Eric Holder dropped a race bomb in New York City this week by telling a largely black audience that Republicans are guilty of “unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly and divisive” attacks on him.
“Forget about me,” he told Al Sharpton’s National Action Network. “Look at the way the attorney general of the United States was treated yesterday by a House committee . . . What attorney general has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?”
We’ll answer that: plenty.
Start with John Mitchell, who spent three days sparring with the Senate Watergate Committee and eventually went to jail. Or Janet Reno, held in contempt by a House committee for refusing to hand over memos related to the appointment of a special prosecutor for Clinton campaign contributions. Or William French Smith, held in contempt by a Senate subcommittee for refusing to turn over records on an investigation into Navy shipbuilding.
Other top officers — from Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten — have also found themselves the target of contempt votes.
Ditto for the hearing Holder cited. On Tuesday, Holder exploded when Texas Republican Louie Gohmert suggested the AG didn’t think it a big deal Congress had held him in contempt. “You don’t want to go there, buddy,” said Holder, adding the finding was “inappropriate” and “unfair.”
But Gohmert had an answer: “Well, I’m just looking for evidence, and normally we’re known by our fruits, and there have been no indications that it was a big deal, because your department has still not been forthcoming in producing the documents that were the subject of the contempt.”
Gohmert makes an excellent point. Because if General Holder checked the record, he’d see the chief reason he’s the first sitting Cabinet member held in contempt of Congress is that — unlike previous cabinet members who faced this sanction — he obstinately refused any accommodation.