Attorney General Eric Holder finally answered questions from Congress about his false testimony regarding the investigation of James Rosen. You may recall that Holder said he had never heard of "potential prosecution" of any reporter even though Holder had specifically approved telling a federal court that Fox reporter James Rosen needed to be the subject of a search warrant because Rosen was a likely co-conspirator in espionage with potential criminal liability. Congress asked Holder to explain the clear contradiction between his statement and his actions.
Holder could have said that he did not recall his prior actions when he testified. That would have gotten him off the hot seat with regard to potential criminal liability for perjury. Instead, Holder said this:
“I do not agree that characterizations establishing probable cause for a search warrant for materials from a member of the news media during an ongoing investigation constitute an intent to prosecute that member of the news media. I do believe that a thorough investigation of the disclosure of classified information that threatened national security was necessary and appropriate.”
Got that? Holder tells a federal judge under oath that Rosen is a likely criminal with criminal liability for espionage, but that is not "and intent to prosecute". Holder did not talk about the intent to prosecute. he spoke about potential prosecution. That word is POTENTIAL, not actual. Clearly if Holder tells a judge that Rosen is a likely criminal with liability, that means he could POTENTIALLY be prosecuted. In other words, Holder lied to Congress while under oath which is perjury.
The Attorney General has to resign...........NOW!!!
Holder could have said that he did not recall his prior actions when he testified. That would have gotten him off the hot seat with regard to potential criminal liability for perjury. Instead, Holder said this:
“I do not agree that characterizations establishing probable cause for a search warrant for materials from a member of the news media during an ongoing investigation constitute an intent to prosecute that member of the news media. I do believe that a thorough investigation of the disclosure of classified information that threatened national security was necessary and appropriate.”
Got that? Holder tells a federal judge under oath that Rosen is a likely criminal with criminal liability for espionage, but that is not "and intent to prosecute". Holder did not talk about the intent to prosecute. he spoke about potential prosecution. That word is POTENTIAL, not actual. Clearly if Holder tells a judge that Rosen is a likely criminal with liability, that means he could POTENTIALLY be prosecuted. In other words, Holder lied to Congress while under oath which is perjury.
The Attorney General has to resign...........NOW!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment