DCPolitics

Eric Holder Stays Put

ATTORNEY GENERAL ASKED TO STAY FOR SECOND TERM U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder – whose Department of Justice (USDOJ) has been dogged by the “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal (and more recently the Benghazi affair) – will remain at his post during U.S. President Barack Obama’s second term. Talk about picking…

ATTORNEY GENERAL ASKED TO STAY FOR SECOND TERM

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder – whose Department of Justice (USDOJ) has been dogged by the “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal (and more recently the Benghazi affair) – will remain at his post during U.S. President Barack Obama’s second term.

Talk about picking a fight …

“Why don’t you just give America a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice on it, while you’re at it?” writes Erika Johnsen for the conservative website Hot Air.

We agree … Holder is as polarizing as he is corrupt and incompetent.  And the invitation from Obama for him to serve another four years at his post is nothing but post-electoral muscle-flexing deliberately intended to provoke a fight.

For those of you unfamiliar with the “Fast and Furious” debacle, the federal government dumped thousands of guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels in an effort to trace them and make arrests.  Pretty bizarre behavior for a government that’s incessantly looking for ways to limit your right to bear arms, isn’t it?

After the operation failed miserably (resulting in the death of a U.S. Border Patrol officer, among other unintended consequences) Holder’s Justice Department attempted to cover up the mess.

Of course like the Benghazi scandal, the Obama administration has been given a hall pass on “Fast and Furious” – and its ensuing coverup.

***

Related posts

DC

Hunter Biden Found Guilty On Gun Charges

FITSNews
DC

Biden Laptop Highlights Importance Of Independent Media

Dylan Nolan
Politics

Prioleau Alexander: A Congressman And A Lobbyist Walk Into A Bar

E Prioleau Alexander

41 comments

CUvinny November 14, 2012 at 11:14 am

“Pretty bizarre behavior for a government that’s incessantly looking for ways to limit your right to bear arms, isn’t it?”

Evidence of this?

Reply
Guero November 14, 2012 at 2:40 pm

CU: Let me channel the wingnuts here for their response to you:

“Why, he’s a nigra…and he’s not our houseboy like the pickaninney in Charleston. What other evidence do we need?”

Reply
Thomas November 15, 2012 at 12:03 pm

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010)

Reply
jjevans December 2, 2012 at 1:10 pm

Agreed. Long overdue to take back our government by necessary means.

Reply
Kingfish November 14, 2012 at 11:59 am

What am I s’posed to do with him? No law firm will hire his ass, and he know too much.

Reply
Jack Jones November 14, 2012 at 11:34 pm

You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about. His old firm, Covington & Burling, would welcome him back with open arms. Legal publications in DC have already been commenting on the fact that most of the other large DC firms would be knocking on his door had he decided to leave. Most people in the DC legal community know that the attempt to link Holder in some negative way to Fast and Furious was led by Fox News and the rest of the conservative industrial industry. And in light of the past election, that industry, of which I’m sure most of you people in South Carolina follow, has lost much of the little credibility it ever had. In the end, Holder will be just fine once he leaves the Justice Department.

Reply
Jack Jones November 14, 2012 at 11:35 pm

“conservative entertainment industry”

Reply
Thomas November 15, 2012 at 12:09 pm

Yea right. Ever hear about the Justice Department inspector general report criticizing 14 ATF and Justice Department employees relates to a months-long investigation into a controversial gun sting that allowed hundreds of weapons to reach violent Mexican drug cartels?

** http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/19/us/us-fast-furious-report/index.html

The House Oversight Committee has sought documents that would show why the Justice Department decided to withdraw as inaccurate a February 2011 letter sent to Congress that said top officials had only recently learned about Fast and Furious.

The Justice Department has turned over thousands of documents during the investigation. However, Attorney General Eric Holder refused to turn over materials containing internal deliberations. In June, the Republican-led House voted to hold the attorney general in contempt.

** http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/21/fast-and-furious-investigation-started-with-agents-death/

Reply
harley November 14, 2012 at 12:09 pm

Hard to respect a man and a justice department that would knowingly arm drug cartels with military grade automatic machine guns, grenades, and ballistic body armor…

Reply
Guero November 14, 2012 at 2:37 pm

Yeah, you’re exactly correct. Only the Bushies could come up with the concept. Holder’s problem was he thought they had some credibility. He obviously wasn’t appropriately sizing up the Bush Crime Family as run by Fredo Gonzalez et al.

Reply
why November 14, 2012 at 6:40 pm

Guero–nice try. You know that the Bush Administration never approved arming the Mexican Cartels (despite the Obama Apologists/Propagandists’ false claims to the contrary).

Don’t lie. It makes you look cheap and desperate. Your team won.
Enjoy the economic free-fall your Dear Leader’s Policies have wrought…NBC just let another 500 go!

Happiness is a Statist/ Democrat President!

Reply
Common Sense November 15, 2012 at 9:15 am

why..what is it like living in a world without facts? Try this thingy called google before you type and prove you are either a liar or to lazy to look up simple truths..

Reply
Common Sense November 15, 2012 at 10:20 am

and sorry harley..this did not involve military grade automatic weapons..this involved the same weapons that are bought daily in thousands of stores by friends of gangs because those like you have fought so long an d hard to make sure the regulations on firearms are almost non existent..remember how you all screamed guns dont kill people people kill people..i guess that only counts when its a president with an R next to the title?.. obviously you dont know shit about weapons so perhaps best if you hold your opinion for the local tea party meetings.

Reply
sid November 15, 2012 at 11:22 am

Correct, CS, in that it did not involve full-autos. A different phase of the operation did, however, allow grenades to be smuggled to drug cartels. These are not items that any citizen may legally purchase or possess.

I get that you don’t like guns, but you should be more upset with what your boy Barry has allowed to transpire. His Administration has allowed countless illegal transactions to take place, which has led to the deaths of countless individuals.

Reply
Common Sense November 15, 2012 at 12:58 pm

actually sid i like guns and have many..but why argue when you once again think you read minds and intentions..carry on..

Reply
sid November 15, 2012 at 1:39 pm

I doubt that, but if you do, then you must be one of those ignorant gun owners who doesn’t know there are countless laws on the books regulating gun possession, purchase, etc. So, what gun laws do you support that are not already in place?

Reply
Common Sense November 16, 2012 at 10:34 am

thanks for proving my point..again sid..wow what magic tricks you must be able to perform reading minds..lol. Help me out..what psychosis is it that makes one thinks he is superior to others and knows there thoughts and intentions?

Reply
Smirks November 14, 2012 at 2:45 pm

Obama should have forced him to resign when he exercised executive privilege. Of course, he never should have used executive privilege on that in the first place.

Reply
Guero November 15, 2012 at 12:28 pm

And what court has decided executive privilege was improperly asserted? Give up? Your ignorant wingnut ( I know, I know, that’s redundant) status has been confirmed.

Reply
sid November 15, 2012 at 1:45 pm

Geeze, Smirks, now even you are a wingnut. BTW, Guero, he never said it was “improperly asserted” by any legal standard. One can legally exercise executive privilege and still have such action be considered inappropriate. Whether or not that is the case here has yet to be determined.

On the other hand, what court has decided executive privilege was properly asserted? Give up? There is still the possibility that the action could face legal scrutiny.

Reply
Smirks November 15, 2012 at 2:55 pm

Guero, I’m of the opinion that executive privilege is something that should be very, very rarely used, and should only be used to protect national security, not avoid an embarrassing government fuck-up and help a fuck-up like Holder keep his job. I don’t care who you consider responsible for it.

If that makes me a wingnut, then so be it.

Reply
scsince60 November 15, 2012 at 12:33 am

Cream of Wheat box photo opp.

Reply
Junga November 15, 2012 at 7:25 am

It resulted in a death of a border patrol agent….I thought guns don’t kill people….people kill people….I guess your are no longer pro gun rights…

Reply
ludwigvonStepladder November 15, 2012 at 8:14 am

Thugs kill people…why did the Obama administration arm the murderous Mexican drug gangs?

Reply
Junga November 15, 2012 at 8:58 am

The US government didn’t arm anybody. The straw purchases were completely legal. Regardless if the ATF monitored these purchases or not the guns would of ended in the same hands.

Reply
sid November 15, 2012 at 11:24 am

From the LA Times:

“The goal of the Fast and Furi­ous op­er­a­tion, run by the Phoenix of­fice of the ATF, was to al­low straw pur­chasers to il­leg­ally buy weapons in the U.S. so agents could learn the traf­fick­ers’ routes in­to Mex­ico.”

The transactions were not legal, and would have been stopped if Barry’s people had not allowed them to go through.

Reply
Mitt Romney November 15, 2012 at 9:51 am

Thugs are people too my friend!

Reply
pman5k November 15, 2012 at 9:58 am

Junta… you obviously don’t know the law….

It is and has been illegal to purchase a firearm on the behalf of another…period. gun dealers were told to complete transactions by ATF agents, that the dealers said were sketchy. That is the issue…

Those purchases were illegal to begin with. The fact the ATF forced the transactions under threats of license revocation, is the issue.

Straw purchases are not and have never been legal. Most of those purchases would have been denied via NICS but the ATF had the suspects data altered in order to allow purchases as well. A FFL dealer can stop a transaction that they feel is unlawful but the ATF tied those dealers hands behind their backs…

So please stop trying to spread false information and check facts before commenting on an issue.

Reply
Common Sense November 15, 2012 at 10:12 am

straw purchases happen every single day..why illegal it still happens and will not stop..the regulations to stop it really dont exist and do you honestly think that drug gangs would stop having others buy weapons because its illegal..roflmao. So if you are a NRA rally its all..”guns dont kill people people kill people” but if it in any way involves the current administration, forget the fact the last administration had exact same operations..its all “guns kill people not people”..great logic..maybe thats why the right did so well this last election. Bang up job boys.

Reply
Junga November 15, 2012 at 10:29 am

Yes it’s illegal for a straw purchase to place. But near impossible to prove. The transaction between the dealers and buyers were completely legal under Arizona law. Suspects data was altered by the ATF…..? And tied dealers hands? I’m sorry if I don’t get all my information from Fox News. So your saying there not someone right now buying weapons in Arizona(completely legally) and selling to a third party(completely legally)..?

Reply
sid November 15, 2012 at 11:18 am

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/atf-fast-furious-sg,0,3828090.storygallery

This isn’t Fox News, it’s the LA Times. Lots of info on F&F, and most of it very negative for Barry’s DOJ and BATFE. Or is the LA Times now in the tank for those who call F&F into quewstion?

“The goal of the Fast and Furi­ous op­er­a­tion, run by the Phoenix of­fice of the ATF, was to al­low straw pur­chasers to il­leg­ally buy weapons in the U.S. so agents could learn the traf­fick­ers’ routes in­to Mex­ico.”

Again, that’s the LA Times saying they allowed straw purchasers to ILLEGALLY buy weapons. They knew they were illegal, but let them go through, anyways.

Also, it was CBS that first brought the scandal to light. Again, not Fox News.

Reply
Junga November 15, 2012 at 1:03 pm

The LA Times clearly states the sale from the dealer to the buyers were indeed legal. If these ATF officials broke all these laws why didn’t Issa’s over site committee have any charges brought against them? You parse what is legal/illegal right/wrong. But the fact remains tthat every single one of those weapons would have been sold and resold…just like wveryday…..FACT! So I’m saying is that the tragic death of the US Boader patrol was caused by a killer that would have gotten the weapon or a different weapon for that matter regardless to F&F. So….is it guns kill people? Or do people kill people. You cannot be on both sides of this argument.

Reply
sid November 15, 2012 at 1:49 pm

“The goal of the Fast and Furi­ous op­er­a­tion, run by the Phoenix of­fice of the ATF, was to al­low straw pur­chasers to il­leg­ally buy weapons in the U.S. so agents could learn the traf­fick­ers’ routes in­to Mex­ico.”

That’s what the LA Times said.

Yes, those guns would have likely been sold anyway. But had the feds not been involved in their little operation, they would have likely been sold to law-abiding citizens who would have done nothing illegal with them, much less murder a Border Patrol agent. Why make it easier for a criminal to get the gun by literally letting the criminal get the gun?

Reply
Junga November 15, 2012 at 2:24 pm

The Feds didn’t control who bought what they MONITORED the sales and TRACKED the weapons, Thousands of guns are sold and resold in Arizona everyday. Who do you think is buying them? If it’s not criminals why are they using straw buyers?

Reply
Junga November 15, 2012 at 2:34 pm

People at the DOJ told the ATF to let the guns walk because they did not have enough proof to arrest. It wasn’t until they were able to get wire taps on buyers that got the evidence to arrest them. But that was after the guns had walked.

Reply
Smirks November 15, 2012 at 2:58 pm

Sources?

Reply
sid November 15, 2012 at 3:19 pm

No, Junga, they were told to let them “walk” because they wanted to see where the guns went. The biggest problem was they ended up having no idea where the guns went. Even when that became clear, they kept the operation going. Say what you want about how a similar operation ran under the Bush Administration, but they shut it down because they realized the flaws, and the moral implications of allowing guns to go to violent criminals.

Reply
SCBlues November 15, 2012 at 4:50 pm

The Republicans will never change – all they can do is drum up conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory (especially if it involves a Black person. It suits me fine for them to continue this crazy nonsense – we can keep a Democrat in the White House for eternity!

PLEASE! All all baggers and birthers and kooks and looney-tune Republicans get together and self-deport or secede or whatever – just get the hell out so the rest of us can live in peace!

Reply
Junga November 15, 2012 at 6:08 pm

Sid you are conflating Fast and Furoius and Wide Reciever.

Reply
gotcha goober November 30, 2012 at 7:44 am

USSA is a mess.

Reply

Leave a Comment