The decision of Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane to drop the investigation and potential prosecution of Philadelphia Democrats who were recorded accepting cash, money orders, or jewelry certainly seems suspicious. According to news reports, investigators collected over 400 hours of audio and video of five Democrats, including four state lawmakers, before Kane, also a Democrat, secretly killed the investigation last fall. When confronted with this troubling story by the Philadelphia Inquirer, Kane cited racism and mismanagement in the investigation, but the detailed descriptions of the recordings certainly seem to indicate that the payments were made.
Kane’s reaction to reports about her decision went from bad to worse. At first, she complained that white men were attacking her:
In the statement, Kane provided only one quote, dismissing those who questioned her decisions as “nothing more than the Good Ol’ Boys club playing political games to discredit me in order to fulfill their own selfish and improper agenda.”
The statement cited Kane’s pursuit of political-corruption cases, including the pay-to-play scandal involving Democrats tied to the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission and the corruption charges brought last week against Democratic State Sen. LeAnna Washington.
That was a pretty astounding escalation. It is not out of line to wonder why a state’s attorney general would drop an investigation which is said to have obtained detailed recordings of lawmakers taking bribes. The decision to dismiss the investigation under seal combined with Kane’s accusation that it was tainted by racism certainly is newsworthy and gives rise to an inference that, although we may not know exactly what went on here, something unusual did. That’s ordinarily a reason to give something more examination, not less.
But Kane, apparently frustrated by continuing scrutiny of her decision, has now escalated further, hiring counsel and suggesting that if the Inquirer continues to pursue the story, she would start suing people!
During the meeting, Sprague [Kane's new lawyer] suggested that The Inquirer may have been used by the sources of its stories – “wittingly or unwittingly” as a “weapon” to attack Kane to defend themselves from potential charges of wrongdoing in the management of the probe.
“I intend to look at the investigation from the very beginning to the conclusion of it, and in terms of what has been published, by this paper and others, to take appropriate action on behalf of the attorney general against those responsible for the defamatory and the false publications that have been made,” Sprague said.
It sounds like Kane or her new lawyer thinks the folks providing detailed information about the investigation into bribe-taking Democrats are the very investigators she claims were impermissibly motivated by race in the investigation.
The decision to lawyer up and take “appropriate action” against either the leakers or the papers goes far beyond the bounds of a reasonable response. This is indisputably a newsworthy story. The public deserves to know what happened with this investigation and why it happened. Kane’s acceleration from “it was racism” to “it’s the Good Ol’ Boys” to “I will start suing people” is despicable in any public servant, but even more so from the state’s top prosecutor.
The Inquirer’s editor, William K. Marimow, gets this exactly right:
“Our lead reporters, Angela Couloumbis and Craig McCoy, have interviewed many people with in-depth knowledge of the investigation, including members of Attorney General Kane’s staff, in order to ensure that the stories are accurate, thorough, and fair,” Marimow said. “These stories are the product of months of diligent and dogged reporting – not a leak from a person with a political agenda.”
He added, “In my opinion, this is precisely the kind of issue that requires public scrutiny, specifically the conduct of public officials who accepted cash or gifts from an undercover agent and the quality of a three-year investigation launched and ended by a state law enforcement agency.”
Bravo, Inquirer. That’s journalism.
From a cheering New York Times:
Holder Sees Way to Curb Bans on Gay Marriage
By MATT APUZZO | February 24, 2014
WASHINGTON – Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Monday injected the Obama administration into the emotional and politicized debate over the future of state same-sex marriage bans, declaring in an interview that state attorneys general are not obligated to defend laws that they believe are discriminatory.
So it’s okay for government officials to ignore their oaths of office and refuse to enforce a law they don’t personally agree with. But it’s a crime for a religious official to refuse a church wedding to some couple because of a personal belief.
Mr. Holder was careful not to encourage his state counterparts to disavow their own laws, but said that officials who have carefully studied bans on gay marriage could refuse to defend them.
So the Attorney General of the United States, the highest law enforcement officer in the country, says it is okay to ignore legally enacted laws. And, in fact, he is encouraging people to do so. Which he does on quite a few issues, by the way. (Cf. amnesty.)
Six state attorneys general – all Democrats – have refused to defend bans on same-sex marriage, prompting criticism from Republicans who say they have a duty to stand behind their state laws, even if they do not agree with them.
What nonsense. Only Republicans have to enforce laws they disagree with.
It is highly unusual for the United States attorney general to advise his state counterparts on how and when to refuse to defend state laws. But Mr. Holder said when laws touch on core constitutional issues like equal protection, an attorney general should apply the highest level of scrutiny before reaching a decision on whether to defend it. He said the decision should never be political or based on policy objections…
And, of course, they would never be political.
The nation’s first black attorney general, Mr. Holder has said he views today’s gay-rights campaigns as a continuation of the civil rights movement that won rights for black Americans in the 1950s and ’60s. He has called gay rights one of “the defining civil rights challenges of our time.”…
And if you call something a ‘civil right,’ then no one can oppose it. Just like amnesty has suddenly become a civil right.
His comments signal the latest manifestation of the Obama administration’s evolving position on gay rights. Mr. Obama came into office opposed to same-sex marriage. But in 2011, he decided against defending the Defense of Marriage Act and ended the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy barring gays and lesbians from the military. The next year, the president said he personally supported gay marriage…
All of which he did to boost the fundraising for his re-election campaign. But it wasn’t political. No way.
Greg Abbott, our current Attorney General, and likely the next governor is a proponent of allowing concealed handgun license holders to open carry their weapons. I am fine with this. Open carry brings another level of responsibility with it. With concealed carry no one else knows you are armed. That goes away when you open carry, so it will be interesting what a new law would require of the license holder, and how police would handle the new laws. Of course, the nervous Nellies who would freak out when they saw a man or women with a .45 on their hip are an issue. We have largely become a society that fears guns, I wonder how that will be handled? Possibly requiring the license holder to wear their permit in a visible place when they open carry?
When Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler arrived at a house party of teenagers in June, he pushed through the crowd, past youngsters dancing on a table and a smattering of red plastic cups. One of the revelers snapped a photo.
As the night wore on, teens at the South Bethany rental home posted tweets, photos and videos of a bash labeled the “eviction party” for its intensity – a celebration where underage participants later confirmed many were drinking alcohol.
Gansler, a Democrat who is running for governor, said this week that he stopped by the Delaware beach house to talk briefly with his teenage son and then left. He said he does not remember whether he saw anyone drinking. But even if he had, Gansler said, it was not his responsibility as a parent or a high-ranking law enforcement official to intervene.
“Assume for purposes of discussion that there was widespread drinking at this party,” Gansler said. “How is that relevant to me? …The question is, do I have any moral authority over other people’s children at beach week in another state? I say no.”
Advocates against substance abuse and underage drinking disagreed, saying adults shouldn’t look the other way.
“It’s totally inappropriate for an adult, especially for an elected official whose job is to uphold the laws of the state or any state,” said Michael Gimbel, an independent consultant and the former alcohol abuse prevention official for Baltimore County.
“For any parent to do this is irresponsible. But for an attorney general who fought for these laws on the books is even worse,” he said.
Gansler has publicly advocated against underage drinking, appearing less than a year ago in a video for the Century Council, a nonprofit that works to combat both teen drinking and drunken driving.
“Parents, you’re the leading influence on your teen’s decision not to drink,” Gansler said in a video filmed as part of the organization’s “Ask, Listen, Learn” initiative to persuade parents to talk to middle-school children about drinking. “It’s never too early to talk with your kids about smart ways to say no.”
Century Council’s CEO and president Ralph Blackman, upon learning that Gansler had been at such a party, said, “Let me pick myself up off the floor here.”
Blackman added that he couldn’t judge what Gansler should have done while briefly stopping by a party. But he said that as a parent, he would hope to hold himself to a standard high enough to “not only set a good example and be a good role model for my own kid, but for the wider group of kids who all influence each other.”
“You can agree, you can disagree with the legal age,” Blackman said. But by looking the other way, “you are somehow suggesting that it is OK to break the law. It’s part of the value systems that go into young people’s decision making.”
Gansler, in a two-hour interview Tuesday about senior week and the June 13 party, said, “My responsibility is only to my child… Everybody has their own moral compass. Mine is to raise my own child.” He said firmly that his son was not drinking.
Gansler had attended a Maryland State Bar Association event in Ocean City earlier that evening. During his brief stay at the teens’ party, he was captured in both a video and a photo posted online. He did not dispute the authenticity of those images.
He said he was at the party only for a few minutes to discuss with his newly graduated son when they would leave Delaware the next morning for a college event in Pennsylvania. Of senior week, he said, “For better or worse, the reality is some kids drink alcohol while they’re there.”
The two-term attorney general and former Montgomery County state’s attorney said he had no more responsibility to shut down a party if he saw drinking than to stop teenagers walking down the street with beer cans in hand or investigate tailgate parties.
“Was I supposed to serve as the police officer?” Gansler asked. “No.”
Gansler was part of a group of parents who paid for a weeklong stay at a six-bedroom beach house after their sons’ graduation from the private Landon School in Bethesda.
The parents arranged for two fathers to serve as chaperones each night, paid for food and negotiated rules that forbade the boys from driving, having girls behind closed bedroom doors or drinking “hard alcohol,” according a copy of the rules and planning documents obtained by The Baltimore Sun. The list of prohibitions did not mention drinking beer or wine.
Gansler said that while he didn’t write the rules, he attended a meeting where parents discussed them and was one of two adults who explained them to the dozen boys.
“If anything bad happened, if the kids violated the rules, they’d be sent home,” Gansler said. “My guess is… that if someone drank beer, that would not be an offense for which the chaperones would want to send somebody home.”
Delaware law, like Maryland’s, does not distinguish among types of alcohol in its broad prohibition against underage drinking. In both states, the legal drinking age is 21.
It is legal for parents to allow their own children to drink at home.
In several photos posted online by people at the party, older adults can be seen standing in the background. In videos and photos, young people, both men and women, are dancing on a bar and on a table. In one video, a bucket of clear liquid is poured from the balcony onto dancers below. It’s unclear how many teens were drinking.
Some of the videos have since been removed from social media.
“I don’t remember much, but it was one of the best parties I’ve been to, hands down,” said one attendee who spoke to The Baltimore Sun this week under the condition of anonymity because some engaged in underage drinking.
Two days after the party, however, the house was in bad shape. Julie Barnes, who has for years cleaned the home after renters, said she arrived on June 15 to find the wooden floors rippled from moisture damage, dents that appeared to be made from high heels on the bar and pool table, and floors sticky from what smelled like beer. According to minutes of a South Bethany Town Council meeting where the vandalism was discussed, the house sustained about $50,000 worth of damage.
Police who investigated did not place blame on the Landon group and classified the damage as likely the result of a burglary that occurred sometime between Friday evening and Saturday when Barnes arrived to clean. The Landon group turned in their keys Friday afternoon, parents said.
A parent who chaperoned the night of the party but would not discuss whether there was drinking said he helped the boys clean up the next morning. He said they left the house in good shape. Another parent said a representative of the realty company ResortQuest called afterward to say the house was fine and minor damage would be covered by the security deposit. The parents asked not to be identified to protect their children’s privacy. Representatives from ResortQuest did not respond to a request for comment.
Gansler said the parents assume that someone broke in and trashed the house after the boys checked out.
“Apparently, the night before, the parents who were chaperoning it kicked kids out” because it was getting too crowded, Gansler said. “The thought was [the damage] was so malicious that they were trying to get revenge or back at the parents who were chaperoning for kicking them out.”
The home’s owner, Timothy Dickson, lives in Virginia and said he thought he and his wife were renting to several families vacationing together, not to a dozen recent high school graduates. He said they were dismayed by the teens’ behavior at their beach house as displayed on social media.
Texas Republicans are pushing back against a move by Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department to attempt to force the state to receive permission from the federal government before it can make changes to its voting and election laws.
In the administration’s first response to last month’s Supreme Court ruling that wiped out a major provision of the Voting Rights Act, Holder asked a San Antonio-based federal court to force Texas to get Justice Department approval before changing their election rules.
The high court’s 5-4 decision gutted the part of the Voting Rights Act under which all or parts of 15 mainly Southern states had been required to submit all voting changes for approval from Washington before they could take effect.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said Thursday the Obama administration seemed to be “sowing racial divide” and accused the administration of joining Texas Democrats with an eye on the 2014 elections.
“These judges are going to base their decision on the law and the facts,” Abbott told the Brownsville Herald. “(Holder’s announcement) seems to be more political theater than it does any kind of legal statement.”
Abbott, who is running for governor, said there is “no need to have any uncertainty” about the legitimacy of the state’s the 2014 elections calendar. Next year’s primaries are scheduled for March 4.
Republican Sen. Ted Cruz released a statement following Holder’s announcement accusing him of continuing the Justice Department’s “longstanding pattern of refusing to follow the law.”
“Likewise, Holder continues to attack voter ID laws, even though the Supreme Court has concluded that voter ID laws are supported by multiple interests that are ‘unquestionably relevant to the State’s interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'” Cruz said.
Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn accused Holder of trying to go around the high court. “This decision has nothing to do with protecting voting rights and everything to do with advancing a partisan political agenda,” Cornyn said.
Holder, during a speech to the Urban League in Philadelphia on Thursday, said that based on evidence of racial discrimination presented last year in a redistricting case in Texas, “we believe that the state of Texas should be required to go through a preclearance process whenever it changes its voting laws and practices.”
In its filing in San Antonio, the Justice Department said that “in every redistricting cycle since 1970, courts have similarly found that one or more of Texas’ statewide redistricting plans violated the voting guarantees of the Constitution or provisions of the Voting Rights Act.”
A three-judge panel in San Antonio has been looking at Texas voting maps for state and congressional redistricting since 2011, when the court threw out boundaries drawn by a then-GOP supermajority in the statehouse.
An ensuing legal battle between the state and a coalition of minority rights groups upset the 2012 elections in Texas, delaying party primaries that ultimately used temporary maps drawn by the court.
“Once again, the Obama Administration is demonstrating utter contempt for our country’s system of checks and balances, not to mention the U.S. Constitution. This end-run around the Supreme Court undermines the will of the people of Texas, and casts unfair aspersions on our state’s common-sense efforts to preserve the integrity of our elections process,” Gov. Rick Perry said in a statement.
Holder’s action was praised by minority rights groups, with the NAACP lauding the “necessary” move “for the United States to come to the aid or minorities in Texas.”
“We are simply ecstatic that the Attorney General has decided to join us in a continuing effort to thwart the implementation of a discriminatory redistricting map,” NAACP Texas State Conference President Gary Bledsoe said in a statement.
Last month, more than 75 Republicans in the House of Representatives joined the effort to pass legislation on ousting scandal-plagued Attorney General Eric Holder (shown), bringing the total number of representatives seeking his immediate resignation to over 130. Even some Democrats have added their voices to the growing chorus. The myriad scandals surrounding the Obama administration, meanwhile, continue to escalate as the president tries to deflect accountability.
The bid to oust disgraced Attorney General Holder began about two years ago following explosive whistleblower revelations regarding Operation Fast and Furious. The federal program, which was eventually exposed in Congress and the media by brave ATF agents, put thousands of weapons into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.
Official documents later revealed that the resulting violence – hundreds of Mexicans and at least two U.S. federal agents were killed with Fast and Furious guns – was being used to advance gun control in America. While much of the media tried to portray the deadly operation as a “botched” investigation, it also emerged later that the two supposed “drug lords” and “targets” being “investigated” were on the FBI’s payroll.
After Congress found out about the scheme, Holder lied on numerous occasions, and he continues trying to cover up the crimes by refusing to hand over subpoenaed documents to congressional investigators. In June of 2012, the attorney general was even held in criminal contempt of Congress on a bipartisan vote, giving him the dubious distinction of being the first sitting Cabinet member in U.S. history to face such charges.
Now, congressional investigators on the House Judiciary Committee are also exploring whether or not Holder committed perjury when he falsely told lawmakers that he had never been involved in the prosecution of journalists. “This is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy,” Holder responded on May 15 when asked about spying on journalists.
More than a few Republicans have hinted that the attorney general could have been deliberately lying under oath – a very serious crime. Judiciary Committee chief Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) recently said his panel was “very concerned” about the possibility. Allegations of perjury from Holder’s previous bogus testimony on the gun-running scandal have not died down either.
“The media reports and statements issued by the Department regarding the search warrants for [Fox News reporter] Mr. Rosen’s emails appear to be at odds with your sworn testimony before the Committee,” Republican lawmakers wrote recently in a letter to Holder. “We believe – and we hope you will agree – it is imperative that the Committee, the Congress and the American people be provided a full and accurate account of your involvement in and approval of these search warrants.”
In response to the coverup and the lies surrounding Fast and Furious, meanwhile, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) again introduced a resolution in January to force Holder out of office. The legislation “expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that Congress has lost confidence in the Attorney General and calls for his immediate resignation.” At least 76 lawmakers signed on just in the month of June.
In an interview with The Hill, Rep. Gosar said the latest revelations about Holder’s Justice Department spying on reporters from the Associated Press and Fox News have helped increase support for the measure. “Americans have lost faith in our chief law enforcement officer,” the congressman said. “He’s contradicted himself in front of Congress.”
Other Republicans cited concerns over the veracity of Holder’s recent claims to Congress on prosecuting journalists as a major factor in the growing support for his ouster. Indeed, when it emerged earlier this year that the attorney general had approved the spying and that the Justice Department named a Fox News reporter as a potential “co-conspirator,” outrage grew on both sides of the aisle as accusations of perjury began flying again.
Even the establishment media, which for years has been accused by critics of running cover for the administration, expressed misgivings about the espionage aimed at journalists. Combined with other major scandals – IRS targeting of conservative and Tea Party groups, NSA spying, Benghazigate, extrajudicial assassinations, potential perjury, and more – the general public was also upset, according to polls. More than two-thirds of Americans say the federal government is “out of control” and a threat to basic liberties.
Some Democrats have also recently suggested that Holder should consider resigning. “Whenever you feel that you have lost your effectiveness or may be losing your effectiveness to the detriment of the job that you do… you have to evaluate that and make a decision,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said in an interview with Bloomberg Television. “And I think we’re at the time now where decisions have to be made.”
In the wake of revelations that Holder had approved spying on journalists, far-left commentators have joined the growing chorus calling for his resignation, too. Former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann, for example, said on Twitter last month that the attorney general “should’ve resigned or been dismissed after the AP overreach. Instead he made a Fox News figure a martyr.”
The president, however, who has also been mired in controversy and major scandals, continues to defend the attorney general, recently saying that he has “complete confidence in Eric Holder.” Some analysts argue that Obama’s “confidence” in the disgraced Justice Department boss is actually an effort to help deflect attention and responsibility from the White House itself by keeping the spotlight on lower-level minions.
Of course, even though some of Obama’s most loyal supporters have turned on Holder, not everybody thinks the attorney general should be allowed to just resign and quietly disappear from public life. More than a few analysts have said in recent months that the attorney general should be indicted for a wide array of serious crimes that could land Holder in jail for a long time.
Former judge and current Fox News legal analyst Jeanine Pirro recently compiled a list of crimes for which she said Holder should be prosecuted. Among them: perjury, knowingly making false statements, aiding and abetting crimes in the Fast and Furious scandal, obstruction of justice, misprision of a felony for failing to stop gun-running, and finally, conspiracy to provide guns to Mexican cartels.
Ex-congressman Allen West, meanwhile, suggested that Holder was a bigger threat to America than al Qaeda. “I’ve been warning for a long time that there may be a day we wake up and America is no longer America,” said West. “The more time Eric Holder spends as Barack Obama’s right hand man, the closer we are to this day. We must stop this dangerous duo today.”
Some reports, citing public statements made by members of Congress, have noted that there are ongoing discussions among lawmakers about potentially trying to impeach Holder. Among the serious possible crimes cited by analysts are at least the two possible counts of perjury – one in testimony about spying on journalists, the other from lies told under oath about Fast and Furious.
Other major scandals cited by critics of Holder: Coming up with bogus legal arguments for assassinating Americans without charges or trial; approving lawless activities including gun-running to drug cartels; getting caught on video advocating a plan to “brainwash,” in his words, the American people into opposing gun rights; assaulting states’ rights and sovereignty; and more. The Justice Department chief has also infuriated a sizeable portion of Obama’s own base by persecuting medical-marijuana users and providers even more aggressively than the George W. Bush administration in states where it is legal.
Whether Holder will resign or face criminal prosecution in the near future remains to be seen. What is clear at this point, however, is that the growing storm of serious scandals emanating from Washington, D.C., and the Obama administration in particular has most Americans fed up with the federal government. Those trends are likely to continue accelerating – at least until criminals in government who defy their oaths of office are held accountable.
Eric “fast and furious” Holder’s legacy of corruption, power, influence, and greed will be a tough act for any future Attorney General to follow. He is the only Attorney General in our nation’s history to facilitate the pardon of a convicted felon and fugitive. Like Barack Obama, he is a privileged minority with a chip on his shoulder and a fellow supporter of Black Liberation Theology.
But that’s not even the worst of it.
Here are the reasons why our current Attorney General is the worst in no particular order:
He represented Washington, DC in DC versus Heller joining then Attorney General Janet Reno in an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold the DC hand gun ban. In his argument he actually said, “The Second Amendment does not protect an individual’s right to keep and bear arms for purposes unrelated to a state’s operation of a well regulated militia.” (Sorry Mr. Holder, but the Second Amendment is not negotiable or left to interpretation.)
He advocated for and justified the use of drones to kill US citizens even on US soil. On March 5, 2013 Eric Holder said this, “Drone strikes against American citizens on US soil are legal. After this outrageous statement the Attorney General started to backtrack from these comments saying, “Using lethal force against American citizens on US soil was highly unlikely. We hope no President will ever be faced with that decision. However if there was an imminent threat such as a domestic terror attack on the country similar to Pearl Harbor or 9-11 it is conceivable that the use of an unmanned aircraft could be used as a viable option. (Mr. Holder, the fact that you believe this should make every American fearful of you, this Administration, and our government.)
He Initially was a proponent of trying 9-11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a New York City courtroom rather than at a military tribunal. (Sorry, Mr. Holder but this animal who maliciously murdered almost three thousand of your fellow Americans doesn’t deserve to have some Columbia leftist lawyer like yourself representing him, let alone in New York City at the scene of the crime.)
He blocked legislation in Texas and other states that called for voters to show picture ID in order to curb illegal voting. His ridiculous reason was, “It would disproportionately affect minority voters from the electoral process.” (No Mr. Holder it would stop voter fraud which you obviously support and no it would not be a poll tax either as most of the legislation called for cost free ID cards.)
He refused to prosecute and even dropped the charges against the New Black Panther Party; who on Election Day in 2008 stood outside polling stations dressed in paramilitary uniforms, carrying nightsticks and intimidated voters. His reason: He has stated on many occasions that he is unwilling to prosecute minorities for civil rights violations. “I think it does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line for my people.” (Mr. Holder, not only is this a blatant disregard for the rule of law, but more importantly it shows what a racist anti-white bigot you are as you selectively disenfranchise voters you deem unworthy of such.)
He filed a law suit against the state of Arizona over their anti illegal immigration bill, SB 1070 without even reading it first. He said the bill might lead to “racial profiling”. (Mr. Holder, SB 1070 does not racially profile anyone. Maybe if you would’ve read it first you would’ve known that.)
In February 2011, he announced that the Department of Justice would no longer defend cases involving the Defense of Marriage Act in court. He deemed DOMA was unconstitutional. (Wrong again Mr. Holder, where in the Constitution does it say that Traditional Marriage is unconstitutional, but Gay Marriage is constitutional? I think your reason is like yourself, a little light in the loafers.)
He was found in contempt of Congress by the House Oversight Committee for lying, misleading, and stonewalling the investigation by withholding information concerning the gun running scandal Operation Fast and Furious. (Mr Holder, I hope you can sleep at night with the blood of Border Agent Brian Terry on your hands as well as numerous others who died by the guns you provided to Mexican Drug Cartels.)
His most recent scandal is unfolding as I write this. His Justice Department has acquired illegal phone records from many reporters and editors at the left leaning Associated Press. This was in retaliation to a story the Associated Press ran about a Covert Mission in Yemen that foiled the plot of the so called “underwear” bomber.
The Obama Administration lied to the American people when they said publicly that they had no imminent or credible threat of a coming terrorist attack that was to coincide with the anniversary of Osama Bin Laden’s death. This was not true and the Associated Press knew they were not telling the truth. In fact, the Administration pleaded with the Associated Press not to run the story because it was in an Election year.
As soon as the Associated Press ran the story the Administration illegally seized over two months of phone records. (Mr. Holder, your disgusting intimidation tactics make you unfit to hold the position in our government that you do. I can only hope and pray that you, your boss, and all of his Socialist, Marxist, cohorts eventually go down with the ship. If the Republicans had any testicular fortitude you would all be wearing black and white stripes in Leavenworth.)
The Constitution says we need to keep America safe from all enemies both foreign and domestic. Throughout our history we have fought foreign enemies in far away lands but now we have an enemy within our own borders and inside our government.
America is the last great hope on earth; without our compassion and guidance the world would be a very dark and dismal place. America has been the leader in prosperity, freedom, liberty, and self governance since its founding. The Obama Administration is like a cancer and its supporters are the carriers of the disease known as liberalism. If we don’t stop them soon they will destroy what little we have left in regard to liberty and freedom. How do you destroy the greatest, most powerful country on earth? Just ask the Obama Administration and Eric Holder; they seem to have all the answers.
In a meeting with Attorney General Eric Holder, executives from several news organizations said the attorney general pledged to change the way the Justice Department conducts investigations that involve reporters.
Government officials said they would work to change guidelines on issuing subpoenas in criminal investigations involving reporters and ensure searches that have raised concerns recently about freedom of the press are not repeated, the editors said.
The news executives made the comments Thursday after meeting with Holder and some of his aides.
The discussion took place following an outcry from news organizations over the Justice Department’s secret gathering of some Associated Press reporters’ phone records and some emails of a Fox News journalist.
Last week, President Barack Obama ordered a review of the Justice Department guidelines.
One of the news media participants, Marty Baron, executive editor of the Washington Post, said the news executives told the department officials that reporters were concerned about using their email and concerned about using their office telephones.
“It was a constructive meeting,” said Baron. “They expressed their commitment to the president’s statement that reporters would not be at legal risk for doing their jobs.”
Jerry Seib, Washington bureau chief of The Wall Street Journal, said that in addition to the commitment to change the guidelines, there also was a renewed commitment to support a federal shield law for journalists. Such laws in force in many states protect journalists from having to reveal confidential sources.
“We diplomatically raised our concerns – don’t know what’s going to happen if anything,” said Jim Warren, Washington bureau chief of the New York Daily News. “Who knows what’s going to happen if they practice what they seem to preach and try to change some laws that we feel are very relevant. I think it’s sort of an opening gambit.” Warren said “there were some specifics talked about, more of a legal and statutory nature,” but he did not elaborate.
Other news media participants were Jane Mayer, a staff writer for the New Yorker; and John Harris, editor in chief of Politico.
The Associated Press didn’t attend the meeting because it objected to the meeting being off the record. The New York Times said it wouldn’t attend because of the department’s off-the-record ground rules.
Asked why the news executives decided to participate, Baron said people in the press frequently have off-the-record discussions.
“We feel very strongly about the issues here,” said Baron. “This was an opportunity for us to share our views with people at the highest level of the Justice Department.”
Besides Holder, Deputy Attorney General James Cole and seven other Justice Department officials also participated.
You just knew this was coming, didn’t you?
DOJ: Social Media Posts Trashing Muslims May Violate Civil Rights
In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights.
[Ed.: Apparently the DOJ needs to read the Bill of Rights again and, in particular, the First Amendment.]
The move comes a few years after the administration became the first in history to dispatch a U.S. Attorney General to personally reassure Muslims that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is dedicated to protecting them. In the unprecedented event, Attorney General Eric Holder assured a San Francisco-based organization (Muslim Advocates) that urges members not to cooperate in federal terrorism investigations that the “us versus them” environment created by the U.S. government, law enforcement agents and fellow citizens is unacceptable and inconsistent with what America is all about.
…Evidently that was a precursor of sorts for an upcoming Tennessee event (“Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society”) that will feature the region’s top DOJ official [Bill Killian], who serves as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and an FBI representative. The goal is to increase awareness and understanding that American Muslims are not the terrorists some have made them out to be in social media and other circles, according to a local newspaper report. The June 4 powwow is sponsored by the American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee.
The area’s top federal prosecutor, Bill Killian, will address a topic that most Americans are likely unfamiliar with, even those well versed on the Constitution; that federal civil rights laws can actually be violated by those who post inflammatory documents aimed at Muslims on social media. “This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,” Killian says in the local news story. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.”
…Over the years the Obama administration has embarked on a fervent crusade to befriend Muslims by creating a variety of outreach programs at a number of key federal agencies. For instance the nation’s Homeland Security covertly met with a group of extremist Arab, Muslim and Sikh organizations to discuss national security matters and the State Department sent a controversial, anti-America Imam (Feisal Abdul Rauf) to the Middle East to foster greater understanding and outreach among Muslim majority communities.
The Obama Administration has also hired a special Homeland Security adviser (Mohamed Elibiary) who openly supports a radical Islamist theologian and renowned jihadist ideologue and a special Islam envoy that condemns U.S. prosecutions of terrorists as “politically motivated persecutions” and has close ties to radical extremist groups.
The president has even ordered the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to shift its mission from space exploration to Muslim diplomacy and the government started a special service that delivers halal meals, prepared according to Islamic law, to home-bound seniors in Detroit. [And who] could forget Hillary Clinton’s special order allowing the reentry of two radical Islamic academics whose terrorist ties have long banned them from the U.S.?
In other words, criticizing Islamofascism – the political strain of Islam – could very well be criminalized by the Obama-Holder administration. The Islamist term for this crime is “Blasphemy”, which may include one or more of the following crimes:
- speaking ill of Allah
– finding fault with Muhammad
– speculating about how Muhammad would behave if he were alive
– drawing a picture to represent Muhammad
– whistling during prayers
– flouting the rules prescribed for Ramadan
– reciting Muslim prayers in a language other than Arabic
– consuming alcohol
– being alone with persons of the opposite sex who are not blood relatives
– finding amusement in Islamic customs
– publishing an unofficial translation of the Qur’an
– practicing yoga
– watching a film or listening to music
– wearing make-up on television
– insulting religious scholarship
– wearing the clothing of Jews or of Zoroastrians
– participating in non-Islamic religious festivals
– converting from Islam to Christianity
This crime is, in many cases, punishable by death. In other words, you are no longer living in America.
It takes a special kind of skill to do Jay Carney’s job, at least the way Jay Carney does it. The rule of modern-day politics is that you never concede anything the other side says, no matter how absurd the claim you have to make. That means you’ve got to twist yourself into some pretty contorted pretzels sometimes, but that’s the rule and you have to follow the rule.
One staple of the rule, of course, is that you can never – under any circumstances – admit that someone on your team lied, especially when it’s about something serious like taking a buzz saw to freedom of the press. So when someone on your side actually does lie, you’ve sometimes got to go through some pretty wild machinations to make the case that he didn’t. Not easy, but hey, lying craftily is why they pay Jay Carney the big bucks.
What do you do, though, when faced with a lie like Eric Holder’s lie – the one where he never knew anything about possibly prosecuting a member of the press for disclosure of information, even though he himself signed a warrant against a member of the press and used the possible prosecution of the reporter as justification for doing so.
That’s not just an arguable lie. That’s a lie. That’s an I-didn’t-take-any-cookies-oh-you’ve-got-video-of-me-taking-cookies-OK-you-got-me lie. That’s what that is. How do you claim that’s not a lie? You can’t use logic. You can’t say, “Oh look, a squirrel!” You have to be completely absurd. So if that’s what you have to do, you might as well embrace it for all its worth. You don’t just claim the lie isn’t a lie. You claim it is self-evidently not a lie. Hey. Might as well. If you have to go over the cliff, you might as well run fast.
“It seems self-evident that that charge is inaccurate,” White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters. “Based on the published reports that I have seen, I have seen no conflict between what the attorney general said and published reports.”
The “published reports” refers to NBC’s report that it was Holder who signed off on the warrant against Rosen. How can that not be a lie? It can’t. It’s a simple, straightforward impossibility. So Carney tells another lie to cover it up:
“Clearly what the attorney general said is accurate,” he said.
Carney said that media reports indicate that no prosecution of Rosen is being contemplated, and that therefore Holder’s statement regarding potential prosecution is correct.
“I think based on what you said, he testified truthfully,” Carney said after the Holder quote was read aloud by a reporter. “You guys are conflating the subpoena with prosecution.”
Now granted, Carney’s lie is a lie of implication, but that doesn’t make it any less dishonest. By emphasizing that no prosecution of Rosen is under current consideration, Carney tries to change the story to be about the here and now. But it’s not about the here and now. The warrant was issued in 2009, based on the administration’s claim at that time that Rosen might be a criminal co-conspirator in a leak case. That means that the potential for prosecution was either a) real; or b) presented to the judge as real as justification for the warrant, if it there really was no such consideration, then that’s another lie.
Whatever is being considered or not considered now is completely irrelevant. Holder lied when he said he knew nothing about potential prosecution of a journalist for disclosure of information. Carney lied to try to cover up Holder’s lie.
This whole administration is nothing but a bunch of liars.
Eric Holder is a national embarrassment. By the way how confident should we feel that his Justice Department will be looking into the IRS scandal?
Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters Tuesday that the leak to the Associated Press that prompted the Justice Department to secretly obtain phone records for AP reporters and editors constituted a “very, very serious leak” that “put the American people at risk.”
The AP sent a scathing letter to the DOJ on Monday, after they were informed that the DOJ had secretly obtained two months worth of phone records from April and May of 2012, a period of time during which the AP reported on a covert CIA operation in Yemen to prevent an airplane bomb plot. The Justice Department had previously said it was investigating the leak.
“This was a very serious leak. A very, very serious leak,” Holder said Tuesday at a press conference. He added that it was possibly the most serious leak he had seen, or at least top two or three.
See, it was “very serious” In fact it was “very very serious”, in his personal top three very, very serious leaks it seems. I wonder if it was more, or less serious than selling guns to Mexican cartels?
Eric Holder our Attorney General, had some interesting comments on gun rights yesterday
“As a nation I think we have to ask ourselves some hard questions. We gather too often to talk about these kinds of incidents. We need to discuss who we are as a nation, talk about the freedoms that we have, the rights that we have and how those might be used in a responsible way.
Ah, so we should use our liberties in “responsible” ways. OK, but I am troubled by one thing. When someone speaks of using our rights responsibly, what do they mean? Likely they have their own definition of responsible. So, to better gauge what Holder means I have one question. If I were to give, or sell my guns to a Mexican drug cartel, would he consider that responsible?
Some people, I will call them Leftists because they are, well, leftists, are so deep in the Pit of Eternal Leftist Stupidity, that they are actually not as bright as the average recipient of a Marxist Moron Award. Eleanor Holmes Norton is, I believe, such a person
Washington, D.C., Democratic Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who represents the city in Congress, claimed the National Rifle Association is responsible for Border Patrol agent Brian Terry’s murder and Operation Fast and Furious on Thursday, in what appears to be a last-ditch effort to protect Attorney General Eric Holder before he’s voted in contempt of Congress.
“Any doubt that today’s contempt resolution is political was put to rest when the NRA joined in to blow-torch vulnerable Democrats to vote for contempt today,” Norton said on the House floor. “The gun lobby is directly responsible for the gap in federal law that allowed purchases of guns here that were sold in Mexico and ultimately for the tragic death of a border agent. Yet our committee spent no time on the root cause of the tragedy because of a political mandate from the gun lobby.”
Ah, actually, it was not the NRA telling gun dealers to sell guns to cartels, it was the ATF. But, do not let that fact trip you up on your way to the Stupidity Hall of Shame there. In fact the NRA would be the LAST group to support a program such as Fast and Furious. But, again, don’t let silly facts get in the way as you insert your feet, yes both of them, into your mouth, which appears to be extremely large while your brain is, well, tiny.
The House of Representatives voted Thursday to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in criminal contempt for refusing to turn over documents tied to the botched Fast and Furious gun-running sting – a discredited operation that has become a sharp point of contention between Democrats and Republicans in Washington.
The 255-67 vote marked the first time in American history that the head of the Justice Department has been held in contempt by Congress. Almost every House Republican backed the measure, along with 17 Democrats.
A large number of Democrats – including members of the Congressional Black Caucus and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi – walked off the House floor in protest and refused to participate in the vote.
The criminal contempt charge refers the dispute to District of Columbia U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen, who will decide whether to file charges against Holder. Most legal analysts do not expect Machen – an Obama appointee who ultimately answers to Holder – to take any action.
House members are also expected to pass a civil contempt measure Thursday afternoon. The civil measure would allow the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to file a lawsuit asking the courts to examine the Justice Department’s failure to produce certain subpoenaed documents, as well as the validity of the administration’s recent assertion of executive privilege over the documents in question.
Dear CBC: Please don’t go away mad, just go away
Let’s face it. They don’t give a damn about who killed border agent Brian Terry.
The Hill reported:
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) plan to stage a walkout during Thursday’s vote on whether to place Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress.
The CBC is scheduled to meet at 10 a.m. on Thursday to discuss the details of the walkout and is planning to circulate a letter to House Democrats requesting that they join them on the Capitol steps for a press conference during the contempt vote.
The move comes less than 24 hours before the House plans to vote for the first time in history to hold a sitting attorney general in contempt of Congress for not complying with a congressional subpoena. Holder is the first black attorney general in U.S. history.
The walkout is reminiscent of a similar move made by Republicans in 2008 during a Democratic-led vote on whether to hold two senior staffers in President George W. Bush’s administration in contempt of Congress.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) — then the minority leader — led the walkout with Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) following closely behind him. Issa, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is the sponsor of the contempt resolution against Holder.
“The House floor is the scene of a partisan, political stunt,” said Boehner at the time. House Democrats have been expressing similar comments about the Holder contempt measure.
CBC Chairman Cleaver released this statement on the Fast and Furious investigation this week.
“During this critical moment in our nation’s history, the attention of our country’s chief law enforcement officer should be focused on addressing ongoing law enforcement challenges and championing real issues, instead of being distracted by manufactured, partisan political ones. This is an extremely low moment in our body politic. The cause for civility has been met by an unnecessary and unfortunate partisanship.”
These miscreant racists bottom feeders are a disgrace
People honor the memory of Martin Luther King Jr., and Liberals completely forget that King longed for a day when people were judged NOT by skin color but for their Character. Oh well, why waste an opportunity to race bait right Eric Holder?
(Politico) — Attorney General Eric Holder used Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy on the anniversary of the civil rights leader’s birthday Monday to emphasize the Obama administration’s dedication to protecting the American people from discriminatory voting practices.
“Despite our nation’s record of progress, and long tradition of extending voting rights – today, a growing number of citizens are worried about the same disparities, divisions, and problems that Dr. King fought throughout his life to address and overcome,” Holder said at an MLK Day event in Columbia, S.C.
Holder’s remarks in the Palmetto State come just weeks after the Justice Department blocked the state’s new voter ID law from taking effect, citing an unfair burden on minority voters.
Citing the “drumbeat of concern” he has encountered from Americans across the country about discrimination in the election systems, the attorney general vowed that the Justice Department was more committed than ever before to enforcing the Voting Rights Act.
Same Old S#@^
That solution in a minute, but first via Hot Air comes news that Holder is playing the YOU-KNOW-WHAT card
Attorney General Eric Holder told The New York Times this weekend that “the more extreme segment” of his Fast and Furious critics are motivated by — you guessed it — racism. But Florida Rep. Allen West will have none of it.
In remarks to The Daily Caller, West interpreted Holder’s shameless rhetorical tactic as a sign of desperation — and called him out for his non-race-related incompetence:
“I think this is absolutely the last card in the deck, and that shows how weak their ground is,” West said in a phone interview. “But, what that means is they want to make white individuals afraid of continuing to put the pressure on Eric Holder because they don’t want to be seen as racist, and that is something that we have got to move beyond.”
West said Holder can’t logically assign race as a motivation behind the criticisms for his handling of Operation Fast and Furious. “What Fast and Furious has to do with is misleading the Congress and the American people about what you knew about this program, and if you did not know anything about this program, then who’s in charge of the Department of Justice?” West said. “It has nothing to do with your race — it has everything to do with competence, with your character and with your ability to lead the Department of Justice.”
West said Holder’s use of race as a way to attack his critics is “the most insidious thing I ever heard.”
“I grew up in the United States military and it’s not about your color, it’s about your competence, it’s about your abilities to execute a mission,” West said. “If your commanding officer turns heat on you, it’s because you have failed to achieve the mission and I think what we’re doing is we’re looking at something that was a very horrible program — this Operation Fast and Furious.”
Pathetic but sadly predictable of Holder. Now, I say we solve this in this manner. We lock West, and Holder in a room, and, well, I think you know the rest!
Rep. Joe Walsh lays it out. this was all about furthering gun control in America. H/T Doug Powers
Walsh sure seems to have a bead on what Fast & Furious was designed to accomplish:
Walsh added that Holder needs to explain to the American people what role he had in Operation Fast and Furious. “The American people deserve to know the truth regarding Attorney General Eric Holder’s knowledge and role in the Fast and Furious operation,” Walsh said. “This program was deliberately designed to attack law-abiding American gun owners and gun dealers. Why else would an anti-gun administration force licensed firearms dealers to sell guns to violent criminals?”
This ought to be obvious. The administration has been repeating the lie that lax gun laws here are to blame for the heavily armed drug cartels in Mexico. Apparently Team Obama is willing to sacrifice lives to achieve their Stalinist dreams of stricter gun control.
—————————————— CLICK HERE TO VISIT THE DAILY BENEFACTOR ——————————————–
—————————————————————————– TOP STORY ——————————————————————————
Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, sent a subpoena Wednesday to Attorney General Eric Holder as part of his investigation into the gun trafficking operation known as “Fast and Furious.”
“Top Justice Department officials, including Attorney General Holder, know more about Operation Fast and Furious than they have publicly acknowledged,” the California Republican said in a statement. “The documents this subpoena demands will provide answers to questions that Justice officials have tried to avoid since this investigation began eight months ago. It’s time we know the whole truth.”
The subpoena seeks, among other things, all communications regarding the operation from 16 top Justice officials, including Holder, his chief of staff, Gary Grindler, and the head of the department’s criminal division, Lanny Breuer, as well as correspondence on specific dates to and from the former head of the ATF’s Phoenix field division, William Newell.
It also asks for all documents and communications referring or relating to the murder of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata, including any correspondence outlining the details of Zapata’s mission at the time he was murdered.
Zapata was killed in a drug cartel ambush on a northern Mexican highway with a gun that was purchased in a town outside Forth Worth, Texas. Three Dallas-area men – one accused of buying the gun, his brother and their neighbor – are facing federal weapons charges, although none related to Zapata’s death.
Congressional investigators are also demanding information regarding the investigation into the death of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. Two guns found at Terry’s crime scene were linked to the failed operation that allowed more than 2,000 weapons to “walk.”
The subpoena also asks for correspondence that Justice Department officials had with the White House about the gun trafficking operation, as well as what information was shared by Justice officials in Mexico.
This second subpoena follows the first one issued in March to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Asked about the development Tuesday, Holder said his department “will undoubtedly comply with them,” noting that Justice officials have already sent “thousands of pages of documents up to the Hill.”
But Holder wouldn’t answer whether he or anyone else at the department knew about the controversial tactics.
Holder addressed the matter at the end of a press conference about an alleged Iran-tied terror plot foiled by U.S. investigators. “What I want the American people to understand is that in complying with those subpoenas and dealing with that inquiry, that will not detract us from the important business that we have here to do at the Justice Department, including matters like the one that we have announced today,” Holder said.
The new subpoena follows a week of back and forth between congressional investigators and Justice Department officials of “who knew what, when.” Under scrutiny was Holder’s testimony from May 3 when he told Issa that he “probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”
Fox News obtained documents addressed to Holder as early as nine months before that, which described the concept of Fast and Furious.
In addition to the congressional investigation being led by Issa and Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, is calling for a special counsel to look into the matter.
——————————————————————– NOTE TO READERS ———————————————————————
THE DAILY BENEFACTOR now provides you with a large selection of NEWS WIDGETS containing RSS feeds from the most comprehensive news sources on the internet, such as THE DRUDGE REPORT, GATEWAY PUNDIT, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, WORLDNETDAILY, POLITICO, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, CNS, MICHELLE MALKIN, BREITBART, and THE JERUSALEM POST. Check them out!
Or words to that general affect
During an appearance on the Steve Gill Show, U.S. Rep. Allen West said the roads that appear to lead to those responsible for the botched program that was supposed to trace guns to high-ranking drug lords are alarming.
“This is just another sad chapter in the Eric Holder book of ineptness and incompetence,” West said. “Eric Holder needs to be brought before an investigative committee and if those charges are warranted he needs to be held accountable.
“At least the president needs to realize that Eric Holder needs to be removed from the Department of Justice … or else it appears President Obama is complicit and in approval of the actions of his attorney general,” he said.
————————— CLICK HERE TO VISIT THE DAILY BENEFACTOR —————————
————————————————————- TOP STORY ————————————————————-
Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen has taken a great step forward in stopping the implementation of ObamaCare. And quite correctly, Van Hollen said, “Judge Vinson declared the health care law void and stated in his decision that a declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction. This means that, for Wisconsin, the federal health care law is dead unless and until it is revived by an appellate court. Effectively, Wisconsin was relieved of any obligations or duties that were created under terms of the federal health care law.”
Wisconsin has drawn a line in the sand. ObamaCare is not a law, because it was overturned by Judge Vinson. Because ObamaCare is not a law, no state is to follow it. To begin implementing ObamaCare would be in violation of the law of the land.
From Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen on Monday:
Judge Vinson has confirmed the conclusion I reached when this law was enacted. Congress is free to reform health care, but it must do so in a Constitutional manner. It simply does not have the authority to require people to either purchase health insurance or pay a fine.
Now, we wait to see if the federal government has finally gotten the message. If they don’t get the message, and decide to appeal the case, as they did when they lost in Virginia, my colleagues and I will continue our fight to defend the Constitution and protect the people of Wisconsin from this unconstitutional law.
Florida has also declared that they will not implement the law. According to Florida Governor Rick Scott, “We are not going to spend a lot of time and money with regard to trying to get ready to implement that (law) until we know exactly what is going to happen.”
Other states must follow the lead of Attorney General Van Hollen. ObamaCare is not law, and thus, must not be implemented.
—————————————————— NOTE TO READERS ——————————————————
THE DAILY BENEFACTOR now provides you with a large selection of NEWS WIDGETS containing RSS feeds from the most comprehensive news sources on the internet, such as THE DRUDGE REPORT, GATEWAY PUNDIT, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, WORLDNETDAILY, POLITICO, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, CNS, MICHELLE MALKIN, BREITBART, and THE JERUSALEM POST. Check them out!