It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Eric Holder says ‘subpoena’ to Fox News reporter is his one regret

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 11:14 PM
"Retiring" U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder claims his "one" regret as AG was that warrant/subpoena to a reporter that caused much controversy.

I imaging he has at least a dozen "regrets" but I can't think of any off hand

Maybe his Contempt of Congress issue is one in particular?

Attorney General Eric Holder says he has one regret: his department's court order for Fox News reporter James Rosen's emails labeling him a criminal "co-conspirator."

The outgoing attorney general, who recently announced his retirement, addressed the controversial episode during the "Washington Ideas Forum" on Wednesday. Asked what decision he wishes he could do over, Holder said: "I think about the subpoena to the Fox reporter, Rosen."

Holder was referring to a 2010 search warrant application seeking Rosen's emails. The Justice Department at the time was investigating who leaked information contained in a series of reports by Rosen in 2009 about North Korea's nuclear weapons program.

Holder says ‘subpoena’ to Fox News reporter is his one regret

posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 11:18 PM
You do understand that he really doesn't regret his actions while holding that office.
He's a believer.

posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 11:32 PM
What? No Fast & Furious??

Nope. Not sorry about that at all I guess.

posted on Oct, 31 2014 @ 05:59 AM

originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe
What? No Fast & Furious??

Nope. Not sorry about that at all I guess.

spot on! and THIS is who we have running our country, admittedly no remorse for serious mistakes, his one regret had PR ramifications alone, things that have SERIOUS consequences such as potential loss of life, no regret at all

posted on Oct, 31 2014 @ 11:07 AM
Yeah Fast and Furious isn't a regret.

Him on record saying people have to be brainwashed in to hating guns isn't a regret.

Being a race baiter isn't a regret.

Covering up clearly ILLEGAL actions of his boss isn't a regret!..

The guy is a clear sociopath.

posted on Oct, 31 2014 @ 06:56 PM
a reply to: xuenchen

Not quite the admission from Holder that you are claiming - he said he has 'some' regrets about the "wording of the subpoena" but NOT about the subpoena itself. The formulation of those regrets came about over time after realizing that he made himself look like the absolute fool that he really is. Mind you - he has no regrets whatsoever about the actual charges themselves. He and Obama are out to destroy the Bill of Rights and the truth of the Constitution which are inclusive of the existence of a free press in America established by the founders from day one.

Holder is a co-presidential lawless operative who does the lapdog bidding of his dictatorial counterpart in the White House.

HOLDER QUOTE And this was the complete substance of his so-called "regret."

“I think about the subpoena to the Fox reporter, Rosen,” Holder replied. “I think that I could have been a little more careful looking at the language that was contained in the filing that we made with the court — that he was labeled as a co-conspirator.”

FURTHER QUOTE FROM FOX NEWS: Holder went to extremes - the affidavit went so far as to invoke the Espionage Act Rosen was being falsely accused of being an enemy of the state - punishable by death:

Fox News writes, “In the course of seeking Rosen’s emails, an FBI agent submitted an affidavit claiming there was evidence that Rosen broke the law, ‘at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and /or co-conspirator.’ The affidavit went so far as to invoke the Espionage Act — pertaining to the authorized gathering and transmitting of defense information.”

In the final analysis its important to understand that the actual "co-conspirators" in this sordid affair were the lawless team of Holder/Obama.
Again - Holder did not actually regret unfairly targeting Mr. Rosen as a criminal journalist, but instead he merely regretted the kind of language that was used in his case. Notice how Holder never once mentions anything about the importance of non-interference from government in the work of journalists. In his statement Holder justifies the action and says it was necessary under a statute, while at the same time attempts to portray that the way things happened "could have been done differently."

edit on 31-10-2014 by hashtagzog because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

log in