Posted on 05/14/2010 4:53:17 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
Washington (CNSNews.com) – Attorney General Eric Holder would not answer whether the Justice Department is looking into an allegation by Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) that the White House offered him an administration job as an enticement to drop his primary challenge against Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.).
After five minutes of evading the question from Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Holder’s final answer was no comment.
“It’s the department’s policy not to comment on any matters to say there is an investigation, to say there is not an investigation,” Holder said during a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee. “That’s not the way the Department of Justice under a Republican or Democratic administrations have conducted. That’s not what we do. That is the way I would answer the question.”
Both Issa and Specter, as well as other legal commentators, have said that offering someone a federal job in exchange for taking a specific action could constitute bribery or other federal crimes.
Issa, ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, asked Holder in an April 21 letter to name a special prosecutor to look into the matter. Issa first sought answers from White House counsel Robert Bauer in two previous letters, one on March 10, and one on March 22.
The matter first came up in February when Philadelphia TV newsman Larry Kane asked Sestak, “Is it true that you were offered a high-ranking job in the administration in a bid to get you to drop out of the primary against Arlen Specter?”
Sestak answered, “Yes,” but he declined to answer further questions about what the job was and who specifically made the offer. In several subsequent interviews, Sestak reaffirmed that the offer was made, but declined to give details.
For its part, the White House has never denied the allegation.
In April, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs only said, “I’ve talked to several people in the White House; I’ve talked to people that have talked to others in the White House. I’m told that whatever conversations have been had are not problematic. I think Congressman Sestak has discussed that this is – whatever happened is in the past, and he’s focused on his primary election.”
The attorney general by law can name a special prosecutor with autonomy from the Justice Department and the administration to investigate alleged crimes in the executive branch to avoid a real or perceived conflict of interest by the Justice Department.
Issa, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, pressed Holder for an answer to no avail. At times, the attorney general looked and sounded flummoxed in trying to respond to Issa, but Issa’s time expired.
“I would say that with regard to a special prosecutor, that’s something we would look at on a case by case basis,” Holder answered.
Issa asked, “What could be more case by case than an allegation that this White House had committed a felony by offering a member of Congress a high ranking position in the administration in return for him getting out of the primary? What would be more appropriate than that? If it’s not appropriate, and you’re not conflicted, what are you going to do about it?”
Holder said, “Well, there are regulations that, uh, are in place – there are requirements that have to be met before a special prosecutor or independent counsel is appointed. I have great faith in the people in the public integrity section who handle these kinds of matters.”
As the exchange continued, Issa asked, “If I offer you a job in the White House, let’s say Secretary of the Navy, in return for your doing something such as dropping out of office to clear a primary, is that a serious crime?”
Holder answered a question with a question, “Is the offer of a job a serious matter?”
Issa became frustrated and said, “I’m asking you is that a crime? You don’t answer in specifics. Will you answer in hypotheticals?”
Holder said, “I don’t answer hypotheticals.”
Issa continued to press.
“Here before us today, you won’t answer literals and you won’t answer hypotheticals, or apparently investigate,” Issa said. “You’re not investigating whether it’s a false statement by a member of Congress or a crime by the White House. What are we to do?”
After a little more back and forth, Holder said, “things would have to be examined, would have to be looked at.”
Issa said, “I’m only asking if you have followed up on the allegation by a member of Congress and asserted by a U.S. senator. That’s all I’m asking. I’m asking if you have followed up on it. I’m not asking for all the details on how you have followed up. Have you followed up on the allegation that we brought up here today?
After all that, Holder’s answer was no comment.
“It’s the department’s policy not to comment on any matters to say there is an investigation, to say there is not an investigation,” Holder said. “That’s not the way the Department of Justice under a Republican or Democratic administrations have conducted. That’s not what we do. That is the way I would answer the question.”
Specter, a former state prosecutor and previous chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has called on Sestak to “put up or shut up,” because if the allegation is true, it could constitute a bribe.
“There is a specific federal statute, which makes it a bribe to make an offer for a public office,” Specter told MSNBC. “When I was district attorney, if somebody came and told me that, I would say, well, ‘name names, name dates, name places.’ It’s a big black smear without specification. I’m telling you this is a federal crime, punishable by jail.”
Title 18, U.S.C. Section 211 says, “Whoever solicits or receives, either as a political contribution or for personal emolument, any money or thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year or both.”
He also refers to Title 18, U.S.C. Section 595, which says, “Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States … uses his official authority for the purposes of interfering with, or affecting the nomination of, or the election of any candidate for office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representative…shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”
Finally, Issa referred to Title 18 U.S.C. Section 600, which says, “Whoever directly or indirectly promises any employment position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, in favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”
Looks like the wheels are coming off of the short bus known as Eric Holder.
“Holder Evades Questions...”
And the base loves it.
IMHO
I bet Eric Holder wouldn’t have much trouble calling Pro-Life Christians potential terrorists the way Janet Napolitano did!
Then there is Arizona. If he went into full Arizona attack mode ignorant of the new law, what makes any think he knows about anything he speaks about?
He is an affirmative action scoundrel, Peter Principled into a good salary.
He’s REFUSING to admit whether or not he’s even followed up it? ISSA: “If it’s not appropriate, and you’re not conflicted, what are you going to do about it?” “
Seems to me, Holder is ‘conflicted’. What then?
Every single level of this POS administration is as corrupt as it is incompetent.
Holder is a tap dancing charlatan.
The danger that we faced on 911 has set up shop in the White House.
This group astounds at every turn.
He’s a good puppet.
*(See Monty Python's “Buying a Bed” sketch...)
Exactly! We have this stonewalling over a singular crime, at the same time we have literally millions and millions who are illegal criminals, by multiple federal statutes, RICO, immigration law, giving sanctuary, etc. all being ignored. The "law" in the United States really is a moral joke, just a power play, enforce what you want, ignore what you don't want.
The US federal government, graphic under the executive branch of Barack Obama, is the most corrupt that has been in place in my lifetime. "Corrupt" meaning twisted in the most subversive and comprehensive manner. The Obama administration represents America becoming demoralized, corrupt, and arrogant.
As Toynbee suggests it is virtually impossible to relate to younger generations; the America with which I grew up was completely different than today's miasma.
Bump.
Well, it could be worse. They could be corrupt and competent.
Now if there was just a competent and uncorrupted opposition party...
I couldn’t find a best sentence to quote because the total post is spot on.
I can only wonder at the leaders of the world governments and businesses think when the Obama administration shills whine about the corruption of Hamid Karzi and the Afghan government. They are pikers compared to the American disaster.
I watched his "Arizona" testimony this morning on Fox and Friends. What an idiot - he bashed the bill publicly for a week, then says the didn't read it.
Holder's credibility = way less than zero (and I don't mean the zero in the White House who also has negative credibility).
Charles Krauthammer said on Fox last nite after Holder’s
pathetic appearance before Congress”that he should reexamine
his credentials.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.