The New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza has become the go-to source for coverage of the Eric Holder/James Rosen scandal, and tonight he has some good advice for the GOP. While the Democratic strategists known as the mainstream media express their concern that Republicans are in danger of “overreaching” in their pursuit of the attorney general, Lizza notes that Holder’s apparent perjury shouldn’t be the main concern of investigators and reporters.
Instead, a letter sent from the Justice Department to the chairs of the House Judiciary Committee today shows the DOJ doubling down on its unprecedented pursuit of a search warrant against the Fox News reporter, according to Lizza.
Here's the latest development in the House Judiciary Committee's inquiry into Eric Holder's recent testimony: http://t.co/XWqAfIX5NK
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) June 4, 2013
In letter, DOJ affirms Holder agreed there was probable cause to believe Rosen committed a crime. Not encouraging: http://t.co/6pwkMP7A6H
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) June 4, 2013
@RyanLizza I may be missing something, but it's not clear to me they're saying the crime was Rosen's.
— James Ledbetter (@jledbetter) June 4, 2013
@ledbetreuters they're saying DOJ was correct to seek exception to PPA because there was probable cause Rosen committed criminal offense.
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) June 4, 2013
The First Amendment Privacy Protection Act precludes the issuance of search warrants for “materials” belonging to journalists (such as the content of emails) without probable cause that the journalist has committed a crime.
@RyanLizza Right. I guess the real q is: What was Rosen's "crime" if it wasn't reporting or publishing, which they hint here it wasn't?
— James Ledbetter (@jledbetter) June 4, 2013
Recommended
@ledbetreuters it's spelled out in the warrant: violating Espionage Act by aiding, abetting, conspiring in disclosure of classified info.
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) June 4, 2013
DOJ: prosecutors never "sought approval to bring criminal charges against" Rosen. But was it ever discussed?
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) June 4, 2013
Again, the Justice Department seems to be saying that it never intended to prosecute Rosen under the Espionage Act; it just had to accuse him of being a conspirator so that it could secretly search his personal emails. As Reuters reported, President Obama “believes firmly in freedom of the press and does not want journalists prosecuted for doing their jobs.” That search warrant was just an unpleasant formality.
.@RyanLizza DoJ statement re Espionage Act prosecutions of reporters boils down to "we could, but we won't. Trust us."
— David Lauter (@DavidLauter) June 4, 2013
Bingo MT @DavidLauter: .@RyanLizza DoJ statement re Espionage Act prosecutions of reporters boils down 2 "we could, but we won't. Trust us."
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) June 4, 2013
.@RyanLizza Those on the left who want to accept "trust us" should think abt precedent for the nxt administration & the one after that.
— David Lauter (@DavidLauter) June 4, 2013
As if that weren’t enough, there’s always that apparent perjury thing.
@RyanLizza well an attorney general lying under oath is kinda big
— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) June 4, 2013
@JRubinBlogger I believe that in the long run the legal precedent is more important. And the perjury case seems a little thin.
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) June 4, 2013
@RyanLizza @JRubinBlogger Rather than disect legl detail by detail, can we just ask if we're really willing to accept a gov't this corrupt?
— Steve Parks (@Ipaddlecanoe) June 4, 2013
Join the conversation as a VIP Member