Category Archives: Eric Holder

Please, Eric Holder, will you Just Go Away???

 

Eric-holder-will-you-please-go-now-999

Last week our current (and, it seems, history-deficient) US Attorney General said the following:

 “…the last five years have been defined by significant strides and lasting reforms, even in the face, even in the face, of unprecedented, unwarranted ugly and divisive adversity. And if you don’t believe that, you look at the way — forget about me, forget about me — you look at the way the Attorney General of the United States was treated yesterday by a House Committee. It had nothing to do with me, forget about that.

What Attorney General has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?…”

Wow.

Well, then.

Hey, there: Mr. Holder? Eric? Do you by any chance recall a man by the name of Alberto Gonzales? He was, by sheer coincidence, ALSO the Attorney General of the United States and he seems to have run into a dash of “adversity” during his time as AG, too:

Continue reading

Advertisements

Threats, Intimidation and Payback in the ‘Goodfellas’ Administration

goodfellas 846

“…For as long as I can remember I always wanted to be a gangster. To me that was better than being president of the United States. To be a gangster was to own the world…”  
      -Ray Liotta in ‘Goodfellas‘, 1990

There’s been a disturbing, …no, make that terrifying, …trend in our politics of late. We are being governed by people who behave like gangsters, minus the stereotypical accents or any perceivable ethical code. They believe (and behave as if) our nation’s laws are only for “little people”; schlubs. They believe themselves to be above the law, beyond it.

They believe they won’t be caught, because they believe they can’t be caught.

Most of all, they believe this allows them to deal with their enemies in classic gangster style: through threats, intimidation and ‘payback’. They want to send a message, they delight in it, precisely because they believe that no one can touch them.

And God help us all: they may be right.

Continue reading

Steven Crowder vs. Eric #Holder (VIDEO)

CrowderAn excellent video (below) from comedian Steven Crowder: it’s imaginative, funny, … but more than a little troubling.

Primarily ’cause it’s true, or true enough.

Why IS Holder still running our Department of Justice, instead of experiencing the hospitality of our maximum-security prison system?? That we can even ask the question gives away the answer: lawlessness abounds in this Administration, with weaselly Eric Holder apparently running point.

And Crowder’s video notwithstanding, THAT’s not funny at all:

Continue reading

Perfectly said: “Eric Holder has been a disastrous Attorney General for a REALLY long time…”

Holder, will you please go now 444

A year ago I wrote:

“Holder was the one responsible for the Marc Rich pardons, and it was his Justice Department that dropped the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party back in 2009. Holder also had the bright idea of trying terrorists in criminal court, an idea which thankfully was blown up by Lindsey Graham, of all people. But that isn’t why he needs to go (at least, that’s not all of it).

No, his refusal to adequately explain his knowledge and involvement in Operation ‘Fast and Furious’ is why Holder is guilty of at LEAST contempt, and why it’s long past time for him to leave.”

I was 1000% right then, …and I’m even more right now: Eric Holder deserves to be fired and perp-walked down the steps to a waiting paddy wagon.

Yesterday woulda’ been nice….

Continue reading

Obama admits he doesn’t have authority to “drone” American citizens… sorta

Constitution

This just in, via Allahpundit:

Strictly speaking, Eric Holder already acknowledged this yesterday after three agonizing minutes of Ted Cruz teasing it out of him. But Rand Paul wanted a formal statement from the White House as a condition of ending his filibuster.

And now, apparently, he’s got it:

Continue reading

Eyes, but cannot See

“The only thing worse than being blind is having sight but no vision.”  -Helen Keller

—–

I just heard about this article last night and ….I’m waaaay confused.

Here’s the scoop from the Sacramento Bee:

The U.S. Justice Department announced Wednesday that it and the National Federation of the Blind have reached a settlement with the Sacramento Public Library Authority to supply e-book readers for blind people.

The settlement resolves allegations that the library violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by using “inaccessible” Barnes & Noble Nook electronic readers in the library lending program.

The settlement agreement calls for the library not to acquire any more e-readers that exclude blind people, who need features such as text-to-speech functions or the ability to access menus through audio or touch options.

—–

Before I comment on this, my lawyers have asked me to state for the record: “No one here has anything against anybody who is blind, deaf, mute, tall, short, red-haired, skinny, squinty, furry, or smells funny” (…ok, I may be fibbing about that last one).

All set? On we go.

This is an actual case (which was just settled), brought by the Department of freakin’ Justice about Kindles, Nooks and assorted E-Readers? Seriously? THIS is what they’re doing instead of “investigating” Fast And Furious? This is why they dropped the charges against the New Black Panther Party from the 2008 election? To allow them the time necessary to sue….the LIBRARY?

Two words: Ri. Diculous.

Adding to the dichotomy between what the DOJ should be doing and what they evidently are doing is: isn’t the Public Library, ..well, …Public? Meaning: aren’t they largely funded by our tax dollars? So isn’t this basically one arm of the government suing another one? And we’re on the hook to pay for ALL of it? You could almost say it’s inconceivable.

And another question: what if I’m blind AND deaf? A talking Kindle wouldn’t do ME any good then. In order to not discriminate against me at that point, the libraries (all of them, remember, not just some) would have to go purchase BRAILLE E-Books. Sure, they only exist conceptually right now, but why would that stop Big Daddy? It’s not as if the government has never set standards which are physically impossible before this.

I get that everyone should have reasonable access to everything. But the key word is “reasonable”. Everyone already has access to the libraries, for free, and every book within. Also, in most libraries they already have a plethora of services for the visually impaired. I will further posit that every single book in the library is likely not available on E-Readers. So what then? Should those books be taken off the shelves until they eventually make it into Nook, version 9.0?

The library was merely trying to add a new technology for their patrons, and they’re vilified for it. Next time someone questions how too much government stagnates innovation, you might want to bring up this example.

The EPA, DOJ, and virtually every other government agency seem to have a conspiratorial approach when dealing with the general population (and now even each other). I realize that “conspiratorial” may be too loaded a term for some folks, so you may substitute “totally-hive-minded” if you’d prefer.

I’ll ask you: do you think this was the biggest hot-button issue facing us today? Does every facet of our life need the government’s “wise intervention”? I don’t think I’m being hyperbolic when I say: Every time another government ‘edict’ is announced, it always seems to cost money. A LOT of money.

Our money.

That’s probably just a coincidence, though.

American Future Fund PAC Presidential Campaign Ad: “Fast and Furious”

…***Thanks to the excellent ‘Unedited Politics’ blog. More info on the travesty that is Fast and Furious, and Attorney General Eric Holder.

Eric H. Holder, will you Please Go Now!

With apologies to Dr. Seuss…..

Holder has debased the office of Attorney General.

Remember, Holder was the one responsible for the Marc Rich pardons, and it was his Justice Department that dropped the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party back in 2009. Holder also had the bright idea of trying terrorists in criminal court, an idea which thankfully was blown up by Lindsey Graham, of all people. But that isn’t why he needs to go (at least, that’s not all of it). No, his refusal to adequately explain his knowledge and involvement in Operation ‘Fast and Furious’ is why Holder is guilty of at LEAST contempt, and why it’s long past time for him to leave.

First, some background: this post from us yesterday, and this updated post from ABCnews.com.

And this brief synopsis from an Ed Morrissey column back in early December, 2011:

“The ATF sent hundreds, if not thousands, of weapons across the U.S.-Mexico border in 2009 and 2010, ostensibly to track them as they passed from straw buyers in the U.S. to drug cartels in Mexico. However, the ATF didn’t actually track the weapons, which have now begun appearing in crime scenes north of the border. The weapons have been used in hundreds of murders in Mexico and at least one in the U.S., in which Border Patrol agent Brian Terry was killed just over a year ago.

Of course, that wasn’t the reason people were upset, according to Holder. C’mon, you can guess the reason….

Holder told The New York Times Charlie Savage that the intense scrutiny of himself and Barack Obama relating to Fast and Furious came from a few “extreme” bloggers and conservative media figures whose criticisms were “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

Of course!! It’s so obvious! I know that I always agree completely with all Caucasian Democrats and Liberals, and only have a problem with the ones that are more ….darkly hued.

Mr. Holder, you’d be an equal disgrace if you were white, pink, or plaid. Feel better?

Pabulum like this aside, Texas Senator John Cornyn summed up, in 4 short minutes, the litany of offenses of which Holder is guilty. You probably have seen little of it, if any, so be sure to watch it all.

—–

—–