Ad

Showing posts with label Attorney General. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Attorney General. Show all posts

Monday, October 1, 2012

Univision: Fast & Furious. Ryan:Holder Should Resign. Obama: Liar Liar Pants On Fire.







Univision Contradicts Obama on Who Started 'Fast and Furious' and When
Monday, October 1, 2012





Univision: The untold story of what 'Fast and Furious' wrought in Mexico

Sunday evening, Univision airs an investigative report on how the botched 'Fast and Furious' program resulted in a deadly toll in Mexico when US authorities allowed guns to 'walk' across the border.

By , Staff writer / September 29, 2012
Part of a cache of seized weapons displayed at a news conference in Phoenix. The ATF is under fire over a Phoenix-based gun-trafficking investigation called "Fast and Furious," in which agents allowed hundreds of guns into the hands of straw purchasers in hopes of making a bigger case.
Matt York/AP

























source: http://www.csmonitor.com

...............................................................
"Obama specifically referred to 
“the Fast and Furious program,” 
which unquestionably 
president. 
That operation was not “begun 
under the previous administration.”
.......................................................................



'Furious' guns tied to 2010 Juarez massacre, other murders in Mexico



For the first time, Mexican victims of crimes tied to the botched Operation Fast and Furious are being identified, including teenagers killed in a 2010 massacre. 

A new report finds dozens of weapons recovered in Mexico have been connected with the ill-fated and ill-conceived anti-gunrunning program. While some Mexican authorities estimate 300 of their citizens have been injured or killed by Fast and Furious guns, little has been known about those weapons south of the U.S. border until now. 

Through the Mexican Freedom of Information Act, Spanish-language network Univision and Fox News obtained a list of 100,000 weapons recovered in Mexico in 2009 and 2010. The guns were then compared with the serial numbers of the 2,000 guns sold in Fast and Furious.   

Univision identified a total of 57 more previously unreported firearms that were bought by straw purchasers monitored by ATF during Operation Fast and Furious, and then recovered in Mexico in sites related to murders, kidnappings and other actions by Mexican hit men and drug cartels. 

In an investigative special that aired Sunday, Univision revealed one such massacre that was later found to be linked with Fast and Furious. 

It happened in January 2010 in Juarez, Mexico, where cartel members burst into a home killing 16 people -- mostly teenagers -- at a birthday party. While the gunmen were targeting members of a rival gang attending that party, some of the victims were innocent bystanders.

Family members of those killed have appeared before the Mexican government demanding to know what happened. 

"They are waiting for an answer," said Gerardo Reyes, head of Univision's investigative unit. "They want to know what happened. And why they didn't stop these guns from leaving the U.S. and ending up in these crimes?" 

"They feel helpless," added Reyes. "They don't know what to do. We interviewed one of them and they said ... 'Who's going to pay for this?'" 

It might end up being the U.S. government, should the family of Brian Terry prevail in its wrongful death claim. Terry is the U.S. Border Patrol agent killed in December 2010 in the Arizona desert, and whose murder scene contained weapons linked to Fast and Furious. 

"The people can go and sue in the United States with support of American lawyers and that will be a very interesting development certainly," said former Mexican prosecutor Samuel Gonzalez. 

The report also reveals the botched operation may have played a role in a 2009 massacre, where 18 young men were killed at a rehabilitation center also in Juarez. The massacre was reportedly ordered and carried out by Mexican hit men. 

According to a Mexican Army document obtained by Univision, three of the high-caliber weapons used in the attack were linked to a gun-tracing operation run by the ATF. The partial transcript obtained by Fox News did not specify whether this was Operation Fast and Furious. 

The Fast and Furious program caught the attention of Congress and the rest of the country after weapons from the operation were found at Terry's murder scene.   

One Justice Department official resigned and another retired after an inspector general report on the probe faulted multiple agencies for letting it get out of hand. Fourteen officials were forwarded for possible disciplinary action. 


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/01/report-claims-to-have-found-57-more-guns-tied-to-operation-fast-and-furious/#ixzz283leABnN



Obama’s Univision denial that Fast and Furious started on his watch


 at 07:05 PM ET, 09/21/2012
................................................................
"Obama specifically referred to 
“the Fast and Furious program,” 
which unquestionably 
president. 
That operation was not “begun 
under the previous administration.”
....................................................................


(Brendan Smialowski/AFP Getty Images)
















“I think it’s important for us to understand that the Fast and Furious program was a field-initiated program begun under the previous administration. When Eric Holder found out about it, he discontinued it. We assigned a inspector general to do a thorough report that was just issued, confirming that in fact Eric Holder did not know about this, that he took prompt action and the people who did initiate this were held accountable.”

— President Obama during Univision interview, Sept. 20, 2012
President Obama on Thursday fielded some tough questions from Hispanic journalists and voters during a forum hosted by the Spanish-language television network Univision. Host Jorge Ramos asked Obama whether U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. should be fired over Fast and Furious, a so-called “gun-walking”operation that allowed firearms to be transferred to suspected arms traffickers — and two guns purchased by a suspect in the Fast and Furious operation were found at a crime scene where a Border Patrol agent was killed.
Obama said the previous administration initiated Fast and Furious and that Holder shut the program down after he found out about it. Let’s check the first part of that statement for veracity.
fter he found out about it. Let’s check the first part of that statement for veracity.
The Facts
White House spokesman Eric Schultz said the president’s Fast and Furious comments referred “to the flawed tactic of gun-walking, which despite Republicans efforts to politicize this issue, began under the previous administration.”
So Obama was supposedly talking about “Operation Wide Receiver,” which the Phoenix division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) ran between 2006 and 2007, during the George W. Bush administration.
The ATF used that program to build a dossier against suspected traffickers, but federal authorities didn’t indict anyone until after the Justice department’s gang unit accepted the case for prosecution in September 2009 — after Obama took office.
Roughly one month after the Justice Department decided to press forward with that prosecution, the ATF’s Phoenix division launched Fast and Furious, again using gun-walking tactics. The program was similar to Wide Receiver, but it grew to involve significantly more firearms: 2,000.
The public learned about program after authorities linked two guns bought by a suspect in the Fast and Furious operation to the slaying of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. His death turned the gun-tracking program into a politically toxic matter.
Holder said he didn’t know about Fast and Furious before Terry was killed on Dec. 14, 2010 in southern Arizona. An 18-month independent investigation by the Justice Department’s inspector general found no evidence to the contrary, according to a report released Wednesday.
The Pinocchio Test
Clearly, ATF didn’t develop the practice of gun walking under the current administration. But Obama specifically referred to “the Fast and Furious program,” which unquestionably started during his term as president. That operation was not “begun under the previous administration.”
Perhaps the president made a mistake, and he really meant to talk about gun-walking in general instead of a particular gun-walking operation. But he could also be trying to wash his hands of any accountability for a program that launched on his watch and allowed 2,000 powerful firearms to end up on U.S. and Mexican streets.
Either way, we can’t let politicians get away with this sort of egregious factual mistake. Otherwise they’ll start making them on purpose.
For what it’s worth, Obama has shirked responsibility for politically hot failures in the past. He earned two Pinocchios in a previous column for saying his administration wasn’t at fault “per se” for the $535 million federal loan that went to the now-bankrupt solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra.
Obama earns three Pinocchios for his comments about Fast and Furious. His factual error sends a message that the previous administration is responsible for gun walking and Operation Fast and Furious.


Univision Blows Fast and Furious Bombshell Up On Holder, Obama



Univision report connects Operation Fast and Furious scandal to murders of Mexican teenager
 
By Matthew Boyle | The Daily Caller
 
The Spanish language television news network Univision unleashed a bombshell investigative report on Operation Fast and Furious Sunday evening, finding that in January 2010 drug cartel hit men slaughtered students with weapons the United States government allowed to flow to them across the Mexican border.
“On January 30, 2010, a commando of at least 20 hit men parked themselves outside a birthday party of high school and college students in Villas de Salvarcar, Ciudad Juarez,” according to a version of the Univision report in English, on the ABC News website.
“Near midnight, the assassins, later identified as hired guns for the Mexican cartel La Linea, broke into a one-story house and opened fire on a gathering of nearly 60 teenagers. Outside, lookouts gunned down a screaming neighbor and several students who had managed to escape. Fourteen young men and women were killed, and 12 more were wounded before the hit men finally fled.”
Citing a Mexican Army document it obtained and published, Univision reported that “[t]hree of the high caliber weapons fired that night in Villas de Salvarcar were linked to a gun tracing operation run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).”
That operation was Fast and Furious.
The “massacre,” as Univision described it, was not the only bombshell the network unveiled in its Sunday evening report.
“Univision News identified a total of 57 more previously unreported firearms that were bought by straw purchasers monitored by ATF during Operation Fast and Furious, and then recovered in Mexico in sites related to murders, kidnappings, and at least one other massacre,” the Univision report reads.

Univision Special On Fast & Furious' Connection To Massacre Of Mexican Teens

The above video is of Univision's special investigation on the connection between Fast & Furious and the massacre of nearly 60 Mexican teenagers.

"On January 30, 2010, a commando of at least 20 hit men parked themselves outside a birthday party of high school and college students in Villas de Salvarcar, Ciudad Juarez. Near midnight, the assassins, later identified as hired guns for the Mexican cartel La Linea, broke into a one-story house and opened fire on a gathering of nearly 60 teenagers. Outside, lookouts gunned down a screaming neighbor and several students who had managed to escape. Fourteen young men and women were killed, and 12 more were wounded before the hit men finally fled," ABC News reported.

"Indirectly, the United States government played a role in the massacre by supplying some of the firearms used by the cartel murderers. Three of the high caliber weapons fired that night in Villas de Salvarcar were linked to a gun tracing operation run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), according to a Mexican army document obtained exclusively by Univision News," the network also reported.

UNIVISION FINDS MORE WEAPONS LINKED TO FAST & FURIOUS


 1 Oct 2012, 1:52 AM PDT

The ATF’s Operation Fast and Furious allowed over 2,000 guns to walk into the hands of already dangerous Mexican drug cartels. The agency made no attempt to interdict them. People used the guns to murder Border Patrol Agent Brian and hundreds of Mexican citizens.


Univision News found 57 unreported firearms from Fast and Furious and three of these weapons were used in a massacre on January 30, 2010. Twenty hit men surrounded a birthday party filled with high school and college students in Villas de Salvarcar, Ciudad Juarez. They opened fire on the party guests. Fourteen were murdered and twelve more were wounded. The assassins were hired by the Mexican cartel La Linea.
In August, I did my best to document the hysteria in Mexico caused by Fast and Furious. The most well known case is the murder of prominent Mexican attorney Mario Gonzalez Rodriguez, brother of then Chihuahua Attorney General Patricia Gonzalez Rodriguez. He was kidnapped, forced to “confess” on tape that his sister worked with the Juarez cartel. They found his body in a shallow grave on November 5, 2009. Two of the AK-47s connected to his death were linked to Fast and Furious.
One hour before the special vice president nominee Paul Ryan told The Daily Caller he thinks Attorney General Eric Holder should resign.
No one within the Department of Justice has been held accountable. They have been allowed to resign quietly or reassigned to another position. No one has been fired or arrested.


Univision Contradicts Obama on Who Started 'Fast and Furious' and When MRCTVone Monday, October 1, 2012 - 4:57am

Friday, June 22, 2012

Update...This will give you a chuckle!...President Invokes Executive Privilege Over "Fast & Furious" Documents. Will This Be A "Monica Lewinsky" Type Case?

This is awesome!

 

-----------------------end update--------------------------------------------
As you may already know, Eric Holder, who was sworn in as the 82nd Attorney General of the United States on February 3, 2009 by Vice President Joe Biden, used EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, approved of by President Obama, regarding the documents that were subpoenaed in the case of "Fast & Furious". 
According to news media outlets, past U.S. Presidents have used this EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE on numerous occasions with success.  Some of these outlets have also emphasize that this is just a political probe in the first place, that it is an attempt by Republicans to make Obama look bad during an election.
Here is the letter invoking this current attempt at the utilization of EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE.  Please note that Issa is said to have reported that Holder did not mention using EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE yesterday, during their meeting.  Why would that be?  What is going on that needs to be swept under the rug?
The Honorable Darrell E. Issa
Chairman
June 20, 2012
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
After you rejected the Department's recent offers of additional accommodations, you stated that the Committee intends to proceed with its scheduled meeting to consider a resolution citing the Attorney General for contempt for failing to comply with the Committee's subpoena of October 11, 2011. I write now to inform you that the President has asserted executive privilege over the relevant post-February 4, 2011, documents.
We regret that we have arrived at this point, after the many steps we have taken to address the Committee's concerns and to accommodate the Committee's legitimate oversight interests regarding Operation Fast and Furious. Although we are deeply disappointed that the Committee appears intent on proceeding with a contempt vote, the Department remains willing to work with the Committee to reach a mutually satisfactory resolution of the outstanding issues.
Over the last fourteen months, the Department has provided a significant amount of information to the Committee in an extraordinary effort to accommodate the Committee's legitimate oversight interests. The Department has provided the Committee with over 7,600 pages of documents and has made numerous high-level officials available for public congressional testimony, transcribed interviews, and briefings. Attorney General Holder has answered congressional questions about Fast and Furious during nine public hearings, including two before the Committee. The Department has devoted substantial resources to responding to
these congressional inquiries.
In addition, upon learning of questions about the tactics used in Fast and Furious, the Attorney General promptly asked the Department's Acting Inspector General to open an investigation into the operation. This investigation continues today. We expect that the Inspector General's report will further help the Department to understand how these mistakes occurred and to ensure that they do not occur again.
Finally, the Department has instituted a number of significant reforms to ensure that the mistakes made in Fast and Furious are not repeated. For example, a directive was issued to the field prohibiting the flawed tactics used in that operation from being used in future law enforcement operations. Leadership and staffing at ATF and the Arizona U.S. Attorney's Office were reorganized, and A TF instituted new policies to ensure closer supervision by ATF management of significant gun trafficking cases. The Criminal Division refined its process for reviewing wiretap authorization requests by its Office of Enforcement Operations. And component heads were directed to take additional care to provide accurate information in response to congressional requests, including by soliciting information directly from employees with detailed personal knowledge of the subject matter at issue.
The Committee's original report accompanying its contempt resolution identified three "main categories" of interest: (1) "Who at Justice Department Headquarters Should Have Known of the Reckless Tactics"; (2) "How the Department Concluded that Fast and Furious was 'Fundamentally Flawed"'; and (3) "How the Inter-Agency Task Force Failed." Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House ofRepresentatives, Report at 39-40 (June 15, 20 12). With respect to the first category, the thousands of pages of documents and other information we have provided establish that the inappropriate tactics used in Fast and Furious were initiated and carried out by personnel in the field over several years and were not initiated or authorized by Department leadership. We have also provided the Committee with significant information with respect to the third category. In a revised report issued late last week, the Committee has made clear that these categories will not be the subject of the contempt vote. See Report at 41.
Rather, the Committee has said that the contempt vote will address only the second category, "How the Department Concluded that Fast and Furious was 'Fundamentally Flawed." See Report at 42; Letter for Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, from Darrell E. Issa, Chairman at 1-2 (June 13, 2012) ("Chairman's Letter"). In this regard, your letter of June 13 stated that the Committee is now "focused on" "documents from after February 4, 2011, related to the Department's response to Congress and whistleblower allegations" concerning Operation Fast and Furious, in order to "examine the Department's mismanagement of its response to Operation Fast and Furious." !d. The Committee has explained that it needs these post-February 4 documents, including "those relating to actions the Department took to silence or retaliate against Fast and Furious whistleblowers," so that it can determine "what the Department knew about Fast and Furious, including when and how it discovered its February 4 letter was false, and the
Department's efforts to conceal that information from Congress and the public." Report at 33.
The Department has gone to great lengths to accommodate the Committee's legitimate interest in the Department's management of its response to congressional inquiries into Fast and Furious. The information provided to the Committee shows clearly that the Department leadership did not intend to mislead Congress in the February 4 letter or in any other statements concerning Fast and Furious. The Department has already shared with the Committee all internal documents concerning the drafting of the February 4letter, and numerous Department officials and employees, including the Attorney General, have provided testimony, transcribed interviews, briefings, and other statements concerning the drafting and subsequent withdrawal of that letter.
This substantial record shows that Department officials involved in drafting the February 4 letter turned to senior officials of components with supervisory responsibility for Operation Fast and Furious- the leadership of ATF and the U.S. Attorney's Office in Arizona- and were told in clear and definitive terms that the allegations in Ranking Member Grassley's letters were false. After the February 4 letter was sent, such assurances continued but were at odds with information being provided by Congress and the media, and the Attorney General therefore referred the matter to the Acting Inspector General for review.
As the Department's review proceeded over the next several months, Department leaders publicly indicated that the facts surrounding Fast and Furious were uncertain and that the Department had significant doubts about the assertions in the February 4 letter. For example, at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on May 3, 2011, the Attorney General testified that the Department's Acting Inspector General was reviewing "whether or not Fast and Furious was conducted in a way that's consistent with" Department policy, stating "that's one of the questions that we'll have to see." The next day, May 4, 2011, in response to a question from Senator Grassley at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about allegations that ATF had not interdicted weapons, the Attorney General said, "I frankly don't know. That's what the [Inspector General's] investigation ... will tell us." As you have acknowledged, Department staff reiterated these doubts during a briefing for Committee staff on May 5, 2011. Testifying before the Committee in June 2011, Ronald Weich, Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs, acknowledged that "obviously allegations from the A TF agents ... have given rise to serious questions about how ATF conducted this operation." He added that "we're not clinging to the statements" in the February 4 letter.
In October 2011, the Attorney General told the Committee that Fast and Furious was "fundamentally flawed." This statement reflected the conclusion that Department leaders had reached based on the significant effort over the prior months to understand the facts of Fast and Furious and the other Arizona-based law enforcement operations. The Attorney General reiterated this conclusion while testifying before Congress in November 2011. The Department's many public statements culminated in the formal withdrawal of the February 4 letter on December 2, 2011.
The Department has substantially complied with the outstanding subpoena. The documents responsive to the remaining subpoena items pertain to sensitive law enforcement activities, including ongoing criminal investigations and prosecutions, or were generated by Department officials in the course of responding to congressional investigations or media inquiries about this matter that are generally not appropriate for disclosure.
In addition to these productions, we made extraordinary accommodations with respect to the drafting and subsequent withdrawal of the February 4 letter, producing to the Committee 1,364 pages of deliberative documents. And we accepted your June 13 letter's invitation to "mak[ e] a serious offer" of further accommodation in hopes of reaching "an agreement that renders the process of contempt unnecessary." Chairman's Letter at 2. Specifically, we offered to provide the Committee with a briefing, based on documents that the Committee could retain, explaining further how the Department's understanding of the facts of Fast and Furious evolved during the post-February 4 period, as well as the process that led to the withdrawal of the February 4 letter. See Letter for Darrell E. Issa, Chairman, from Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General at 1 (June 14, 2012). We also offered to provide you with an understanding of the documents that we could not produce and to address any remaining questions that you had after you received the briefing and the documents on which it was based. We believe that this additional accommodation would have fully satisfied the Committee's requests for information. We are therefore disappointed that the Committee has not accepted our offer and has chosen instead to proceed with the scheduled contempt vote.
As I noted at the outset, the President, in light of the Committee's decision to hold the contempt vote, has asserted executive privilege over the relevant post-February 4 documents.
The legal basis for the President's assertion of executive privilege is set forth in the enclosed letter to the President from the Attorney General. In brief, the compelled production to Congress of these internal Executive Branch documents generated in the course of the deliberative process concerning the Department's response to congressional oversight and related media inquiries would have significant, damaging consequences. As I explained at our meeting yesterday, it would inhibit the candor of such Executive Branch deliberations in the future and significantly impair the Executive Branch's ability to respond independently and effectively to congressional oversight. Such compelled disclosure would be inconsistent with the separation of powers established in the Constitution and would potentially create an imbalance in the relationship between these two.co-equal branches of the Government.
In closing, while we are deeply disappointed that the Committee intends to move forward with consideration of a contempt citation, I stress that the Department remains willing to work toward a mutually satisfactory resolution of this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if we can be assistance.
Enclosure
cc: The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings
Ranking Minority Member
Sincerely,
James M. Cole
Deputy Attorney General
In a case with Clinton in 1998, when there was an attempt to use EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE to sweep the Monica S. Lewinsky investigation under the rug, he was denied because it became apparent that the details of the investigation were too important to follow through with to accept the EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE.  

President Is Denied Executive PrivilegeBy Peter Baker and Susan SchmidtWashington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, May 6, 1998; Page A01
A federal judge has ruled that President Clinton cannot use the power of his office to block prosecutors from questioning his senior aides, rejecting Clinton's assertion of executive privilege in the Monica S. Lewinsky investigation, lawyers familiar with the decision said yesterday.
In a ruling issued under court seal Monday, Chief U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson concluded that independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr's need to collect evidence in his obstruction of justice probe outweighs Clinton's interest in preserving the confidentiality of White House discussions, the lawyers said.
source: WASHINGTON POST

Regarding the issue of defining EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, I quote Wikipedia here.
In the United States government, executive privilege is the power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government. The concept of executive privilege is not mentioned explicitly in the United States Constitution, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled it to be an element of the separation of powers doctrine, and/or derived from the supremacy of executive branch in its own area of Constitutional activity. 
The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case."(418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns.
Historically, the uses of executive privilege underscore the untested nature of the doctrine, since Presidents have generally sidestepped open confrontations with the United States Congress and the courts over the issue by first asserting the privilege, then producing some of the documents requested on an assertedly voluntary basis.

What happens if the panel cites Eric Holder in contempt?  Here is your answer.


What happens if panel cites Holder for contempt?
updated 1:56 PM EDT, Wed June 20, 2012
(CNN) -- The House Oversight Committee is considering a contempt measure against Attorney General Eric Holder over documents sought by the panel investigating the botched gun-running sting called Operation Fast and Furious. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama entered the dispute by asserting executive privilege over the documents sought by committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-California.
Here are the issues around the dispute:
Q: What is a contempt citation?
 
A: Congress can vote to hold a congressional witness in contempt of Congress if it considers the witness to be obstructing its ability to carry out its constitutional powers. For a person to be held in contempt, Congress must vote on a contempt citation in committee.
The process involves a series of legal maneuvers including the president's ability to assert executive privilege, as he did in this case, which has historically made executive branch officials immune from criminal prosecution.
Q: Why is a contempt citation being considered against Holder?A: Issa may hold Holder in contempt for failing to hand over all of the documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious, the botched Justice Department sting operation linked to the death of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and a number of Mexican citizens from some of the 2,000 weapons that fell into the hands of Mexican drug gangs.
Q: When is the last time an executive branch official faced a contempt citation?A: Although this is the first time an attorney general has faced a potential contempt citation, other executive branch officials have been held in contempt of Congress.
Most recently, George W. Bush White House Counsel Harriet Miers and Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten were held in contempt of Congress despite Bush asserting executive privilege in their case. During the vote in early 2008, a large number of Republicans walked out in protest of what they saw as a partisan vote.
Miers and Bolten were accused of failing to cooperate in a congressional investigation into the mass firings of U.S. attorneys and allegations that the White House was using the Justice Department for political aims. Their citations marked the first time White House officials had been found in contempt of Congress.
source: CNN


This is becoming quite an interesting process and may be more scandalous than we already have been seeing.  Will the Supreme Court make the right decision, or will they be threatened like they have been said to be regarding the Obamacare issue?  
In this July 20, 1999, photo, President Bill Clinton shakes hand with Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder, right, as Attorney General Janet Reno looks on at a American Bar Association Presidential Call to Action event at the White House in Washington.