Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- it is fair to say we are investigating.
The conflict in his remarks.
Those remarks -- -- under oath but we also think it's very important that the attorney general be afforded the opportunity.
To respond so we will wait to pass judgment on that until after we receive his response.
Unless of course he's not forthcoming -- that.
Your point is the attorney general is -- weren't weren't playing to prosecute this report either that's the whole issue here that they were never intending to prosecute -- Republican leaders in the House Judiciary Committee want to know -- attorney general Eric Holder may have perjured himself when he testified before the committee back on May fifteenth.
They've sent the attorney general -- detailed letter asking him to clear up what appears to be.
To many people conflict.
The deadline for those answers is Wednesday joining us now from Wisconsin one of the authors of that -- congressman.
Good afternoon -- -- and I wanna see you up first ask you -- first of all let me outline what the attorney general sat in case folks don't know exactly what -- -- on May fifteenth before the committee said with regard to the potential prosecution of the press.
Where does disclosure of material that is not something that I've ever been involved and he went on to say I've never even heard of that.
Where is the conflict for you and what we now know about the attorney general's involvement in some of these cases.
I guess the answer to that is that.
About nine days after the attorney general said that the Justice Department said.
That these subpoenas against Fox News correspondent James Rosen.
How were approved by the highest levels of the Justice Department including participation.
By the attorney general.
Now the perhaps -- accused -- is -- being common criminal -- accused him of violating the Espionage Act.
And it also called for a lot more then that disclosure of material relating to mr.
-- -- contact with Stephen Kim.
Who has been indicted for violating the espionage yet.
And if I can quote depth to the application it says.
Rosen would have to the upper right any document image record or information concerning -- national defense.
Than any other Department of Defense US military and -- weapons material.
Then any communications concerning such documents images records or information.
That's a fishing expedition that's much broader than -- merely going after mr.
Rosen for material that he might have had.
With the information that mr.
Kim gave him and remember mr.
-- is under indictment for violating the Espionage Act.
Now I can't think of a more chilling effect I'm.
The news media and violating the First Amendment by having that kind of fishing expedition.
And -- were accusing you.
-- of being common criminal unless you comply.
Well knowing what we know about the attorney general's involvement in what -- DTL that is in that search warrant affidavit that accompanied it and made it possible.
And what he told you on May fifteenth do you personally think.
He misled you or he perjured himself.
Getting a perjury rap is really hard to convince a jury that he perjured himself.
He may have done so and I think that we need some more information.
You know first of all I think the attorney general should be given the opportunity to clarify what he did.
But even if he makes that clarification I think he has lost.
The confidence to the American people and definitely of the congress he ought to resign.
The president -- to appoint somebody else to replace him who can start with a clean slate.
That will restore the confidence of the people of this country in the Justice Department.
-- there -- few other departments of the government that need a little bit of conference a confidence restoration starting with the IRS.
But let's go after this cabinet official and make sure that he comes clean and if he won't do that then we're gonna have to need the independent counsel.
Because if we don't have an independent counsel then the Justice Department you'll end up prosecuting their boss and that is a doozy of a conflict of interest.
I absolutely would be -- he's got a deadline the attorney general set by you and congressman good -- until Wednesday.
If he does not answer what's the next step for the attorney general.
Well I think we -- -- have subpoena the attorney general to come back -- answer those questions specifically.
This is congress fulfilling its constitutional.
Obligation to provide oversight over the executive branch of government.
-- how oversight is tough.
And -- -- you receive an oversight letter.
There are consequences for not comply.
I was the chairman of the Judiciary Committee during the bush administration.
And I had a lot of -- with attorneys general Ashcroft and Gonzales.
About them complying.
-- -- things that were under our jurisdiction and the implementation of laws that we helped -- And manage on the floor which got past.
Ashcroft wasn't happy about the fact that I canceled a hearing -- him at the last minute.
Because he didn't submit the information so that the members of the committee and our staff.
Could get to the bottom of it but again congress has some responsibility.
And what mr.
good laugh and I are doing are discharging those responsibilities.
In the spirit of the framers of the constitution.
All right congressman sensenbrenner Republican from this comment you will see when your back in town -- thank you sir.
Filter by section