(Above: U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus questions Attorney General Eric Holder)
After news broke that the U.S. Justice Department had secretly acquired the telephone records of Associated Press journalists during a leak investigation, Attorney General Eric Holder claimed he had actually recused himself from that investigation and had not been involved.
The FBI interviewed Holder in June of 2012 as part of a probe into a leak of classified information to the AP.
“To avoid any potential appearance of a conflict of interest,” Holder later testified, “I recused myself from this matter.”
But Holder did, however, express his support for the investigation of the journalists.
“This is among the top two or three serious leaks that I’ve ever seen,” he said. “It put the American people at risk… Trying to determine who was responsible for that required very aggressive action.”
Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-AL06, questioned Holder at the time about the lack of evidence that he had formally recused himself. There was no letter or other form of documentation stating that he had removed himself from the investigation.
On Tuesday, Bachus resumed that line of questioning during a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee and found that the Justice Department had still not implemented any formal recusal process. Holder responded that he had recused himself “in (his) own mind.”
Here’s an excerpt from the transcript of the exchange between Bachus and Holder, which can be viewed in the video above:
BACHUS: “Have you adopted such a policy?’
HOLDER: “I am not sure that we have formally done so, but in my own mind, I have thought that to the extent I recuse myself in other matters, I would do so and put a writing [sic] together of some sort that would indicate what the basis was for that recusal.”
BACHUS: “I know you just indicated it was conflict of interest or appearance of conflict of interest. Do you not believe, because of that and other cases, that it is essential that there actually be a formal process where there is something in writing with a date and time on it?”
HOLDER: “I think you raised it during the hearing last year and as I said then, I think it’s a good idea. My only concern is –
BACHUS: “As opposed to a good idea, why doesn’t the Justice Department adopt a formal process and do that, particularly in that you are required by law to sign off on any subpoena involving the media? So I just think, particularly in a matter like that, there ought to be a formal recusal.”
After the hearing, Bachus said, “It is now almost a year later and we still don’t have all of the answers. If you don’t have a formal procedure, you have no record of when and why important decisions were made. My expectation was that, as a basic matter of accountability to the public, an official process would be in place by now. Saying that having a policy would be a ‘good idea’ isn’t good enough.”
Bachus also said that Attorney General Holder had not directly answered when asked whether information from media organizations and reporters other than the AP and Jamie Rosen of Fox News had been targeted during the Justice Department’s investigations into “leaks.”
Bachus was not the only Congressman to get under Holder’s skin on Tuesday. Rep. Louie Gohmert, TX01, and Holder got into a heated exchange after Gohmert referenced the the House of Representatives’ decision to hold Holder in contempt in 2012 for refusing to disclose documents related to the Fast and Furious gun-running scandal. (2:30 into the video below)
“I realize that contempt is not a big deal to our attorney general, but it is important that we have proper oversight,” Gohmert said.
“You don’t want to go there, buddy!” Holder replied.
“I don’t want to go there?” the Texas Republican asked. “About the contempt?”
“You should not assume that that is not a big deal to me,” said Holder. “I think that it was inappropriate, I think it was unjust, but never think that that was not a big deal to me. Don’t ever think that.”
Follow Cliff on Twitter @Cliff_Sims
