actually. the executive privilege claim is about givng the finger to issa and his fellow rightwingnut hacks.
they interviewed holder 7 times. they had piles and piles of documents. the emails they wanted had nothing to do with the death of the officer. and they still could have seen everything if they stopped the rightwingnut hack stuff and dropped the contempt nonsense. if they were interested in "fast and furious*, they'd have subpoenaed Mukasey... in whose justice department UNDER BUSH, the program started.
oh... and stop telling people they shouldn't comment on our politics. or feel free to stop mentioning any country other than the U.S.
mmmkay?
With all due respect, Jillian? You as a lawyer should be well aware of the reason WHY most people get interviewed numerous times...namely that their story hasn't checked out. Holder originally told the Congressional investigating committee that he had only heard about Fast & Furious "several weeks" before the story broke only to have e-mails surface that had him discussing Fast & Furious nine MONTHS earlier. To be quite blunt...Eric Holder got caught in a bald faced lie. As for the "piles and piles" of documents that the DOJ has turned over? Also as a lawyer you should be well aware of that little game...namely inundating your opponent with reams of inconsequential information while holding back what they are actually seeking. The committee wants to know WHO in the DOJ knew about Fast & Furious and WHEN it is they knew it. Attorney General Holder has stone walled that effort from the get go. THAT is why contempt charges are being sought against him.
As for a subpoena for Mukasey? Why...so he could tell the committee why Operation Wide Receiver was stopped by the Bush Administration? I'm sorry but the OBAMA DOJ under Eric Holder decided to restart a program that had been halted by a previous administration because it was shown that even with the cooperation of Mexican authorities that they couldn't keep track of where the guns were going...but Holder's people then took it much further...not informing the Mexican authorities that they were going to let guns walk and NOT EVEN ATTEMPTING TO MAKE ARRESTS.
for the record, my objection is not to holder having to answer questions. when things go bad, they always have to get explained.
my objection is to issa, who promised an investigation a day, using something which should be bi-partisan to score political points and try to embarrass holder, who the right has had an issue with from day one.
i also have issues with them allowing a conspiracy theorist like the "break their windows not" blogger, to influence the actions of our political machine.
as for mukasey... if you have credible evidence that the bush admin stopped their program of "gun walking", then i would very much like to see it. but given that the program was the same, he should speak to it as well. bi-partisan actionl; bi-partisan investigation instead of opportunistic nonsense by issa and friends.
it is often true, even in our own domestic investigations, that criminal activity is allowed as a means to obtain evidence against bigger and bigger fish. i don't think this was any different.
