| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| William Barr vs. Eric Holder: A Tale of Two Attorneys General |
| 2019-05-11 |
| [NationalReview] Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has declared it a "constitutional crisis" that Attorney General William Barr refuses to divulge the small parts of the Mueller report that contain grand-jury material. By a straight party-line vote, the House Judiciary Committee voted to hold Barr in contempt of Congress. What did Pelosi think when Barr’s predecessor, Eric Holder, refused to divulge documents to a congressional committee and was held in contempt? "Ridiculous!" she said. What did Holder and Obama say? That the House subpoena was a violation of "separation of powers." To partisans, the difference between the cases is obvious. To partisans, the difference between the cases is obvious. Barr is defending Trump; Holder was Obama’s self-proclaimed "wing man." That is enough for many journalists and most politicians. The rest of us might want to know: What is the legal or constitutional difference between Holder’s refusal to provide documents and Barr’s? Here is the background of the Holder contempt. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), a unit of Holder’s Department of Justice (DOJ), conducted an operation called "Fast & Furious," intended to track illegal gun sales. In fact it put hundreds of weapons in the hands of Mexican criminal gangs, leading to the death of an American officer. On February 2, 2011, after news of the operation emerged, Holder’s assistant attorney general sent a letter to Congress declaring that the Obama administration had no knowledge of the operation. This letter was false, as Holder later admitted. Nancy Pelosi and Jerrold Nadler did not declare this a constitutional crisis. They backed Holder. On June 19, 2012, President Obama invoked executive privilege, and on the same day, the House committee voted to hold Attorney General Holder in contempt of Congress. The committee vote was 23‐17. The full House voted Holder in contempt by a lopsided vote of 255‐67, with 17 Democrats voting for the contempt and many more staying home to avoid having to cast a vote. How does this compare with the Barr contempt? Under regulations written by the Clinton administration, the special prosecutor is instructed to submit a "confidential" report to the attorney general at the end of an investigation. It is entirely the prerogative of the attorney general to decide whether to release any of the report to the public or to Congress. In his discretion, Attorney General Barr decided to release the Mueller report in its entirety, but for two categories of redactions, which were made in conjunction with the Mueller team. One main difference is that Barr sought to protect grand jury information by redacting it which is legally required whereas under Holder, Holder did it for political reasons to basically cover-up an illegal operation operated out the government and to protect Obama's presidency. Barr made nearly all of the Mueller report available to the public and even more in a SCIF. In this case Barr is following the law and the Dems are using the law in a political way; they want to break the law under the guise of following the law. |
| Posted by:JohnQC |
| #2 Another difference is that Barr is banned, by FEDERAL LAW, from disclosure. Personally I think he should hand something over, and when they take it arrest them for violating non-disclosure laws by essentially ordering him to hand it over. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2019-05-11 13:05 |
| #1 Here is the background of the Holder contempt. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), a unit of Holder’s Department of Justice (DOJ), conducted an operation called "Fast & Furious," intended to track illegal gun sales. In fact it put hundreds of weapons in the hands of Mexican criminal gangs, leading to the death of an American officer. We know that Mexican drug cartel money corrupts the Mexican government. I keep wondering how much of this money finds its way north, into the pockets of our government officials. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2019-05-11 11:52 |