Lawless Attorney General is Offended When Called on Administration’s Failure to Uphold the Law


The Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, has been called before the House Judiciary Committee to answer questions about his and the Obama Administration’s failure to follow the law when it comes to Obamacare, marijuana and prosecution of administration members accused of wrong doing.

Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday that he has a “vast amount” of discretion in how the Justice Department prosecutes the laws that are on the books.

Leading the questioning was House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), who asked Holder whether he believed there were any limits to the administration’s prosecutorial discretion.

“There is a vast amount of discretion that a president has — and more specifically that an attorney general has,” Holder responded. “But that discretion has to be used in an appropriate way so that your acting consistent with the aims of the statute but at the same time making sure that you are acting in a way that is consistent with our values, consistent with the Constitution and protecting the American people.” the AG stated in response to accusations that he is flouting the law with its positions on marijuana legalization and criminal sentencing.

At issue is the Obama Administration’s unwillingness to follow the laws and statutes of the United States as passed by Congress. States such as Colorado and Washington have passed laws that legalize the open use of marijuana contrary to the federal law, as long as states establish adequate regulations.

Goodlatte criticized the decision, saying it is tantamount to ignoring the law.

“The Justice Department’s decision not to enforce the Controlled Substances Act in states whose laws violate federal law is not a valid exercise of prosecutorial discretion, but a formal department-wide policy of selective non-enforcement of an Act of Congress,” Goodlatte said.

Under Holder’s “Smart on Crime” initiative, the Justice Department has altered the charging policies with regard to mandatory minimum sentences for certain nonviolent, low-level drug crimes.

“This commonsense change will ensure that the toughest penalties are reserved for the most dangerous or violent drug traffickers,” Holder said.

Democrat lawmakers on the panel, who approve of the lawlessness exhibited by the administration, gave their approving grunts at such silliness. Rep. John Conyers (Mich.), the committee’s top Democrat, said almost half of all federal inmates are serving time for drug offenses. We have seen how such thinking has worked in Michigan, especially Detroit.

Holder also faced questions from Republicans on the legality of Obama administration’s decision to delay the employer mandate in the Affordable Care Act.

In a terse back and forth with Holder, Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) argued that because an implementation date had been written specifically into the legislation, the executive branch had no authority to delay it.

“When Congress puts effective dates in laws, do we need to further state that the effective date cannot be waived or modified by the executive branch, or is the president required to follow the law, and also follow the dates set by Congress?” Chabot asked.

Holder responded that “the president has the duty, obviously, to follow the law,” but that “it would depend on the statute” and statutory interpretation of the law.

Holder said the Department of Justice provided legal analysis to the administration regarding the delay, but that his agency doesn’t discuss those arguments publicly.

In other words, the Attorney General could not defend the administration’s untenable and lawless position. Not too surprising as there is no defense to be made.

The hearing became even more confrontational as the Attorney General Eric Holder became visibly upset when Rep. Louis Gohmert suggested that being in contempt of Congress didn’t appear to matter to the Attorney General.

After Holder dismissed Gohmert’s requests for documents relating to congressional investigations, Gohmert said “I realize that contempt is not a big deal to our Attorney General, but it is important that we have proper oversight.”

“You don’t want to go there buddy!” Holder responded. “You don’t want to go there OK?”

“You should not assume that uh that is not a big deal to me,” Holder continued. “I think it was inappropriate, I think it was unjust, but never think that it was not a big deal to me. Don’t ever think that.”

Gohmert insisted that Republicans were focused on getting to the bottom of the Fast and Furious gun running scandal.

“I don’t need lectures from you about contempt,” Gohmert fired back.

“And I don’t need lectures from you either,” Holder responded.

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, suggested to Holder that there appeared to be a partisan nature in the cases run by the Justice Department.

“My question is, have you prosecuted anyone in this administration?” King asked. “Because it looks to me that folks on the other side of the aisle are getting extra scrutiny and those on your side of the aisle are getting no scrutiny.”

King cited investigations into Repubicans such as conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Sousza, Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., Gov. Bob McDonnell, R-Va., and even investigations surrounding the “knockout game,” and pointed out that Democrats such as Gov. Jon Corzine, D-N.J. the “Black Panthers” went unchecked.

Holder was visibly annoyed by the question, and told King that he, once again, wouldn’t discuss any cases currently under investigation.

“This is a Justice Department that I have run that I’m proud of,” Holder said, noting that the DOJ follows the “facts and the law” in every investigation. Many doubted that either was true

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.