As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Did Holder Commit Perjury Last Week?

Attorney General Eric Holder may have lied under oath last week when he told a House committee that he has never been involved in the “potential prosecution” of reporters for disclosing classified material.

Michael Isikoff of NBC News reported Thursday that in fact Holder himself signed off on the search warrant that identified Fox News reporter James Rosen as a possible “co-conspirator” in a crime that involved reporting he did that resulted in the release of classified information.

Sounds like a “potential prosecution” to me. But here”s what Holder said in answer to questions from Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) of the House Judiciary Committee:

With regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material, that is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy. In fact, my view is quite the opposite.

Here’s a video of the exchange. Holder’s possible perjury comes just before the five minute mark.

Last night Karl Rove began the drumbeat, charging Holder’s statement was “potentially a lie to Congress.”

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney Wednesday when to great pains to assert that Obama doesn’t think reporters should be prosecuted:

The President’s view is that if you were to ask him should a reporter ever be prosecuted for doing his or her job, the answer in his view is no.

So how does it make sense that they get labeled potential “co-conspirators?”

In a featured column in the Wall Street Journal today, attorney Theodore Boutrous Jr. writes that the Justice Department has “has completely lost sight of the First Amendment” in its pursuit of reporters.

He notes that the Supreme Court, even as recently as 2001, has been clear that reporters must be permitted to do their jobs:

The Supreme Court, however, has repeatedly made clear that the First Amendment forbids the government from making it a crime for a reporter who lawfully obtains information of public concern to publish it—even if he knows his source may have committed a crime by leaking the information.

As the court explained in Bartnicki v. Vopper (2001)—a case in which a radio station broadcast the tape of a cellphone conversation it knew had been illegally recorded and disclosed in violation of federal wiretapping laws—”a stranger’s illegal conduct does not suffice to remove the First Amendment shield from speech about a matter of public concern.” To conclude otherwise, the court added, would encourage “timidity and self-censorship” . . .

In the words of the Supreme Court in Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. United States (1953), the press is tasked with “vigilantly scrutinizing” the government “as a potent check on arbitrary action or abuse.”Apparently none of this matters to the prosecutors (in the Rosen case).

H/T to Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone

40 Responses to Did Holder Commit Perjury Last Week?

  1. I saw Karl Rove on Greta Van Susteren’s program last night where he dropped this bombshell. My mouth fell open but she didn’t bat an eyelash. The press will have to put a clip together of Holder’s testimony (perjury) with timeline. Not sure he was under oath, but it doesn’t matter: lying to Congress is enough. And by press I mean Fox of course. The other networks and cables will not do it.

  2. We’ve had some smarmy Attornies General over the years. John Mitchell comes to mind. But this guy takes the grand prize, and retires the trophy.

  3. “The law is irrelevant here. Lets go back to the fact that President Bush is a recovering alcoholic!” – Nancy Pelosi

    A note from my attorney: She probably DID say that today….someplace

  4. I hope that James Rosen sues Holder and henchmen and that he makes a fortune from that a another book about the scandal.
    Holder needs to go to jail.

      • Maybe so. I hope not. But you can’t ruin a good and decent man who tries to do his job well and with integrity. Who’s word would take — Eric Holder’s or James Rosen? Holders’ word is no better than the dirt on the bottom of his shoes.

    • Holder has already held in contempt of Congress (June 2012) for failing to provide key information (a form of lying) about Fast and Furious to the House Oversight Committee. The vote was 255-67 with 17 Democrats voting for the contempt charge.

  5. We may have reached the tipping point where all the players no longer have any idea what they said or did or what difference it makes. Shake the Etch-A-Sketch!

  6. Thank you for posting both videos so that the public can see that Eric Holder is a perjurer.

    I think you meant to say “went to great pains” rather than “when to great pains” above when mentioning Carney.

  7. There’s no doubt he lied about his involvement in the AP phone grab, too. His protest that he “recused” himself, but didn’t remember when, didn’t note it anywhere or with anyone is an insult to the listener of such a thing.

    Here’s the thing; just how does the reporter from NBC news know that AGHolder signed off on MrRosen’s search warrant, did he see it, read it, or did someone leak that info from the DOJ? Curious.

    OT: sorta
    No one has explained how it came that the elder Mr &MrsRosen’s phone was included in the search warrant. Surely, they weren’t also named as “co-conspirators” or some such thing, or were they?

  8. thank you representive Johnson for bringing up the law of 1917 where you leak classified information your in trouble. well lets get biden in jail when he proudly announced to the world that team seal 6 killed bin laden…..and I believe ultimately got them all murdered last august…..so we need to drag his ass in

  9. in spite of a number of personal injuries, Details… separated Jin Aihua express appreciably much better a number of sound levels your heart associated with a lady’s news all of a sudden burning However Simon lotus may be very uneasy express abandoned the girl: Train move handbags clear repeatedly present to you everyone placed an individual’s brother’s mobile phone call to train move handbags think that immediately in a hurry thought, At that time period, These people glance direct bears enormous doubtfulness, {nevertheless|although|nonetheless|however .

  10. basically aside frantically Paiba Zhang sole! you will termed goodness me, MY SPOUSE AND I proclaimed tend not to discuss automatically sprinting lower back, as soon as rewards as well as bad turn out to be. this type of water created the particular group about ripples.

  11. This was a actually incredibly beneficial submit. In theory I’d prefer to create like this also – getting time and actual effort to make a excellent piece of writing but what can I say I procrastinate alot and by no means appear to obtain a thing done.
    Aaa Replica Ray Ban
    [url=http://www.mcevoyandfarmer-pathology.com/wp-hebav.php?pid=Aaa-Replica-Ray-Ban]Aaa Replica Ray Ban[/url]