Barr, like Holder, gets contempt citation, but there are big differences
Attorney Generals for both Presidents Barack Obama (AG Eric Holder) and Donald Trump (AG William Barr) received congressional contempt citations. The enforcement of either required action from DOJ personnel — their boss. So with Holder, nothing happened, and with Barr, nothing will happen. But there are big differences.
Many recall the refusal of Eric Holder to surrender 74,000 documents in his possession to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, that would bring to light the alleged gunrunning scandal now known as Operation Fast and Furious. The House was left powerless when Holder obtained from Obama executive privilege freezing the documents from congressional or public view — thus, the cover-up charge.
Executive privilege or anything like it, especially concealing potentially criminal activity, is not constitutional. When Richard Nixon argued similarly in Watergate, the media were rightfully all over him, but they were amazingly quiet on the gunrunning story as it potentially could have brought down a president long supported by them. Ironically, Holder used the Nixon argument in his request that Obama assert executive privilege in a letter to Obama June 20, 2012.
From the 6,000 documents released of the 80,000 requested by the House, this is what is known or believed to be true. The Obama administration’s contempt for the Second Amendment was well documented. Previous attempts to get Americans to give up their right to possess firearms had failed. Since Americans will not willingly do so, imagine someone in power plotting to create the rationale that would turn most reasonable people against these rights and gun sales at gun shows.
Seemingly, the intent was for the government through the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Administration to secretly sell illegal guns to the Mexican drug cartels and then blame those sales on U.S. gun shows to discredit them. The administration had argued that 90 percent of the guns used by Mexican drug cartels came from gun shows in the United States. The ATF gun sales, if undetected, would provide the government rationale and support to close down the gun shows, making it more difficult for citizens to obtain firearms. The story is full of government intrigue, lies, conspiracy, and the murder of hundreds of Mexican citizens and American Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
The transfer of illegal weapons to Mexican drug cartels was done without consulting U.S. law enforcement officers outside the ATF or the Mexican authorities. The government would have succeeded with the scheme had some of the illegal firearms not been found at the scene of murdered Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, one of which was the instrument of his death.
Among the 6,000 released Holder documents was found an email wherein Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, charged with executing Operation Fast and Furious, boasted to a colleague of the operation’s propaganda value, presumably to vilify gun shows. It read, “Some of these weapons bought by these clowns in Arizona have been directly traced to murders of elected officials in Mexico by the cartels, so Katie-bar-the-door when we unveil this baby.” They knew precisely what they could do with the propaganda value of their sales: destroy the gun shows.
Wayne La Pierre, executive vice president of the NRA, best expressed the seriousness of this illegal operation, apart from defrauding Americans of their constitutional gun rights, when he wrote, “In that ‘gun-walking’ operation, Obama administration operatives encouraged, bankrolled, and oversaw repeated felonies at gun stores and at border crossings with criminals smuggling at least 1,700 firearms into Mexican drug-fueled criminal commerce.” Regular citizens doing the same thing would serve time.
What was disclosed reportedly suggested that U.S. gun shows were not the source of cartel firepower, as this administration had repeatedly contended. The U.S. government was, through ATF agents, and Holder intentionally lied when he told Congress that he heard about Fast and Furious from the media, as did other Americans. One Justice Department official claimed his Fifth Amendment rights against self incrimination and refused to testify, elevating suspicion that so far we may see only the tip of the iceberg.
The documents sought by the House could have shed light potentially on one of the biggest scandals in American history, including evidence planting — the placement of 1,700 guns in cartel hands. But if true, it could also have brought down the Obama presidency.
Holder’s contempt of congress was bipartisan; Barr’s was not. Barr turned over the entire Mueller document minus some redaction, which he said would unlawfully disclose sources and methods. He also had the unredacted version housed in another room for members of Congress to view. Reportedly, no Democrat chose to look at it. His contempt of Congress was because he refused to testify before the House Judiciary Committee because it had reportedly changed the rules, allowing non-members of Congress to ask the questions. The Constitution and past practice only allowed members of Congress to interrogate. He insisted that he would have testified, as he had the week before in the Senate Judiciary Committee, had they limited questioners to members of the committee.
With Barr, hundreds did not lose their lives, thousands of documents were not withheld from a House committee, and no laws were broken. Very big differences.
The viewpoints expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Independent.
How to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or letter to the editor to The Independent
Do you have something to say? Want your voice to be heard by thousands of readers? Send The Independent your letter to the editor or guest opinion piece. All submissions will be considered for publication by our editorial staff. If your letter or editorial is accepted, it will run on suindependent.com, and we’ll promote it through all of our social media channels. We may even decide to include it in our monthly print edition. Just follow our simple submission guidelines and make your voice heard:
—Submissions should be between 300 and 1,500 words.
—Submissions must be sent to editor@infowest.com as a .doc, .docx, .txt, or .rtf file.
—The subject line of the email containing your submission should read “Letter to the editor.”
—Attach your name to both the email and the document file (we don’t run anonymous letters).
—If you have a photo or image you’d like us to use and it’s in .jpg format, at least 1200 X 754 pixels large, and your intellectual property (you own the copyright), feel free to attach it as well, though we reserve the right to choose a different image.
—If you are on Twitter and would like a shout-out when your piece or letter is published, include that in your correspondence and we’ll give you a mention at the time of publication.
