Eric Holder Might Have a Perjury Problem

These guys all have golden parachutes. If he falls, and I doubt he will, then he'll just get a pardon on Obama's way out of the door and never serve more than a day in jail.

Seeing that movie, he looks like a character from the "The Omega Man".

I think Eric Holder jumped the gun way too many times now with quite a few scandals, that should have ended his position a long time ago. If he does get out of this one, it might actually be worst in the long run, because his ego will get bigger, and he will think that he could do anything without repercussions.

Mr. Holder's words to the committee rest on a fine technical distinction between perjury and deception. His words may not technically constitute perjury but they were certainly meant to deceive.

reply to post by BenReclused


Certainly, I will expound on this right here and now.
It is a matter of interpretation of the law.
You mentioned my "failed attempts" conducted in a hasty manner.
I will expound on that:
1) My links were valid and informative.
2) The links were provided in a timely manner for you and other ATS Members
to investigate, read, and thoroughly digest in order to understand my point of view.
3) Whether you asked me to attach links or not, is inconsequential.
4) The fact that I may agree or disagree with a prior post is sufficient, I have no obligation to you.
5) I will present this to you however, your Interpretation of The Law is Subjective, and you may
be corrected by the passage of time and the events that ensue.
6) We should keep in consideration that many of the facts of the cases are still hidden and that it
would be foolish to attempt to be so certain as to make a judgement at this time.

Thanks Again for your feeble challenge.

Originally posted by terriblyvexed
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

Ok, now I'm clear the Patriot Act is something I'm familiar with, and if they can evoke that unconstitutional garbage into this, then there is no more reason for AP scandal threads.

Like it or not the PA makes crap legal.

Yes, and that is why even the Democrat POTUS and Congress won't get rid of it!

Having Eric Holder as A.G. is the same as going to one of the worlds prisons for the worst of the worst, and recruiting one of them as A.G. Obama fits that also... These 2 individuals are pompous asses in every category, and they always consult with each other to get their stories sorted out and matching..

They exercise a level of arrogance and hypocrisy on a GLOBAL scale of INSOLENCE as human beings. Morals? none, ethics? not to be noticed..

Just bald face liars and gutless yellow pie slingers, the both of them.

Holder is in it.

House Judiciary Committee is investigating whether Attorney General Eric Holder lied under oath during his May 15 testimony on the Justice Department’s (DOJ) surveillance of reporters, an aide close to the matter told The Hill.

www.zerohedge.com...

reply to post by Wildmanimal

You mentioned my "failed attempts" conducted in a hasty manner.
I will expound on that:

Yep! Once again you are intentionally avoiding a direct challenge:

Your links only confirmed that the corrections that I posted were, indeed, necessary and proper. If you feel otherwise, I would be mighty interested in having you highlight, and explain, any possible inaccuracies in MY responses to THEM

1) My links were valid and informative.

I never disputed that! You must not have understood:

Your links only confirmed that the corrections that I posted were, indeed, necessary and proper.

2) The links were provided in a timely manner for you and other ATS Members to investigate, read, and thoroughly digest in order to understand my point of view.

Unless you are AKA "Indigo5", you didn't express a "point of view" on the topic. All you did was offer support to your favored participants!

3) Whether you asked me to attach links or not, is inconsequential.

You didn't "attach links"! All you did was POST LINKS!

4) The fact that I may agree or disagree with a prior post is sufficient, I have no obligation to you.

You didn't "agree or disagree with a prior post"! All you did was CHEER for your favorites! We all have an obligation to, at least, make an attempt to stay on topic. You didn't even try!

5) I will present this to you however, your Interpretation of The Law is Subjective, and you may be corrected by the passage of time and the events that ensue.

My "Interpretation of The Law" IS NOT subjective in the least. Even your OBJECTIVE sources confirm that I am, indeed, correct.

6) We should keep in consideration that many of the facts of the cases are still hidden and that it would be foolish to attempt to be so certain as to make a judgement at this time.

I agree! That's exactly why my "judgement" was limited to the content of the video posted in the OP, and was based entirely on the proper use of words and some of the very same sources that you previously linked to. I never went beyond any of that!

Thanks Again for your feeble challenge.

If my challenges were so "feeble", why did you intentionally avoid both of them?

See ya,
Milt

Holder was picked because he was the pet of the Clintons who also hand picked every one of Obama's major appointments and staff and his policy. So Holder is the stooge of a stooge, He's incompetent and spineless and only a rubber stamp. They both are.
So don't blame the guy for not knowing what is going on and not being in charge. The people below him get their orders and run wild and theres nobody there to make them accountable. Obama's the same way.