remember, it was dan burton who pushed the committee and pushed the impeachment hearings to the point where the american people rejected the republicans, the republican leadership, and newt gingrich -- >> he was the guy accusing the clintons of murder, wasn't he? >> accuses the clintons of everything. he was the beginning of the overreach for the republicans that culminated in an impeachment hearing and resulted in republicans losing seats and newt gingrich being gone. >> that's not actually what happened. 2008 they lost the majority. >> i'm talking about 1998. >> 1998 they kept the house. they lost 52 seats. >> they lost newt gingrich. >> they lost newt gingrich. they kept control of the house. i think the bigger point here is that you need, and greg walden is exactly right. i talked to greg walden about this. you need to be careful on these explosive allegations. if you mishandle them, they'll explode in your hand. >> darrell issa uses a technique the "washington post" dana milbank dubbed accuse first, ask questions later. on cnn this weekend, he alleged the tea party targeting was

when i first moved here, i remember the dan burton hearings on whitewater, the clintons, et cetera, ethe fred thompson hearings in the senate. i was an unpaid intern for dick durbin. i used to sits in the fred thompson hearings all the time as a the lowest level staffer you could be -- and i would sit there day in and day out and think there's nothing there there. and we found out there's nothing there. guess what, there's nothing there this time. but that doesn't mean the political damage isn't done. and furthermore, and this is the worst part, it doesn't mean that they're not going to keep investigating if anyone thinks for a second that darrell issa and the republicans in the house and the republicans in the senate aren't going to keep investigating the obama administration for anything, then they're wrong. they are going to. >> absolutely. why not? we've already had 38 votes on the affordable care act. >> absolutely. >> julian, how are people going to argue that it was the white house that was oppressing conservative republicans when all this oppression, all of this started with, y

know, chris, this committee as you know has a long history of shenanigans going back to chairman dan burtonllet at a watermelon in the vince foster case. even by those standards, issa has been extraordinary. you said he's been firing blanks for weeks now. i would say a couple years. the congressman can correct me on this, but i think he's at 10, 11, 12 major investigations into this administration. fast and furious, wikileaks, benghazi, solyndra, fannie mae. it goes on. in each case there's a pattern he sort of makes an outlandish suggestion that this goes right into the white house or the president's going after his political enemies. he couches it with some sort of a weasel word and then nothing comes of it. congressman cummings should be delighted because chairman issa sacrificed his credibility. people in the press when they hear these allegations have to discount that even though we love a good scandal. >> you've been pushing him to put all he's got, show your cards in a poker game. show us the transcripts. is he going to do it? >> i don't know what he's going to do. but i can say one

henry waxman, for example, subpoenaed the bush much asration, not as dan burton did of the clinton administrationt it is a long tradition. hostguest: that is true. the role of the oversight committee is to see if there is any misuse of funds or corruption or any wrongdoing, any mismanagement, and to look at it and to try to reform it. host: do you think all these investigations being done by chairman issa are appropriate? guest: it is absolutely appropriate for him to investigate and for the republicans to investigate any area they feel is appropriate. it is appropriate for democrats to have investigations. the criticism has come when the facts have been not accurate. for example, with fast and furious, there were allegations that this was initiated by eric holder, and all of the facts show it was initiated by the prior administration, that the decisions were made in arizona on the border and not out of his office. so when you have the facts and you don't have anyone saying anything differently, it is appropriate to say you can say whatever you want, but the facts do not support what you are sayi