The last Morning Jolt of the week features a look at Lois Lerner, and the cowboy hero that President Obama seeks to emulate, and . . . 

Eric Holder: Sure, I’m Cool With Snooping Around in James Rosen’s E-Mails

Remember how Attorney General Eric Holder recused himself from the decision to seize the phone records of more than 20 office, home and cell phone lines of Associated Press reporters? (Holder never wrote down his formal recusal, of course, so we have to take his word for it.) The recusal was because the Attorney General was conceivably a suspect of leaking the classified information and was at one point interviewed by the FBI.

His recusal also seemed to suggest he realized the Justice Department looking through reporters’ phone records represented a dramatic expansion of government investigation into how reporters do their work, and that maybe some political survival instinct wanted to keep that controversial move a degree separated from him.

Thursday we learned that Holder doesn’t really have any objection to the government looking around in a reporter’s phone records or e-mails.

Michael Isikoff: “Attorney General Eric Holder signed off on a controversial search warrant that identified Fox News reporter James Rosen as a ‘possible co-conspirator’ in violations of the Espionage Act and authorized seizure of his private emails, a law enforcement official told NBC News on Thursday.”

Lest you think this controversy just represents privileged members of the national news media thinking of themselves as special, a quick refresher: Of course it is often wrong to leak classified information. (I say “often” because our government considers a lot of information “classified,” and one way government officials can keep embarrassing information away from a public that has a right to know is to declare it classified.) But even going back to the Pentagon Papers, the crime was committed by the leaker, not by the reporter who received the information and published it. Judges have put injunctions on publishing information, but there has never been an implication that a reporter commits a crime by publishing classified information.

Until now, with Rosen. And while the DOJ hasn’t pursued charges yet, by naming James Rosen a co-conspirator in their affidavit, Eric Holder and company are leaving the door open to charge Rosen with conspiracy, a federal crime with a penalty of up to five years in jail and $250,000 fine. This is why it’s a big deal — even if Rosen never faces charges, the door has now been opened for some future prosecutor to charge reporters with a fairly serious crime, just for reporting information to the public. This is why most journalists you know are freaking out.

Kristina Ribali: “Will Holder punish Holder with administrative leave?”

John Stanton, the DC bureau chief of BuzzFeed: “So Eric Holder, who signed off on spying on media outfits, is going to head up the Obama administration’s review of its media spying rules.”

Howard Kurtz notices that no matter how much President Obama and his allies and friends win elections, pass legislation, or win news cycles, they always complain about the power of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News:

Now it’s true that Fox or Rush can boost or batter any lawmaker, and that they can help drive a controversy into the broader mainstream media. But we’re talking here about the president of the United States. He has an army, a navy and a bunch of nuclear weapons, not to mention an ability to command the airwaves at a moment’s notice. And he’s complaining about a cable channel and a radio talk show host?

Gee, it’s almost as if the complaints about Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, etc. are not really based on how much power these media entities have, and instead driven by an outrage that they dissent from the narrative of other media, that Obama, Al Gore, and the rest of the progressives are right and virtuous and wonderful and the greatest in every way…

Friend of NR Will Cain guest-hosted Parker-Spitzer last night. There’s been quite a bit of discussion on CNN of the notion that by their count, five Republican presidential candidates are under contract to Fox News Channel: Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and John Bolton.

“Never before in our history, that I can think of, has one media outlet with one coherent ideology had . . . access to half the presidential nominees and controlled one political party this way,” lamented Spitzer.

Yeah, it’s terrible to watch those politicians jump into cable-news jobs, huh, Spitzer?

The show’s guest, Dan Abrams, formerly of MSNBC, raised the irony of the complaint coming from Spitzer and also wondered whether the gripe is overstated, asking whether Bolton or some of the others are serious contenders or simply names being mentioned.

It’s odd to see potential GOP nominees clustered around one news channel, but that probably says more about the hiring mentality at the other networks than at Fox News. CNN could have signed any of the above, or Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush, or tried to line up a deal with outgoing Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty. Instead, they signed Number Nine and a columnist best known for trashing Sarah Palin to anchor their prime-time lineup. And we know no serious potential Republican president will ever collect a paycheck from MSNBC.

UPDATE: Hmmm. Where was Parker that evening? “Eliot Spitzer’s TV sidekick is so fed up with playing second fiddle to the hooker-loving ex-gov that she’s threatening to walk, sources told The Post yesterday.”