House Speaker John Boehner indicated on Sunday that he would take the Administration to court over documents requested in the Oversight Committee investigation into the Fast and Furious scandal.
The House of Representatives voted on Thursday to hold U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over documents relating to a congressional inquiry into the failed gun-trafficking investigation. But the Justice Department has declined to prosecute Holder because the president invoked executive privilege to shield the documents.
“That’s why we’re also going to file in district court a civil suit over the issue of executive privilege,” Boehner said, adding that Republicans would file the suit sometime in the next few weeks [...]
On “Fox News Sunday,” White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew called the Republicans’ pursuit of additional documents a “fishing expedition.” Obama administration officials have testified at 11 hearings on the issue and provided thousands of documents.
I’m on the record saying that I don’t think much of the Oversight Committee’s investigation. And we have a decent amount of information that calls into question the rendering of Fast and Furious as a gun-walking scandal. It appears more like a case of federal prosecutors being overcautious than a definitive strategy to track guns carried across the border by straw purchasers. What’s more, the program started under the Bush Administration and ended under the Obama Administration.
Nevertheless, the proper way to handle this is to challenge the executive privilege invocation in court. Clearly we need more clarity – and limits – to how an Administration can use executive privilege. We know they can privilege both direct communications and deliberative communications among a government agency. But when executive privilege gets used as a mere method to deny documents to another branch of government engaged in oversight, that becomes a problem. In general, there’s way too much secrecy in government, and that’s been especially true of this Administration, which has been anything but the most transparent ever. We need rules on the classification of documents, because the executive branch has shown themselves willing at every opportunity to expand the definition.
I think Fast and Furious is a stupid case. But sometimes it takes stupid cases.




17 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Obama is running around killing American citizens without trial… essentially using executive privilege. You’re worried about exec priv overstep because he didn’t turn over some documents?
Where are the jobs?
But what will happen to all those amazing cases Holder is making against Wall Street? Oh, never mind.
OR…..
I’m just glad this didn’t happen several months ago, when the distraction might have endangered the Justice Department’s successful pursuit of Roger Clemons and Johnny Edwards.
Oh, wait….
Who cares?
This case needs a better handle:
“Slow and Silly”
“Issa is a Pissa”
“Political and Petulant”
“Feckless and Jobless”
“NRA vs ATF”
The real crime here is the lack of any gun control in Arizona, which became the weapons supplier of choice for Mexican drug lords.
Just like teenagers may give money to a guy over 21 to buy beer for them, the Mexican drug lords gave money to a local over 18 to buy assault weapons (AK-47s fergawdssakes) for them to take back to Mexico.
In Arizona buying beer for a minor is a crime; however, buying assault weapons for a Mexican drug lord is not.
“Fast and Furious” as a scandal is election-year bullshit. I don’t approve of the invocation of executive privilege, which seemed spooky to me when I first read of it.
It’s a tempest in a teapot, and will disappear. The Republicans are grasping at straws, and the idiots on Fox TV who are trying to make a “Gate” out of this are embarrassing themselves even more than is typical.
Is the crime the lack of gun control in Arizona, or the lack of *border control* at least insofar as de facto arms shipments are concerned? The problem specifically with “buying guns for Mexican drug lords” is not that guns are bought per se but that they cross the border and that the money for them crosses the border, too.
(To make it clear, I favor limits on the number of guns some guy can just walk into a shop and buy, in any given period of time, as a way of addressing this problem. You can make it so that I gun buy a gun in Arizona. Like, once a month. At most. Then I can have my guns, and the drug lords will no longer find it efficient to import their guns from American shops, if they have to pay 5 people over a year’s time to get their 60 guns.)
David, not just anybody could write something so……uh……”Mel Brooksian”.
Sounds like something from “Blazing Saddles”.
Those Republicans sure love them some constitutional crisis, don’t they?
I though we had agreed to put “-gate” on all government scandals from now on??? “Holder-gate”????
They be lost without one.
This is some seriously disturbing nonsense.
This will disrupt his investigation and prosecution of war crimes too.
One weapon per month is the law in CA.
Since they already hold the AG in contempt, why don’t they use their inherent contempt authority and send the Sgt at Arms out to arrest Holder?