing better than "possible" conjecture is there?

so, IMO, people in general should let the committee hearing the case decide who is guilty of perjury, and not form their opinion based on opinions from a media source. If in fact, the committee hearing the testimony had a ligit perjury offense, they would have set the legal process in motion rather than send a letter suggesting Holder committed perjury. Unless I missed my guess, the republicans aren't real hesitant to move forward when they have solid ground under foot. and would make no bones about hammering Holder... its not like there aren't any republican lawyers in congress who would like to drive a nail in this admin's coffin .... Originally Posted by CJ7

Holder dissembled in front of Congress. Holder claimed he never had any intention of prosecuting any journalist as a traitor, but Holder had already gone before three judges where he swore he intended to investigate and prosecute Rosen as a traitor. He can't have it both ways.

Holder dissembled in front of Congress. Holder claimed he never had any intention of prosecuting any journalist as a traitor, but Holder had already gone before three judges where he swore he intended to investigate and prosecute Rosen as a traitor. He can't have it both ways.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

was Holder under oath?

Here's all I got to say bout that.

Holder has now got into that classic trap. He's having trouble remembering what lie he told yesterday.

was Holder under oath? Originally Posted by CJ7

Yes. That you weren't cognizant of that fact beckons the question, "Why did you post as you did in this thread?"

Yes. That you weren't cognizant of that fact beckons the question, "Why did you post as you did in this thread?"

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Like hell I wasn't cognizant of that fact, Im trying to make the point I previously mentioned..

it goes like this

until the House Judiciary Committee finds Holder guilty of perjury I don't really care what the media (story or opinion) comes up with , and feeds dumbshits like you and COF ... you and the silly shits that feed on conjecture have spun the facts and cried Wolf about everything under the sun for so long, the only audience you have left is each other ... half the country thinks youre full of shit, the other half doesn't bother to even go that far and
give you any attention..

If and when the HJC does decide, I could care less which side of the verdict Holder lands on.

Like hell I wasn't cognizant of that fact, Im trying to make the point I previously mentioned..

it goes like this

until the House Judiciary Committee finds Holder guilty of perjury I don't really care what the media (story or opinion) comes up with , and feeds dumbshits like you and COF ... you and the silly shits that feed on conjecture have spun the facts and cried Wolf about everything under the sun for so long, the only audience you have left is each other ... half the country thinks youre full of shit, the other half doesn't bother to even go that far and
give you any attention..

If and when the HJC does decide, I could care less which side of the verdict Holder lands on. Originally Posted by CJ7

Wow - you don't care if the Attorney General of the US committed perjury?