Accountability in the Obama Administration

Didn’t it used to be a bad thing to lie to Congress?

Well, perhaps lie is too strong a word, and since we’re not talking about sworn testimony, perjury is just right out.

Where does willfully unresponsive and factually wrong land on the scale when responding in writing to Congress?


High ranking DOJ official to resign amid Fast and Furious…

By Matthew Boyle | the Daily Caller

The DOJ official is the same Holder deputy who falsely told Congress that neither the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives nor any part of the Department of Justice ever allowed illicit firearms to “walk” across the U.S.-Mexico border — even as contrary facts emerged from the investigation into Operation Fast and Furious.

On Feb. 4, 2011, Weich wrote to Congress that the idea that “ATF ‘sanctioned’ or otherwise knowingly allowed the sale of assault weapons to a straw purchaser who then transported them into Mexico … is false.”

“ATF makes every effort to interdict weapons that have been purchased illegally and prevent their transportation to Mexico,” Weich added in that letter.

The DOJ has since retracted Weich’s letter but has not held anyone accountable for providing that misinformation to Congress, or for Operation Fast and Furious itself.


Oh, I forgot.  Fast and Furious / Gunwalker doesn’t seem to count, despite both the body count and the ongoing coverup.

Ok then, how about this?


…Virgin Islands bribery scandals.


In February, Weich denied the Justice Department’s involvement in another scandal. The Daily Caller learned that the DOJ had failed to arrest and prosecute several indicted financial criminals because of an alleged bribery scheme. Weich said the DOJ had no knowledge of any bribery.

But TheDC’s investigation unearthed allegations that two DOJ prosecutors on a team of more than 25 accepted cash bribes from indicted finance executives in the U.S. Virgin Islands. And USVI Gov. John de Jongh allegedly accepted part of at least $20 million in cash bribes in exchange for favors from his administration. At least five other prosecutors, according to TheDC’s well-placed source in the DOJ, were compromised.

Weich’s letter denying the allegations was carefully worded. He addressed few specifics in TheDC’s reporting or in the letter Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley sent him requesting additional information. His response made no mention of sealed indictments, or of the lengthy investigation the DOJ conducted into the financial irregularities at the center of the Virgin Islands case.

Instead, Weich challenged only The Daily Caller’s decision to give its source protection through anonymity, claiming the DOJ has no knowledge of the alleged bribes explored in the story.

“The Department is not aware of facts supporting any allegations of bribery, as purported by the article,” Weich wrote.


At the very least this would seem to be an issue worthy of investigation by the bar.  Instead, our malefactor has other plans:



Weich, who has served as Attorney General Eric Holder’s emissary in congressional communications, will become the next dean of the University of Baltimore School of Law in July, according tothe National Law Journal.


I bet Scooter Libby wishes he could have landed such a deal.

Prostitution Scandal There!
In 2008, John McCain Ignored Vote Fraud to Avoid Civil Unrest
  • jim_m

    Where does willfully unresponsive and factually wrong land on the scale when responding in writing to Congress?

    Since the DOJ proposed that it was OK to lie to the public saying that records requested under a FOIA request do not exist, it would not surprise me that the DOJ maintains a similar rule for Congress as well.

    When the admin is trying to make lying to the public official government policy one has to assume that they are already doing it quite extensively.

  • herddog505

    I’ve discovered over the past couple of decades that “lie” has a different meaning for lefties than it does for everybody else, or, more exactly, it has multiple meanings.  For example, Slick Willie perjured himself, yet lefties don’t consider that he lied because “it was just about sex”.  On the other hand, George Bush is down in their books as a liar because he (in common with many other people in the US and abroad) believed that Saddam had WMD and he acted on that belief, which was later demonstrated to be false.

    So, I find it very easy to believe that, as far as the left is concerned, NOBODY in the Obama regime is lying about F&F simply because their definition of “lie” is so flexible that it means whatever they want, whenever they want.

    “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
    “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you
    can make words mean so many different things.”

    “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master      that’s all.”

    Lewis Carroll
    Through the Looking-Glass (1872)

    • jim_m

       I had a Philosophy professor in college that demanded of his students: Define what a word means and then use it that way.  Be consistent in how you use it.  If you don’t use it consistently then no one will understand what you are saying.

      The left could learn a lot from Prof Brendan E. A. Liddell.  They sound ever so clever to themselves but to the rest of us it is just a bunch of meaningless BS.

    • Gmacr1

      Nuanced…and all that jazz.

  • Commander_Chico

    Bush could have pardoned Libby.  He didn’t, he only commuted his prison sentence.

    • jim_m

      The real shame of it was that Star Fitzgerald knew exactly who leaked the information and had already concluded that no crime was committed in leaking the information. What he was fishing for was some technicality that he could put someone in prison for, and he eventually found that.

      • Fitzpatrick…

        • jim_m

           Actually Fitzgerald… I had to look it up.

      • Commander_Chico

        That “technicality” would be “perjury,” which was supposed to be a big thing when Clinton lied about getting a BJ.

        • herddog505

          Yes.  While I think that there was a miscarriage of justice here to some extent (Libby didn’t leak Plame’s identity and appears to have been essentially a bystander), we can’t have people lying to the police.

          • Commander_Chico

            I don’t think Scooter should have gone to jail, either.  

          • jim_m

             The point was that the whole investigation bordered severely on the edge of entrapment.  Yes Libby perjured himself.  But the whole investigation was a sham.

    • retired.military

      So Chico

      Inquiring minds want to know.  WIll you vote for Obama again or will you vote for Romney or someone else?

      • jim_m

         He won’t vote for obama but he won’t vote for anyone who might have a chance of beating obama, thus he will be able to pose as objecting to obama’s policies without actually doing anything to oppose them.

        • PBunyan

          If Romney gets elected Chico will object even more to his policies so it doesn’t really matter. 

      • Commander_Chico

        I’m voting for Gary Johnson.

        Romney talks like a warmonger.  Since it’s Romney, who knows if he means it?  But I’m not voting for him. Saying he thinks Russia is the main foreign policy rival? WTF?

        Romney is also likely to maintain or increase all of the creeping police state policies of Bush/Obama, and the impunity of rich fraudsters from large banks, so there is no change coming there.

        I don’t see a dime’s worth of difference between them, anyone you see that gets passionate about this election you can identify as an idiot.

        • Shorter chicka: Present!

        • Jwb10001

          You shouldn’t waste the gas driving to the polling station. I’m sorry Chico but voting for Gary Johnson is plain chicken crap.

          • Commander_Chico

            Why would anyone who believes in Constitutional civil liberties vote for Romney?    I only see more “homeland security” in his administration.

            Why would someone leery of more wars vote for Romney?  He sounds like he wants a war with Russia, fer Gawd’s sake.   He’s just about promised one with Iran.

            I suppose there is a 50/50 or better chance he does not mean anything he’s said over the last six years, but counting on him being a bullshitter is not a good reason to vote for him.

          • jim_m

             I doubt that Romney wants war with Russia, but I have little doubt that obama would sell this country out to either Russia or China.

          • Commander_Chico

            Romney and his minions are saying a lot of dumb things about Russia.

            We are all selling the country to China and Russia, by individual and collective lack of saving and compulsive consumption.

          • Jwb10001

            So stay home all I’m saying is voting for Gary Johnson is BS it’s pointless do you think you’ll points from someone for that or what?

        • jim_m

           I’m voting for Gary Johnson

          As I said.  He won’t vote for obama, but he won’t vote for anyone that might beat him.  He is only posing about objecting to obama’s policies and he will not do anything to actually oppose them. 

          And everyone knows that it is BS to say that there is no difference between obama and Romney.  There is a vast difference on issues like civil rights (obama is against them categorically) and energy policy (obama is against producing energy except 200 years from now), and capitalism (obama believes the government has the right to dictate what you are paid in whatever job you do.  Part of the obamacare bill was once a rule that would allow the federal government to dictate the wages of all healthcare workers.).

          • Commander_Chico

            The flip side of that is that Romney is an open advocate of government torture and more wars. That makes him unacceptable to me.

          • jim_m

             I think that an aggressive posture regarding other aggressor nations is more of a deterrent to war than the current appeasing and supine posture that obama takes. The last time the world had a leader that was so focused on pleasing aggressive dictators we had a war that killed over 50 million people. 

            That pretty much sets the standard for loss of life that could have been avoided by better policy.

          • Commander_Chico

            Obama is moving towards war, at least proxy war in Syria.  He already had a war in Libya.   He’s bombing and using drones in several other countries.  I don’t see a lot of non-aggression there.

          • Obama is moving towards war, at least proxy war in Syria[, without Congressional approval.  He already
            had a war in Libya[ without Congressional approval].   He’s bombing and using drones in several other
            countries[ without Congressional approval].  I don’t see a lot of accountability there.


  • The feds prosecute Rodger Clemens, Martha Stewart, Scooter Libby and others for lying to the feds, but Obama Administration officials can lie to Congress with impunity. Shouldn’t the officials be just as guilty in the eyes of the law? One would think so, but no one in the DoJ is going to do anything about it, nor will most of the idiots that take up space and bloviate for hours on end in halls of Congress.

    • jim_m

       It’s time to take the DOJ out of the hands of the executive.

      • I don’t believe you can do that absent an amendment as law enforcement is an executive power.

        • jim_m

           I didn’t say it was easy, just that it should be done.

          • And placed where?

          • jim_m

            Dunno.  In most states we vote for an AG.  Maybe it’s time to elect more national offices directly.  Boy it would throw a wrench in a lot of admins to have a DOJ run by the opposition.

            Gridlock in Congress is generally a good thing for the economy (keeps congress from meddling too much).  Maybe gridlock in the executive would help even more.

          • Well, as a quibble, even where attorneys general are elected, they’re still executive — and if anything having DOJ under a different elected official would only politicize it more.

          • jim_m

             True enough that it remains under the executive. Perhaps I should have specified that it should not be under the President.

            Frankly I doubt that it could be any more politicized than it is currently.  The entire DOJ is prosecuting crimes based on political calculations not on whether or not the law has been broken.

          • Without aggressive congressional oversight it’s inevitable. You’d only be exchanging the president’s political calculations for the AG’s.

          • Commander_Chico

            Some countries put the prosecutorial function within the judiciary.  

          • I think the Founding Fathers were aware of those countries, and chose deliberately not to emulate them. For reasons that might be found in various of their writings.

            But they’re dead white guys who wrote those things more than 100 years ago in some kind of archaic version of English nobody understands anymore.

          • Commander_Chico

            I’m not advocating it, just pointing it out as alternative.

            I think there weren’t any countries that had an independent judiciary in 1780 – it’s a bit different now.

            Career prosecutors in continental Europe are usually within an independent agency of the independent judiciary, not too much different organizationally than the Federal Defender Office (for defense counsel) operates under the Federal judiciary.

          • Well, one of the reasons we do have an independent judiciary is to keep the judging of cases as far separated as feasible, in a human-created institution (which isn’t much anyway) from the political day-to-day that the legislative and executive branches are prone to.

            It’s also important to keep the judging of cases separate from the parties thereof. Having prosecutors as part of the judicial branch risks creating a relationship that can go against the interest of justice. Politics, as it happens, is a deeper problem than just when it comes to elections; you can’t eliminate it as long as human beings are involved at any level.

          • jim_m

             I have to agree here.  Without that separation you end up with the farce we see in Spain where judges declare prosecutions of political figures and then sit in judgement upon them.

            These are kangaroo courts and we want no part of them.

          • Commander_Chico

            Correct, there is no perfect system.

            One difference in many countries’ judiciary – judging is a career, started at a junior level.  The candidates are selected by the judiciary, not the executive, and promoted to higher courts from within.

          • As a result judges are only accountable to their colleagues. Imagine the judiciary as “Skull and Bones” writ large.

          • Commander_Chico


            The biggest problem in those countries is that few have juries – or limited jury power.

  • ackwired

    “Didn’t it used to be a bad thing to lie to Congress?”

    I don’t see why.  They lie to us all of the time.

    • I believe that you believe what you have written above.

      • ackwired

        Is there anybody who does not think that the Roger Clemons trial is the biggest waste of time and money of the decade?

    • jim_m

      Ackwired believes that it’s OK to lie to Congress when it is controlled by the GOP but if it is the hands of the dems then it’s considered treason.

      • ackwired

        You make up more sh** than anyone else on this blog.

        • Poke a liberal and a Progressive projects…

          • ackwired

            Another knee-jerk personal attack.

          • Jerk complains shoe pinches when placed on his foot.

        • jim_m

           I will simply note that you did not deny my point.

    • herddog505

      It DOES seem only fair, doesn’t it?!

  • Gmacr1

    “Accountability in the Obama Administration”

    Does anyone else the oxymoron in that headline?

    I somehow doubt that in the remaining 10 months of this regime that the House is going to launch any indictments against them. With the constant stonewalling and outright lying there is little possibility of serious procecution. OTOH, if re-elected, look for the hammer to come down.

    • Any particular reason you thought that was accidental?

      • Gmacr1

        I believe I was pointing out how “Accountability” should not be included in the same sentence as  “the Obama Administration” due to the fact that they aren’t.

  • GarandFan

    Incompetence has been the hallmark of the current administration.  From a President who “leads from behind”, to an Energy Secretary who didn’t know he was also in charge of oil policies, to an Attorney General who cut his legal teeth on getting Presidential pardons for convicted felons in exchange for cold, hard cash.

  • 914

    Barry is accountable to He, His self and Him..

  • Pingback: The Chicago Way: Justice for Sale at Holder’s DOJ – John Malcolm()