A Fed-Up Eric Holder Goes After Congress: ‘Unprecedented, Unwarranted, Ugly and Divisive’

reply to post by marg6043

After all having so much power to play with constitutional rights and be arrogant enough to circumvent laws, can go easily on anybody's head.

Must be nice to get to pick and choose what laws matter, and what doesn't.

After all he has 'vast amounts of discretion' of 'enforcement' ! !

Holder claims 'vast amount' of discretion in enforcing federal laws

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

And Holder absolutely needs to go.

reply to post by neo96


It's a disgrace that two of the highest officials in the land go to the race card in an attempt to deflect their questionable actions. It's just a disgrace and beneath the offices and the people they serve. Yes they are there to serve the people. The president was elected by more than just people of color and yet he claims he's being persecuted because of the color of his skin. Now that is a slap in the face of reality. Comply with the investigations. It's your duty and it's the law!

HauntWok
reply to post by neo96

 

Specifically targeting people for their political beliefs is not, nor has it ever been a function of the IRS.

The FBI found that they did nothing wrong.

Benghazi was not over a GD video, and are the people responsible for it either dead or sitting in jail ?

ARE THEY ?

I dunno, go to Libya and find out.

What is that tripe ?

The guns were bought legally. Were they not? The purchaser had every right to buy guns, did he not? He could do with those firearms whatever he pleased, could he not? When you buy firearms in bulk, sometimes it's hard to keep track of all of them.

So, the purchaser decided to give those guns to a small business owner AKA a "Job Creator" who is in the business of importing a valuable commodity that many people in the United States seem to enjoy. The firearms simply were to protect his investment in his product.

So I ask again, what do you have against guns now? And what do you have against small business?

This is pure unadulterated BS, some of the weapons that were sold were military grade, not available on the street. Secondly ATF went to the gun store owners to force the sale of the arms to the criminals. Holder and his cronies at the ATF were not even smart enough to realize it was a good idea to leave in the GPS trackers that the ATF had during the Bush administration when they figured out the program didn't work. Holder is held in contempt for not releasing the over 30,000 documents congressional oversight has asked for years ago. He is not a job creator but a criminal that creates additional criminals and then protects them. Do you actually have a clue, and have you been following this or do you have this event cornfused with something else?

Didn't you get what Holder said to Louie Gohermt during their exchange a few days ago when asked about the F&F documents. The arrogant sack of crap said he told Gohermt they had made a list of what documents they were willing to release. Of course these were not the what was being asked for.

As the current administration uses the MSM to perpetuate new gun laws and restrictions, isn't it funny how they in the end, are the countries most illegal gun running criminals of all. You will never see Holder in jail because any attorney legally able to prosecute the scumbag works for the scumbag.

"Go to Libya to find out?" Obviously this is a child's mentality.

I guess the FBI missed the IRS employee testimony saying they singled out conservative groups, I guess you missed Lerner apologizing for singling out the Tea Parties, I guess you missed she took the 5th, I guess you missed both parties want to investigate, I guess you missed the part that they really did anything wrong. I think you are just spewing crap to incite yet another conflict, without the slightest interest in intelligent conversation.

reply to post by neo96


He will go out kicking and screaming " its cos im black" like the goon that he is

reply to post by DarthFazer

He will go out kicking and screaming " its cos im black" like the goon that he is

you forgot
i didn't do nothin.

neo96
reply to post by marg6043

 

After all having so much power to play with constitutional rights and be arrogant enough to circumvent laws, can go easily on anybody's head.

Must be nice to get to pick and choose what laws matter, and what doesn't.

After all he has 'vast amounts of discretion' of 'enforcement' ! !

Holder claims 'vast amount' of discretion in enforcing federal laws

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

And Holder absolutely needs to go.

yes, i was going to mention that.

also didn't he poke into the treyvon martin incident? i forget how exactly.

the NBB at the voting station? charges dropped.

didn't know anything about anything, too.

i saw him whining on the news.
alberto gonzales got much worse from congress.

i wish they could do something about him.

reply to post by neo96


Holder is a POS and is a racist himself.

Frankly, I think Congress should pursue his arrest for ignoring Congressional oversight.

reply to post by MarlinGrace


I am merely replying in the same manner as the OP does in similar threads. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you as it were.

The weapons were bought legally. And according to the OP's own modus operandi, any law that does not reflect his own personal belief must be null and void. Therefore, giving those weapons to the drug cartels must be ok, because to think otherwise means that in this country there should and needs to be some sort of gun regulations.

Unfortunately the OP doesn't believe that there should be any regulations on firearms. Therefore, the gun sales and what the legal owner did with those guns is all good.

Therefore Holder did nothing wrong except for losing track of the guns that he was trying to keep track of. Darn.

Also according to the OP's modus operandi anyone who is wealthy can do no wrong. Because wealthy people are better than anyone else by virtue of being wealthy. Therefore even though the recipient of the firearms were a notoriously dangerous drug cartel. Being wealthy must mean that they are automatically a "Job Creator" and therefore above any law that would prohibit that.

Unless of course the OP is simply being partisan which I have been accused of and apparently is a bad thing. Well, I've been accused of being partisan as far as not leaning hard core right wing. Which to some including the OP is treason deserving of death.

Here's the simple truth as far as fast and furious goes.

The drug cartels provide a product that Americans want. If Americans didn't want this product, the drug cartels wouldn't exist. They simply wouldn't have the financial backing to do anything.

They employ thousands of individuals and have a vast distribution network.

Holder's only real crime was simply furthering the already failed drug war. A war that has incarcerated untold amounts of Americans needlessly, cost taxpayers billions if not trillions of dollars, and has done NOTHING to stem the tide of narcotics entering this country.

The drug cartels are simply an import business that provide a commodity that a large percentage of the American public wants. There's nothing different between them and the gangsters of prohibition. The only reason that they are so violent is because of the technicality of the product they happen to be importing being illegal.

The same thing happened during prohibition. Look how well that turned out.

Frankly the United States government is doing the exact same thing in Afghanistan that the drug cartels are doing. Where do you think that the opiates for the legal narcotics people in this country use comes from?

Hell, we are protecting those poppy fields with our men and women in uniform. Making damn sure that our pharmaceutical companies have access to those poppies. Ensuring that our drug addicted culture has the opiates they love and need.

But thanks to partisan political bull crap, we have this pseudo scandal going on.

Hell Reagan gave away more high powered weaponry including anti aircraft weaponry and tons of money to proto Al Qaeda during the Soviet Afghan war than Fast and Furious did and that wasn't a scandal at all. Those same weapons and training were used against our own soldiers.

Oh but because it's the Obama administration. It's got to be a scandal.

It's a bull crap scandal. Perpetrated by the hard line right. It's all partisan.

reply to post by neo96


Uhhhhhh

Holder . . . when has there

EVER BEEN

a MORE TRAITOROUS, DESTRUCTIVE, TREASONOUS, EVIL, . . .

President, Atny General . . . sooo saturated with the genocidal goals of the globalists as to be their obedient puppets with such hellish glee?

Congress is STILL DERELECT IN THEIR DUTIES else y'all would be in prison for treason.

Count your blessings [various labels self censored].

Sadly, the bulk of the Senate and the House leadership are not that much better on such scores.

reply to post by neo96


Contempt of Congress should be a felony charge! Mr. Holder you are not above the law!

reply to post by BO XIAN


Yea obviously someone else still doesn't understand the Constitutional definition of the word TREASON.

Allow me to please educate you on the term

Article III Section III.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

reply to post by HauntWok

I am merely replying in the same manner as the OP does in similar threads. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you as it were.

Is that so?

Often imitated, NEVER duplicated.

But hey keep trying.

The weapons were bought legally. And according to the OP's own modus operandi, any law that does not reflect his own personal belief must be null and void. Therefore, giving those weapons to the drug cartels must be ok, because to think otherwise means that in this country there should and needs to be some sort of gun regulations.

No those guns were not 'bought' legally.

Even bother reading the supplied link ?

Because it sure the hell doesn't sound like it.

Here it is again.

Gunwalking", or "letting guns walk", was a tactic of the Arizona Field Office of the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), which ran a series of sting operations[2][3] between 2006[4] and 2011[2][5] in the Tucson and Phoenix area where the ATF "purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers, hoping to track the guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders and arrest them.

So here is the flaw in that so called 'argument'.

1. The ATF "purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers, hoping to track the guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders and arrest them.

Which is a violation of the LAW, and is ENTRAPMENT.

Unfortunately the OP doesn't believe that there should be any regulations on firearms. Therefore, the gun sales and what the legal owner did with those guns is all good.

Why should there be ?

WHY ?

Since the previous law that says 'thou shall not harm or kill' already covers it, and that isn't talking about the 'ten commandments'.

That is one of those other 'ten commandments' that gun regulations VIOLATE.

Therefore Holder did nothing wrong except for losing track of the guns that he was trying to keep track of. Darn.

Didn't read this either sounds like.

Another, smaller probe occurred in 2007 under the same ATF Phoenix field division. The Fidel Hernandez case began when the ATF identified Mexican suspects who bought weapons from a Phoenix gun shop over a span of several months. The probe ultimately involved over 200 guns, a dozen of which were lost in Mexico. On September 27, 2007, ATF agents saw the original suspects buying weapons at the same store and followed them toward the Mexican border. The ATF informed the Mexican government when the suspects successfully crossed the border, but Mexican law enforcement were unable to track them

Continued:

Less than two weeks later, on October 6, William Newell, then ATF's Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the Phoenix field division, shut down the operation at the behest of William Hoover, ATF's assistant director for the office of field operations.[34] No charges were filed. Newell, who was Phoenix ATF SAC from June 2006 to May 2011, would later play a major role in Operation Fast and Furious.[4]

Also according to the OP's modus operandi anyone who is wealthy can do no wrong. Because wealthy people are better than anyone else by virtue of being wealthy. Therefore even though the recipient of the firearms were a notoriously dangerous drug cartel. Being wealthy must mean that they are automatically a "Job Creator" and therefore above any law that would prohibit that

What the hell is up with that political trolling ?

Unless of course the OP is simply being partisan which I have been accused of and apparently is a bad thing. Well, I've been accused of being partisan as far as not leaning hard core right wing. Which to some including the OP is treason deserving of death

There's some more political trolling because the only one who has brought 'politics' in the thread is the accuser.

Here's the simple truth as far as fast and furious goes.

Here is the simple truth regarding FAF.

As the instability in Mexico increased that means INCREASED illegal immigration, and we all know who benefits from that.

The Holders who are urinating on state rights, and the LAWS of this country picking, and choosing what ones matter, and what ones don't.

Expanding this thought to put this thread in to context.

If a group of people get to pick, and choose what laws matter, and what laws don't. Like the 'citizenship' challenged.

Then fine.

Let's have it Holders way.

I don't like gun laws THEREFORE I don't have to 'obey' them. Just like those people who ignore those laws that say they have to knock before they come in, and ask for permission.

And for the record the US government is one the biggest drug dealers on this side of the globe.

Hey check out Posse Comitatus there.

reply to post by HauntWok


Is "enemies--foreign and domestic" a phrase outside your experience base?

They certainly qualify as guilty of treason under that definition.

Evidently you are rather unaware of these enemies within our borders:

twoday.net...

Or are you a champion of the genocidal globalists yourself?

reply to post by neo96


I don't know how someone can be an observer on the US political scene and get a story backwards like this one.
They call that a defensive mode, a diversionary tactic used in war and politics to gain favor when you are in retreat and need another front to take attention away from the real deal. That is a mode the O administration has been in for a long time.

reply to post by neo96

1. The ATF "purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers, hoping to track the guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders and arrest them.

Which is a violation of the the LAW, and is ENTRAPMENT.

So therefore illegal to be tracking them to begin with and thus if the gun walker wanted to could sue the federal government for said entrapment.

Why should there be ?

WHY ?

Since the previous law that says 'thou shall not harm or kill' already covers it, and that isn't talking about the 'ten commandments'.

That is one of those other 'ten commandments' that gun regulations VIOLATE.

Fortunately the United States is a secular country and not a religious country and therefore the ten commandments of Moses doesn't apply.

What the hell is up with that political trolling ?

I'm just answering your accusations. In a political thread.

The wealthy are automatically "Job Creators" therefore above the law according to the responses you have put forth in other threads. I don't see how this is different.

There's some more political trolling because the only one who has brought 'politics' in the thread is the accuser.

This is a political thread, if Holder leaned towards the OP's general political affiliation, this thread wouldn't exist.

As the instability in Mexico increased that means INCREASED illegal immigration, and we all know who benefits from that.

"Job Creators" and landlords? Otherwise illegals would have no place to live or work. and thus wouldn't be here in the first place.

The Holders who are are urinating on state rights, and the LAWS of this country picking, and choosing what ones matter, and what ones don't.

Oh I see, so if it's a law you agree with, then they are urinating on that law, if you disagree with that law it's a treasonous violation of the Constitution. Seems pretty subjective to me.

reply to post by HauntWok

Fortunately the United States is a secular country and not a religious country and therefore the ten commandments of Moses doesn't apply.

Where do people think the Bill of Rights came from ?

Wow that reference actually has to be explained.

And no this country is not 'secular' because if it was they wouldn't let 'church' of government get away with half the snip it does.

Oh I see, so if it's a law you agree with, then they are urinating on that law, if you disagree with that law it's a treasonous violation of the Constitution. Seems pretty subjective to me

State rights are STATE RIGHTS.

As the 'ten commandments' clearly says:

Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The 'Ten Commandments'

States are FREE to make any law they see fit too.

Congressional oversight means absolutely nothing in the USA today and this means every federal institution is now above the law and no longer accountable to the people. Correct me if I am wrong but is this not Despotism? I know that we elect our leaders, but today it a puppet show where dollars will decide who wins?

"Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

reply to post by neo96

Where do people think the Bill of Rights came from ?

The Magna Carta and the constitutions of existing native American tribes.

NOT from the 10 Commandments.

The rest of your obscure post is in reference to Jewish law, and not Constitutional law. I think you are losing it Neo. I think you are mixing the two up.

It's ok, you aren't the only one to make that mistake. This is a secular nation not a Christian nation, no matter how much the hard core Right wants America to think it is.

reply to post by HauntWok


Let me get this clarified.

You are saying that operations like F&F are actually creating jobs and good for the entire economy ?

Wheeeew.

reply to post by HauntWok


I was enjoying the back and forth until I saw this:

Oh I see, so if it's a law you agree with, then they are urinating on that law, if you disagree with that law it's a treasonous violation of the Constitution. Seems pretty subjective to me.

That is not what he said, not how I interpreted it and I fail to see how anyone would interpret what he said in that way. What he said was that was Holder's views (as admitted to by Holder himself) and by definition that would mean (the context) that he found that approach to be wrong.

Your reply is disingenuous at best, obtuse in the least.