The irony was just too much. Last night Attorney General -- and unindicted co-conspirator in the death of a US Border Patrol agent and a few hundred Mexican civilians -- Eric Holder addressed a meeting of the ongoing RICO conspiracy founded by the “Reverend” Al Shaprton, the National Action Network. That Eric Holder would address a group devoted to racial grievance mongering is unremarkable. Eric Holder’s entire tenure at Justice, when he hasn’t been involved in trafficking firearms to narco-cartels, has centered on creating the appearance of racism where even the dimmest bulb can see that it is false.
He took the opportunity to blame the difficulties the Obama regime has faced over the past five years, not on incompetency or their lack of respect for American institutions and even the rule of law but on… racism. From the Politico and Eric Holder Strays From Planned Remarks:
“The last five years have been defined by significant strides and by lasting reforms even in the face, even in the face of unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly and divisive adversity,” Holder said. “If you don’t believe that, you look at the way — forget about me, forget about me. You look at the way the attorney general of the United States was treated yesterday by a House committee — has nothing to do with me, forget that. What attorney general has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment? What president has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?”
What kind of treatment did Holder have to endure? He was confronted by the truth, something which has the same effect upon members of the Obama regime as Holy Water has on vampires.
Testifying before a oversight hearing of the House Judiciary Committee, Holder was pressed by Representative Sensenbrenner on why Justice hadn’t moved forward with perjury charges against Director of National Intelligence James Clapper:
“What more do you need besides an admission from Gen. Clapper that he lied?” Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) asked, pointing to Clapper’s later remark that his denial was “the least untruthful” answer he could give.
During his appearance before a House Judicial Committee oversight hearing, Holder was noncommittal in his response, declining even to say whether Clapper’s testimony was being formally investigated by prosecutors.
“I’m really not in a position to confirm whether the department is investigating any particular matter,” the attorney general said.
“Is there any circumstance under which you would prosecute a member of the administration for lying under oath to Congress?” Sensenbrenner shot back.
“Wouldn’t it be pointless for Congress to pass new laws limiting data collection if the Justice Department and other officials are at liberty to lie about enforcing them?” said Sensenbrenner, a co-author of the Patriot Act.
Next up was Texas Representative Louie Gohmert who pressed Holder on documents related to the BATFE killing spree known as “Fast and Furious.” Via Melanie Hunter of CNSNews, Holder to Gohmert on Contempt: ‘You Don’t Want to Go There, Buddy’:
At issue was a request for documents in the DOJ’s case against the Holy Land Foundation, a designated terrorist group based in Texas, whose founders were convicted and sentenced for funneling money to Hamas.
The men are now asking for a new trial, blaming their lawyers for their convictions. In February, the DOJ disputed their attorney’s claim, saying there was a “mountain of evidence” that proves the Islamic charity was controlled by Hamas.
“I was fairly specific to make sure that I got the documents that the Department of Justice handed over to people convicted of supporting terrorism. They’re terrorists. We’ve given them the documents,” Gohmert said.
From that point the hearing became more interesting:
Gohmert: “Sir, I’ve read you what your department promised, and it is inadequate, and I realize that contempt is not a big deal to our attorney general, but it is important that we have proper oversight,” Gohmert said.
Holder: “You don’t want to go there, buddy. You don’t want to go there, okay?”
Gohmert: “I don’t want to go there?”
Gohmert: “About the contempt?”
Holder: “You should not assume that that is not a big deal to me. I think that it was inappropriate. I think it was unjust, but never think that that was not a big deal to me. Don’t ever think that.”
Gohmert: “Well I’m just looking for evidence, and normally we’re known by our fruits, and there have been no indications that it was a big deal, because your department has still not been forthcoming in producing the documents that were the subject of the contempt.”
Holder: “The documents that we were prepared to make available then, we’re prepared to make available now that would have obviated the whole need. This was all about the gun lobby and a desire to have a—
Gohmert: “Sir, we’ve been trying to get to the bottom of Fast and Furious where people died, where at least a couple hundred Mexicans died, and we can’t get the information to get to the bottom of that, so I don’t need lectures from you about contempt, because it is very difficult to deal with asking questions.”
Holder: “And I don’t need lectures from you either.”
Gohmert: “As a former judge, I’d never have asked questions of someone who’s been held in contempt. We waited ‘til the contempt was purged, and then we asked questions.”
What Gohmert is referring to is the fact that in June 2012, Congress, in a bipartisan vote, voted to hold Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for his refusal to supply documents related to Fast and Furious, documents which still haven’t been made available to Congress.
The vote was 255-67, with 17 Democrats voting in support of a criminal contempt resolution, which authorizes Republicans leaders to seek criminal charges against Holder. This Democratic support came despite a round of behind-the-scenes lobbying by senior White House and Justice officials - as well as pressure from party leaders - to support Holder.
Another civil contempt resolution, giving the green light for the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to sue the Justice Department to get the Fast and Furious documents, passed by a 258-95 margin. Twenty-one Democrats voted for that measure.
What Holder is attributing to racism is actually a logical and forseeable consequence of the absolutely lawless way in which Holder and his Justice department have operated over the past five years. No Attorney General in the history of the nation, not even the much maligned John Mitchell, have been complicit in as many patently illegal and abusive actions as Holder. But he is simply going to the well of racial grievance in hopes of deflecting real scrutiny from his criminal actions and those of the Department of Justice.