GG Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 What took so long? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 He didn't have his coffers lined propperly to receive the boat loads of money he is now going to get championing the causes of the downtrodden, poor, beleaguered and helpless ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Next up................................................Presidential Pardon. Every thing he did was to advance the agenda..............not to uphold the law We'd be "a nation of cowards" if we didn't admit that. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 I have complete confidence that his replacement will be just as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 What took so long? Moving the pieces into position to replace Ginsberg in the event the Republicans take the Senate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Moving the pieces into position to replace Ginsberg in the event the Republicans take the Senate Oh please no.................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 I doubt he could be confirmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 I doubt he could be confirmed. Thats why Harry worked so hard for the "nuclear option" . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Moving the pieces into position to replace Ginsberg in the event the Republicans take the Senate This quote is from yesterday's article article from Elle, linked here from Real Clear Politics. I’m not sure how to ask this, but a lot of people who admire and respect you wonder if you’ll resign while President Obama is in office. Who do you think President Obama could appoint at this very day, given the boundaries that we have? If I resign any time this year, he could not successfully appoint anyone I would like to see in the court. [The Senate Democrats] took off the filibuster for lower federal court appointments, but it remains for this court. So anybody who thinks that if I step down, Obama could appoint someone like me, they’re misguided. As long as I can do the job full steam…. I think I’ll recognize when the time comes that I can’t any longer. But now I can. Now, anyone who has paid attention to Obama knows that he doesn't care what Ginsberg says. If he wants here gone, he'll go dig up some long locked-up image of her at the age of nine, kicking a dog, and force her to quit. That Holder is stepping down means nothing because there are a dozen Holders standing in line to do, like Holder, whatever Obama tells them to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 From Obama's remarks today: "Eric has done a superb job," Obama said. That says a lot right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 From Obama's remarks today: "Eric has done a superb job," Obama said. That says a lot right there. What would you expect him to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 25, 2014 Author Share Posted September 25, 2014 What would you expect him to say? What Bush said about his FEMA director? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 What would you expect him to say? Exactly that. The B.S. from Obama is becoming very entertaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 (edited) NBC’s Chuck Todd: Self-Professed Activist Eric Holder ‘a Very Non-Political Person’ The host of NBC’s Meet the Press considers resigning attorney general Eric Holder — who once proudly declared himself an “activist attorney general,” called America a “nation of cowards” about race and took heat from his own White House for pursuing politically sensitive initiatives – ”a very non-political person.” Yes............meet the press indeed.............................blind partisans Why Eric Holder Will Regret His Recklessness By John Yoo The nation can wave goodbye to Attorney General Holder with relief, as to a bad houseguest who almost burned down the house during his unwelcome stay. His political missteps were legion, and his choices on law enforcement policy revealed a stunning combination of ideology and incompetence. He called for the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other al-Qaeda leaders in downtown New York City, for example, which showed a failure to understand our war on terrorism. He accused Americans of being a nation of cowards on race while dropping prosecutions of voter intimidation in Philadelphia. He made a terrible error of judgment on sending guns that ended up in Mexico and then made the mistake of stonewalling Congress’s effort to investigate — leading to the unprecedented citation for contempt of a sitting attorney general. But worst of all was not Holder’s political or prosecution choices, but his refusal to obey the Constitution. The AG is the nation’s law-enforcement officer, second only to the president. His most important job is to interpret and enforce the Constitution for the executive branch Krauthammer’s Take: Left Will Regret Holder’s Politicization of AG’s Office While it is “perfectly honorable” for Eric Holder to want to dedicate his life to combating perceived racial injustices, he should have done so in some other capacity and not while serving as attorney general, Charles Krauthammer said on Thursday’s Special Report. Judge denies DOJ delay request on release of 'Fast and Furious' docs... Coincidence.................I'm sure . . Edited September 26, 2014 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Judge denies DOJ delay request on release of 'Fast and Furious' docs... Coincidence.................I'm sure . . I'm sure Holder's resignation has nothing to do with this decision, as Holder knows better than anyone that Obama's interpretation of "executive privilege" means "I'm privileged enough to do whatever I want," and he has no intention of handing any DOJ records over to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Wonder if Janet Reno is available. Her[i guess it's a her] master full handling of Ruby ridge and Waco would make her a perfect fit in this 3 stooges administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Her[i guess it's a her] master full handling of Ruby ridge and Waco would make her a perfect fit in this 3 stooges administration. as a fan of The Three Stooges, I take umbrage at your comparing them to the current administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/nyregion/holder-backs-suit-in-new-york-faulting-legal-service-for-poor.html?_r=0 About damn time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 http://www.nytimes.c...-poor.html?_r=0 About damn time! Why would you post that in this thread? It makes zero sense here, and, quite frankly, is worthy of it's own thread for discussion purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Mr. Holder’s Injustice Department The very first controversy of the Eric Holder-led Justice Department (“DOJ”) involved the dismissal of the voter-intimidation lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party (“NBPP”). The matter provided a template for most of the DOJ controversies that followed: denial, stonewalling, obfuscation, deceit, and racialism. The U.S.Commission on Civil Rights conducted a year-long investigation into the matter shortly after the dismissal. Despite being compelled by statute to cooperate fully with commission investigations, DOJ refused to answer 18 separate interrogatories, refused to respond to 22 separate requests for production of documents, barred two key DOJ attorneys from testifying (both of the attorneys defied DOJ and testified at considerable risk to their careers), refused to provide witness statements for twelve key witnesses, invoked specious privileges in order to withhold critical information, failed to provide a privilege log, and failed to provide requested e-mails between Civil Rights Division personnel and other DOJ officials regarding the dismissal of the NBPP lawsuit (some of the e-mails later were revealed pursuant to court order in a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch) Despite the vigorous stonewalling, DOJ publicly claimed that it was cooperating fully with the investigation. The claim was blatantly false, but was cheerfully reported by the media. What most of the mainstream media failed to report, however, was that the bipartisan commission’s investigation adduced testimony that A high-ranking DOJ political appointee gave instructions that the Voting Section was not going to bring cases “against black defendants or for the benefit of white victims.” A high-ranking DOJ political appointee explicitly told the entire Voting Section “that this administration would not be enforcing Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act.” (The purpose of section 8 of the NVRA is to ensure that persons ineligible to vote are not permitted to vote.) DOJ refuses to enforce Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act on behalf of white victims. https://www.national...bullet_blue.gif There exists within DOJ pervasive hostility to the race-neutral enforcement of civil-rights laws. Furthermore, a high-ranking DOJ political appointee testified under oath that no political leadership was involved in the decision to dismiss the NBPP lawsuit. The testimony was shown to be false only after the Judicial Watch lawsuit pried loose e-mails showing clear political involvement. The commission’s 262-page report to congress contains much more evidence that, under Holder, DOJ did not enforce the nation’s civil-rights laws in a color-blind manner. Something to consider while reading the next obtuse editorial extolling Mr. Holder’s record on civil rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts