Bottom Line: Congress has never really had the authority to hold the Attorney General in contempt. Per the Constitution, Congress can impeach Federal Judges, i.e., members of the Supreme Court, U.S. District Courts or U.S. Federal Courts of Appeal and even the Atty Gen but only for "treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors".
Well, as has been noted, Congress holds the authority to investigate, and hold oversight of Federal departments appointed by the President, and under his authority, including the Office of the President.
In that capacity, if a dept head like the little FALN terrorist sympathizer Holder refuses to cooperate with that investigation there are a myriad of charges, and measures that can happen. Contempt is but one thing that can, and did happen. Now, there are two different types of contempt. Criminal, which was passed, but now ignored by the arrogant Holder, and his DoJ, which was predicted. And, Civil, which will be pressed by Congress in court. That means a Judge will have to look at the documents that Holder won't produce, and decide whether or not EP applies, or is just another smoke screen.
What crime has Atty Gen. Holder been charge with exactly?
Lying under oath? No, that's not what he's been charge with by Sen. Issa.
He hasn't been charged with any crime.......Yet.
Withholding federal documents? He's given up over 7,000 pages of documents since this House investigation began and still Issa couldn't find any conclusive evidence that Holder has committed treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanors.
There are estimates that there are between 80,000 to 130,000 documents involved with F&F, you really think that 7,000 documents is full cooperation, when many were totally redacted to the point where Issa said 'You might as well have just sent over a blank ream of paper...'?
Plus, since when does the one being investigated get to tell the investigator what he is allowed to look at?
Failure to cooperate with Congress? No more than any other member of the Executive Branch has done in the past.
I see, so it's ok as long as its been done in the past eh? What happened to the "Most transparent administration in history"?
Of course, the counter argument will be (or has been) that DOJ wouldn't disclose the information Issa and others believes Holder purposely withheld that possibly held the smoking gun they believed would have convicted him of wrong-doing, but my contension has long been that if Congress couldn't put together even the most circumstantial of evidence based on the documents they did have, how were they going to bring about a tougher charge other than holding him in contempt which really amounts to absolutely nothing except to say, "Well, at least we got him on something". Really? Is that all you really got?
You know, I remember arguing the Plame thing back in the Bush Administration, and demo's dreaming of seeing Cheney, or Rove " "frog marched" in handcuff's across the WH lawn. Fitztgerald, even though he knew who the "leaker" of Plame was early on, David Armitage, he pressed on and jailed 'Scooter' Liby on process charges of perjury, after conflicting statements.
Now, fast forward to today, and you argue that nothing should be done here? really?
Congress (Rep. Issa): "Atty Gen. Eric Holder, because we, Congress (or more specific, GOP House members) believe you haven't played by our rules and giving us the information - no, evidence - we need to convict you of violating the law, we're just gonna hold you in contempt of Congress to atleast claim we won a procedural political victory. NAH, HAH, NAH, NAH, NAH! We gotcha now!...found another way to embarrass the Obama Administration."
Like it or not, process charges are how Washington DC works, in that town dominated by lawyers. What you seem to be arguing here is that the committee in charge of oversight of DoJ, is not allowed to ask to see anything that DoJ doesn't want them to see...What kind of oversight is that?
Only you forgot that your own Republican executives of the past hide behind executive privilege, too, making it impossible for a Judge or the Atty Gen to be charged with violating the Constitution unless he has committed treason, a high crime (i.e., a felony) or misdemeanors.
The President, is not a King, and Holder is bound by oversight, like it or not, the committee charged with overseeing the DoJ has every right to get to the bottom of this regardless of whom it makes look bad, including Holder, or now Obama himself.