Skip to Content

Issa's Contempt Proceedings Akin to Kangaroo Court

Washington, DC, June 20, 2012
At today's Oversight and Government Reform Committee Hearing, Rep Gerry Connolly said Issa's contempt proceedings are akin to a Kangaroo Court. Watch here.

Click the video to watch statement

Statement by Congressman Gerry Connolly at House Oversight & Reform Committee Hearing on Contempt Citation Against Attorney General Holder
June 20, 2012
I think this is a sad moment for this Committee and the Congress.  Some might be forgiven for describing the proceedings today as akin to a Kangaroo Court.  What are the elements of a Kangaroo Court?  First of all, the verdict is decided in advance.  And the facts and the process are modified to fit that verdict that’s already been arrived at.  A Kangaroo Court process involves the distortion of facts, the selective filtering out of facts, controlling testimony, controlling what is available to the court, and making sure that verdict that is arrived at in advance is arrived at.  It involves softening up the intended defendant, by name calling, by badgering, by insinuation, and by character assassination.  All of that, one might say, has characterized this process.
If this were a genuine attempt to make sure that the Terry family had closure, we’d have an open investigation.  We’d make sure the previous Administration’s Wide Receiver program, which was the antecedent of Fast and Furious, was thoroughly examined here on a bipartisan basis, and that the previous Attorney General was called as a witness, to answer simply the questions of what he knew and when he knew it.  
A conscious and deliberate effort has been made here to make sure such testimony is not ever heard. When you exclude legitimate avenues of inquiry it is for a purpose.  And it’s for a purpose to make sure that verdict in advance is arrived at.
Nowhere have we had a hearing on whether or not our gun laws are sufficient at the southern part of our border to address the overwhelming flow of weapons from the United States to Mexico.  I went to Mexico too, and when we asked, on a bipartisan basis, the Attorney General of Mexico what’s the one thing our country can do to help you, we were somewhat surprised by his answer.  His answer was reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban.  
But if your intent is political, and make sure substantively we don’t ever talk about guns in that sense, then you actually warn an ATF witness who dares to go astray in response to a question that we need tougher gun control enforcement.  We need stronger consequences when those laws are violated.  What we never had a hearing about, in talking about ATF, is that ATF hasn’t had a permanent director in six years. Why?  Political obstruction in the other body, because they don’t want tough gun enforcement; they want weak leadership.
So yes, we are brought to this moment, to believe that this is really all about a rogue Attorney General who is uncooperative with this branch of government, and he needs to be reined in, and the ultimate penalty we have available besides impeachment, contempt, for the first time ever, needs to be meted out.  To a man who is otherwise seen, broadly, as an honorable man, who has put himself into this job, who is fighting all kinds of things on our behalf, from voter suppression, to yes, the drug cartels in the South.  
And we are going to demean him, we are going to tarnish his reputation, because that’s how we get to the President of the United States.  And you can forgive the public for the contempt in which this body is held in poll after poll when we behave this way, when we could have behaved so much differently, and gotten so much more done on a bipartisan basis.
Statement by Congressman Gerry Connolly at House Oversight & Reform Committee Hearing on Contempt Citation Against Attorney General Holder
I think this is a sad moment for this Committee and the Congress.  Some might be forgiven for describing the proceedings today as akin to a Kangaroo Court.  What are the elements of a Kangaroo Court?  First of all, the verdict is decided in advance.  And the facts and the process are modified to fit that verdict that’s already been arrived at.  A Kangaroo Court process involves the distortion of facts, the selective filtering out of facts, controlling testimony, controlling what is available to the court, and making sure that verdict that is arrived at in advance is arrived at.  It involves softening up the intended defendant, by name calling, by badgering, by insinuation, and by character assassination.  All of that, one might say, has characterized this process.
If this were a genuine attempt to make sure that the Terry family had closure, we’d have an open investigation.  We’d make sure the previous Administration’s Wide Receiver program, which was the antecedent of Fast and Furious, was thoroughly examined here on a bipartisan basis, and that the previous Attorney General was called as a witness, to answer simply the questions of what he knew and when he knew it.  
A conscious and deliberate effort has been made here to make sure such testimony is not ever heard. When you exclude legitimate avenues of inquiry it is for a purpose.  And it’s for a purpose to make sure that verdict in advance is arrived at.
Nowhere have we had a hearing on whether or not our gun laws are sufficient at the southern part of our border to address the overwhelming flow of weapons from the United States to Mexico.  I went to Mexico too, and when we asked, on a bipartisan basis, the Attorney General of Mexico what’s the one thing our country can do to help you, we were somewhat surprised by his answer.  His answer was reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban.  
But if your intent is political, and make sure substantively we don’t ever talk about guns in that sense, then you actually warn an ATF witness who dares to go astray in response to a question that we need tougher gun control enforcement.  We need stronger consequences when those laws are violated.  What we never had a hearing about, in talking about ATF, is that ATF hasn’t had a permanent director in six years. Why?  Political obstruction in the other body, because they don’t want tough gun enforcement; they want weak leadership.
So yes, we are brought to this moment, to believe that this is really all about a rogue Attorney General who is uncooperative with this branch of government, and he needs to be reined in, and the ultimate penalty we have available besides impeachment, contempt, for the first time ever, needs to be meted out.  To a man who is otherwise seen, broadly, as an honorable man, who has put himself into this job, who is fighting all kinds of things on our behalf, from voter suppression, to yes, the drug cartels in the South.  
And we are going to demean him, we are going to tarnish his reputation, because that’s how we get to the President of the United States.  And you can forgive the public for the contempt in which this body is held in poll after poll when we behave this way, when we could have behaved so much differently, and gotten so much more done on a bipartisan basis.
Statement by Congressman Gerry Connolly at House Oversight & Reform Committee Hearing on Contempt Citation Against Attorney General Holder
I think this is a sad moment for this Committee and the Congress.  Some might be forgiven for describing the proceedings today as akin to a Kangaroo Court.  What are the elements of a Kangaroo Court?  First of all, the verdict is decided in advance.  And the facts and the process are modified to fit that verdict that’s already been arrived at.  A Kangaroo Court process involves the distortion of facts, the selective filtering out of facts, controlling testimony, controlling what is available to the court, and making sure that verdict that is arrived at in advance is arrived at.  It involves softening up the intended defendant, by name calling, by badgering, by insinuation, and by character assassination.  All of that, one might say, has characterized this process.
If this were a genuine attempt to make sure that the Terry family had closure, we’d have an open investigation.  We’d make sure the previous Administration’s Wide Receiver program, which was the antecedent of Fast and Furious, was thoroughly examined here on a bipartisan basis, and that the previous Attorney General was called as a witness, to answer simply the questions of what he knew and when he knew it.  
A conscious and deliberate effort has been made here to make sure such testimony is not ever heard. When you exclude legitimate avenues of inquiry it is for a purpose.  And it’s for a purpose to make sure that verdict in advance is arrived at.
Nowhere have we had a hearing on whether or not our gun laws are sufficient at the southern part of our border to address the overwhelming flow of weapons from the United States to Mexico.  I went to Mexico too, and when we asked, on a bipartisan basis, the Attorney General of Mexico what’s the one thing our country can do to help you, we were somewhat surprised by his answer.  His answer was reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban.  
But if your intent is political, and make sure substantively we don’t ever talk about guns in that sense, then you actually warn an ATF witness who dares to go astray in response to a question that we need tougher gun control enforcement.  We need stronger consequences when those laws are violated.  What we never had a hearing about, in talking about ATF, is that ATF hasn’t had a permanent director in six years. Why?  Political obstruction in the other body, because they don’t want tough gun enforcement; they want weak leadership.
So yes, we are brought to this moment, to believe that this is really all about a rogue Attorney General who is uncooperative with this branch of government, and he needs to be reined in, and the ultimate penalty we have available besides impeachment, contempt, for the first time ever, needs to be meted out.  To a man who is otherwise seen, broadly, as an honorable man, who has put himself into this job, who is fighting all kinds of things on our behalf, from voter suppression, to yes, the drug cartels in the South.  
And we are going to demean him, we are going to tarnish his reputation, because that’s how we get to the President of the United States.  And you can forgive the public for the contempt in which this body is held in poll after poll when we behave this way, when we could have behaved so much differently, and gotten so much more done on a bipartisan basis.
Statement by Congressman Gerry Connolly at House Oversight & Reform Committee Hearing on Contempt Citation Against Attorney General Holder
I think this is a sad moment for this Committee and the Congress.  Some might be forgiven for describing the proceedings today as akin to a Kangaroo Court.  What are the elements of a Kangaroo Court?  First of all, the verdict is decided in advance.  And the facts and the process are modified to fit that verdict that’s already been arrived at.  A Kangaroo Court process involves the distortion of facts, the selective filtering out of facts, controlling testimony, controlling what is available to the court, and making sure that verdict that is arrived at in advance is arrived at.  It involves softening up the intended defendant, by name calling, by badgering, by insinuation, and by character assassination.  All of that, one might say, has characterized this process.
If this were a genuine attempt to make sure that the Terry family had closure, we’d have an open investigation.  We’d make sure the previous Administration’s Wide Receiver program, which was the antecedent of Fast and Furious, was thoroughly examined here on a bipartisan basis, and that the previous Attorney General was called as a witness, to answer simply the questions of what he knew and when he knew it.  
A conscious and deliberate effort has been made here to make sure such testimony is not ever heard. When you exclude legitimate avenues of inquiry it is for a purpose.  And it’s for a purpose to make sure that verdict in advance is arrived at.
Nowhere have we had a hearing on whether or not our gun laws are sufficient at the southern part of our border to address the overwhelming flow of weapons from the United States to Mexico.  I went to Mexico too, and when we asked, on a bipartisan basis, the Attorney General of Mexico what’s the one thing our country can do to help you, we were somewhat surprised by his answer.  His answer was reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban.  
But if your intent is political, and make sure substantively we don’t ever talk about guns in that sense, then you actually warn an ATF witness who dares to go astray in response to a question that we need tougher gun control enforcement.  We need stronger consequences when those laws are violated.  What we never had a hearing about, in talking about ATF, is that ATF hasn’t had a permanent director in six years. Why?  Political obstruction in the other body, because they don’t want tough gun enforcement; they want weak leadership.
So yes, we are brought to this moment, to believe that this is really all about a rogue Attorney General who is uncooperative with this branch of government, and he needs to be reined in, and the ultimate penalty we have available besides impeachment, contempt, for the first time ever, needs to be meted out.  To a man who is otherwise seen, broadly, as an honorable man, who has put himself into this job, who is fighting all kinds of things on our behalf, from voter suppression, to yes, the drug cartels in the South.  
And we are going to demean him, we are going to tarnish his reputation, because that’s how we get to the President of the United States.  And you can forgive the public for the contempt in which this body is held in poll after poll when we behave this way, when we could have behaved so much differently, and gotten so much more done on a bipartisan basis.
Back to top