House finds Holder in Contempt of Congress over "Fast and Furious" case - Polidicks

[url=http://www.marketwatch.com/story/holder-found-in-contempt-of-congress-2012-06-28-161035033?link=MW_pulse]Source[/url] [quote]Lawmakers voted 255 to 67 to approve the Republican bill, which the White House and Democratic leaders have slammed. Seventeen Democrats joined Republicans in voting for the rare contempt citation, but others walked out in protest as the vote began. Holder becomes the first sitting attorney general to be held in contempt of Congress. The citation now goes to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, who reports to Holder and can choose whether or not to begin criminal prosecution proceedings against his boss. Republicans led by Rep. Darrell Issa of California had long demanded documents about the “Fast and Furious” operation, which aimed to track the flow of weapons to suspected Mexican drug traffickers. Some of the weapons used in the operation wound up at the scene of violent crimes in the U.S. and Mexico, including at the December 2010 shootout that killed a U.S. Border Patrol agent.[/quote] Jeez

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/BdCrc.jpg[/IMG] NV means not voted, showing just how many democrats walked out on the vote.

"The citation now goes to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, who reports to Holder and can [B]choose whether or not to[/B] begin criminal prosecution proceedings against his boss." Can he just simply not begin and this whole mess be over? Or will it just trickle down until someone does prosecute?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36539557]"The citation now goes to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, who reports to Holder and can [B]choose whether or not to[/B] begin criminal prosecution proceedings against his boss." Can he just simply not begin and this whole mess be over? Or will it just trickle down until someone does prosecute?[/QUOTE] Inevitably it will be the latter, I doubt he can just not begin.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36539557]"The citation now goes to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, who reports to Holder and can [B]choose whether or not to[/B] begin criminal prosecution proceedings against his boss." Can he just simply not begin and this whole mess be over? Or will it just trickle down until someone does prosecute?[/QUOTE] Essentially this contempt ruling means nothing, because the very people charged with prosecuting him (or lack thereof) won't do it. There's another ruling for civil action that's going to be voted on, which could actually do some damage, but it will take a long time for anything to come of it. [quote] The criminal contempt charge refers the dispute to District of Columbia U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen, who will decide whether to file charges against Holder. Most legal analysts do not expect Machen -- an Obama appointee [B]who ultimately answers to Holder[/B] -- to take any action. House members are also expected to pass a civil contempt measure Thursday afternoon. The civil measure would allow the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to file a lawsuit asking the courts to examine the Justice Department's failure to produce certain subpoenaed documents, as well as the validity of the administration's recent assertion of executive privilege over the documents in question. Legal experts contacted by CNN have said, based on recent precedent, that it [B]could take years for the courts to reach any final decision[/B].[/quote] [URL="http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/28/politics/holder-contempt/index.html?hpt=hp_t1"]Source[/URL] Read the rest of that article if you want some info on the background of the whole case, and other things. Also: [quote] Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, warned that "even the attorney general cannot evade the law. (It's) time for America to find out the truth. ... (It's) time for a little [U][B]transparency[/B][/U]. Today is judgment day. That's just the way it is."[/quote] Haha, oh wow.

[QUOTE=Prez;36539612]Essentially this contempt ruling means nothing, because the very people charged with prosecuting him (or lack thereof) won't do it. There's another ruling for civil action that's going to be voted on, which could actually do some damage, but it will take a long time for anything to come of it. [URL=http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/28/politics/holder-contempt/index.html?hpt=hp_t1]Source[/url][/QUOTE] Well that's good I suppose. Though, I find it kind of tricky to have the prosecution fall on essentially an employee of the man charged. If the AG truly deserved this vote, what's the point if it simply falls under the man right under him? Or are they playing with semantics when they say "ultimately answers to Holder" when he's just the underling of an underling of an underling of an underling, etc, to Holder?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36539655]Well that's good I suppose. Though, I find it kind of tricky to have the prosecution fall on essentially an employee of the man charged. If the AG truly deserved this vote, what's the point if it simply falls under the man right under him? Or are they playing with semantics when they say "ultimately answers to Holder" when he's just the underling of an underling of an underling of an underling, etc, to Holder?[/QUOTE] I don't quite understand it either, but it sort of makes sense. I mean, of course the person charged with prosecuting anyone with contempt would fall upon a top law enforcement official under the AG (meaning that regardless of who was held in contempt, it would be a person of this position). And no, he is literally an underling to holder, not someone many levels down. [quote] The United States Attorney for the District of Columbia is the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Attorney"]United States Attorney[/URL] responsible for representing the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States"]federal government[/URL] in the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Columbia"]United States District Court for the District of Columbia[/URL]. Because unlike typical municipalities, [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.#Government"]Washington, D.C. is governed by the US Congress[/URL], the federal government's representative is responsible not only for the prosecution of all federal crimes, but also for the prosecution of all serious local crime committed by adults in the District of Columbia. Therefore, the US Attorney for the District of Columbia serves both as the federal prosecutor (as in the other 92 US Attorneys' offices) and as the local [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_Attorney"]District Attorney[/URL].[/quote] [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Attorney_for_the_District_of_Columbia]Source[/url] Ronald Machen, the current DC Attorney is responsible for all contempt charges, even if it's his boss.

Civil Vote is done, it's against holder.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;36540152]Civil Vote is done, it's against holder.[/QUOTE] Well. Fuck.

I find it hilarious that it's being deferred to a guy who is Holder's subordinate. Only way for it to be more frighteningly hilarious is if they tried to make Holder [I]prosecute [/I][I]himself[/I].

Why is this a bad thing? Doesn't our legislative branch have a right to see documents pertaining to this operation?