ext_370466 ([identity profile] sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] talkpolitics2012-06-26 10:38 am
Entry tags:

Contempt Vote Tomorrow

Last week the Congressional Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted 23 to 17 (down party lines) to hold to hold US Attorney General Eric Holder in Contempt of Congress for attempting to Obstruct thier ivestigation into the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry who was killed by a rifle registered to the US Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (BATFE).

It has since been revealed that BATFE Agents along the Arizona/Mexico Border had been providing weapons to the Signolla Drug Cartel. I posted about the story when initially broke here.

Holder initially denied any knowledge of of the policy, and later defended it as simply the continuation of a Bush-era program called "Operation Wide Reciever". He has since withdrawn those statements. Holder has not yet been formally held in contempt of Congress. The full House still needs to approve the resolution in order for that to happen. But President Obama has elected to support Holder by asserting executive privilege over the documents subpoenaed by the Oversight Committee.

This raises some interesting questions...

Actual lawyers feel free to corrct me, but as I understand it executive privilege allows the president to withhold documents and other materials that would reveal advisory opinions and recommendations by which governmental policies are formulated. By invoking executive privilege Obama and Holder are essentially admitting that "allowing" guns into Mexico was a policy descision.

Cynics have theorized that this was an effort to justify increased Gun-Control and Federal intervention in southern states. Others see it as simply stupidity and negligence. But what the question I find truly fascinating is "Why has the Obama adminisration chosen to make a stand here?"

I've been expecting Holder to get the boot for a couple of years now but it still hasn't happened. Historically Obama has been willing to sever ties with people who's association has become a liability. Holder is becoming a massive target for the Right and seems to rate an indifferent shrug from the left, so why protect him?

I have a few theories which (in order of increasing cynicism) are...

1: Holder and Obama are friends and Obama is genuinely prepared to risk his own reputation to protect him.

2: Obama doesn't think the charges will stick and sees this as an opprotunity to fuck over a Republican-lead investigation.

3: In relation to #3 Obama and Holder have bought into thier own hype and actually believe that nobody cares about violence in Mexico, they just hate black people.

4: The subpoenaed documents include information that could implicate Obama in wrong doing.

5: Holder has dirt on Obama and is blackmailing him.

Anyone else have any ideas?

[identity profile] dexeron.livejournal.com 2012-06-26 07:44 pm (UTC)(link)
True enough, and I'm not even saying that Holder SHOULDN'T be found in contempt. There are rules, and once it was on his plate (whatever his responsibilities before that point) he's supposed to follow them. And certainly, the whole mess gives the lie to this being "the most transparent administration", but we've already figured that out.

I still can't get behind this idea that somehow this makes Obama (or even Holder, really) responsibile for Mexican mass murder, and I can't buy into the conspiracy angles. Doesn't mean I like Holder. I think the guy's dropped the ball all over the place, and frankly he should have fallen on his metaphorical sword months ago.

[identity profile] mikeyxw.livejournal.com 2012-06-27 07:30 am (UTC)(link)
The idea that Obama or Holder are responsible for the murders isn't something I really expect is believed by even those making the claim. The thing that is really being investigated is the cover-up. The dead people are just incidental.