Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- times on the hill attorney general Eric Holder testified before the House Judiciary Committee and getting into congressman Darrell ice at one point the two of tangled before -- during the fast and furious investigation when the congressman held mr.
holder in contempt.
Right out of the exchange you're about to hear will be joined by the chair of that committee Republican Bob good luck for -- have a listen here.
I'll certainly look at -- -- it's not something I've.
Personally been involved -- but I look at the request and try to be as responsive as we can't I'm sure they must have been a good reason why it only needed to and from parts work.
From yes she didn't want us to see the details.
attorney general no -- knowing that -- -- from what we do knowing that you -- not gonna stop talking now.
They characterized something as something mister chairman of which uniform the witness as part of the rules and -- committee -- -- and it's too consistent with the way in which you conduct yourself as a member of congress it's unacceptable.
And it's shameful.
With me now is Bob good law.
The Virginia Republican who chairs that committee is -- good morning if you want compared to America's Newsroom we just heard a little clip there from yesterday what did you think of a -- -- -- -- Build the tone of the attorney general was fine for a lot of it the frustration of members were.
And you've probably seen some of the YouTube clips of in saying I don't know -- Whole variety of different ways but then there were a few points where members were getting I think they're very pertinent issues -- the attorney general I think.
And and quite frankly.
Not constructively because there are legitimate questions regarding Thomas Perez his conduct of the civil.
Rights division of the Justice Department and in particular the secret deal that he orchestrated with the city of Saint Paul, Minnesota.
To have them back away from a case that had reached all the way to the United States Supreme Court.
In exchange for two whistle blower.
Cases against the city of Saint Paul, Minnesota being dropped.
And potentially costing the taxpayers United States up -- 200 million dollars that's a pretty.
Pretty serious allegation -- that that certainly is yeah but that was just one of the many issues yesterday I'm just curious what you accomplish from this hearing.
Well I think what what.
I think what we accomplished is first of all we did our due diligence and conducting oversight over.
The Justice Department in the attorney general and we had in some instances particularly -- -- regard to the IRS.
Case -- regard to the investigation of tea parties and other conservative organizations and a and other organizations as well.
Pretty considerable bipartisan.
Concern about that same thing.
With the AP story in the over broad apparently over broad.
Subpoena that was the issue where the attorney general had recused himself.
And we did not get to the bottom of that we did not find out why he recused himself.
And we will have to pursue that issue further and we will a very aggressively because protecting the First Amendment.
-- regard to both of these.
Matters is very very important in a great responsibility for the congress and I'm not going now he says he recused himself so we can answer the questions.
So how do you get answers.
If he won't take you there.
Well first of all we're going to have to.
Pursued the deputy attorney general United States to stepped in his place.
And made these decisions and we're also gonna continue to ask why in so many of these matters.
We do not see accountability now -- regard to the IRS.
-- quite frankly I was.
Pleased to see.
Last night that the new US secretary of treasury did take it upon himself to secure the resignation of the acting director of the IRS.
But when it comes to justice -- but he must now understand I'm a long way he was stepping down anyway wasn't in a couple weeks he's he's going to be replaced anyway.
And when you get to the Justice Department whether it's fast and furious whether it's.
Some of these new matters.
A an ongoing concern that when troubling mistakes are made.
No one is held accountable.
And you know it's important to hold them accountable even if it's so -- it's their right that it's a lower level person because.
That lower level person is not likely to to remain silent.
Someone higher up instructed them -- to answer questions -- the answer them or make this.
The actions that they made so it's really important.
To see -- in any administration doesn't matter whether it's the Obama administration another one.
When there are screw up people need to be held accountable.
In news organizations and political organization when people make mistakes there are consequences and we see on a fairly steady basis.
People having to step aside because.
They made bad decisions or said things.
That -- inappropriate YouTube and it doesn't seem to be the rule in this administration and and in other administrations and well after just a couple seconds left for you mentioned the AP story do you think Department of Justice was looking for a leak on that security story.
Who was -- -- well -- something else.
We we don't know yet and we need to dig into that very very closely.
But to me even if they were in exercising.
Their responsibility to look for leaks you know -- can't be over -- there are specific.
Statutory requirements for how you issue a subpoena against a news media organization.
And those apparently were not followed in this case why was it done in secret.
Why was -- not done would notice to the news media.
Why was -- their cooperation sought and why was it's so broad encompassing twenty reporters over a sixty day period of time.
There is -- to answer for here and we will continue to pursue this because we have a constitutional responsibility.
To -- -- all good questions sir thank you for your time congressman Bob good -- the chairman of that committee sir thank you for coming on with us today thank.
Filter by section