Eric Holder–Driving Nails

Good to hear your assessment, Larry. I was nervous. Now, not so much.

While Barack Obama correctly promised not to seek criminal penalties for policy differences,
*******
I agree political differences shouldn’t be criminalized but there were enough felonies and war crimes committed to keep the DOJ busy for 20 years.

OT but another Slippery Slope:
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/01/14/2009-01-14_unacceptable_censorship_the_united_natio.html

a cool ocean breeze sailing over hot sand.

How lyrical, Larry!

I’m happy to read this about Holder. I admit I have my reservations about any/all of The One’s nominations.

a cool ocean breeze sailing over hot sand.

How lyrical, Larry!

I’m happy to read this about Holder. I admit I have my reservations about any/all of The One’s nominations. I’m going to be watching.

So far so good. This guy and Hillary. Not bad.

Speaking of Geithner

There were some holes in the brief NBC News story, which followed a more serious report about cold weather possibly threatening the celebratory atmosphere surrounding Obama’s inauguration. Reporter Kelly O’Donnell’s story failed to disclose that Jeffrey Immelt, chairman and chief executive officer of NBC parent company General Electric (GE), is on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, whose president is Timothy Geithner.

It is also interesting to note that a subsidiary of GE, GE Capital, is getting some of the federal bailout money that Geithner, if he is confirmed, will have a role in managing. Conflict of interest, anyone?

Connections like this help explain why Geithner’s tax problems won’t become a scandal or even much of a controversy for major elements of the media. But GE’s media properties, including NBC News, MSNBC, and CNBC, won’t be alone in trying to put this scandal to rest.

Another member of the board of the New York Fed is Lee C. Bollinger, the president of Columbia University, who serves on the board of the Washington Post Company. This is the media conglomerate whose media properties include the Washington Post newspaper, Newsweek, and Slate.

From the point of view of the major media, it’s better to remain on the good side of Geithner as well as Obama. That is why Geithner’s tax problems have to be whitewashed and senators of both parties have to be provided with an excuse to confirm him.

These were just “errors,” according to the Washington Post story by Michael D. Shear and Lori Montgomery. Geithner insists they were “unintentional.” Case closed. Let’s move on.

If the law needs to be followed, then Barack Obama should present proper citizenship and birth records to show he is eligible under our Constitution to be president. He needs to UNSEAL all of the records, applications, school records, passport records and present them to the American people. When Mr. Obama receives the same HONEST SCRUTINY as did Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and anyone else who is in prime time, then tell us that Mr. Holder is following the Law. When Mr. Obama is allowed to amass fortunes of money during his campaign with no oversight, no investigation as to whether these donors are Americans or not, then don’t tell me Mr. Holder is upholding the law. The law may need to be followed, but for everyone EXCEPT the Obamas. Let’s see if Mr. Holder will HONESTLY investigate the corruption in Illinois as it pertains to Obama, Rezko, Blagojevich and others, or will anything Mr. Obama has done be covered up as it has in the past? As Richard Nixon so famously said, when the president does it, it’s not against the law.

Policy differences are not criminal offenses. Violations of U.S. and International law are criminal offenses. The bush regime has violated so many U.S. and International law that it may be necessary to build a new prison just for them. Maximum security, hopefully.

I sincerely feel that the United Nations should be disbanded. It has become nothing more than a forum for America-haters on our own soil. It has turned out to something other than what was proclaimed when it was formed.

Get them out of New York. If the bullies of the world want a soapbox to castigate America let them go to Russia or China and set up shop.

It would be interesting to see how far they would throw their weight around in either of those countries.

P,S. Thanks for the link, Sowsear.

So none of that stuff about Holder’s ties to the Chicago Combine is true? He’s not tied in with Blago, Dailey and the rest of “the boys”? If so, that is good news! For awhie there, I thought he was as corrupt, if not more so, than the guy who “forgot” to pay his taxes.

DITTO, Candyman.

Hillary has always been fabulous, and although I was leery about Holder I was pleasantly surprised at his testimony. Will keep an open eye and ear for his performance after he is sworn in.

Has anyone seen the special investigation of Eric Holder on Hannity last night?

“Shockine new Eric Holder scandel”
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3446496&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/

The Supreme Court has decided the case doesn’t have enough merit to be heard. You think any responsible attorney general would waste his or her time with something that no court thinks is legally relevant?

Correction.
Did anyone see the special investigation of Eric Holder on Hannity last night?

Eric Holder Wanted ‘Reasonable’ Web Speech Limits

http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2009/01/15/eric-holder-driving-nails/#more-11183

I am not too comfortable with Eric Holder choice for MANY reasons including the following (see link).

How do we define “REASONABLE” web speech limits?

The definition of “Reasonable” is subjective and hence…a moving target.

The internet – as a medium for the exchange of information- is our last hope for our democracy…
IMO…

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=e4qGQukUVr

My apologies. Please view this link for info about Holder’s opinion on web speech limiuts

Thanks for the link to the Daily News story, sowsear. Nice to see the U.N. making a real effort to make sure we speak and think and act in conformity. I think Obama will support this … after all, his entire campaign made it clear that any criticism of his own sacred self would be considered racist. Presto! Criticize at your own risk! Perhaps Eric Holder will back this one up, too. And the web sites will continue to be scrubbed and the word shall go forth that what the leader deems sacred shall not be profaned.

SM,
That is not what they decided (Berg vs. Obama), they just refused to issue a writ of cert while the case is still pending in the 3rd circuit court–to be discussed Jan. 20. The fact that the court allowed another party to join the suit also says it isn’t dismissed.
And, there’s the one tomorrow.
And, there’s Orly Taitz’s case Jan. 23.
And, they are stacked up like planes waiting to land at La Guardia.

I watch his opening statement before work. I will have to watch the rest, but he appeared straightforward…stay tuned.

HERRING v. UNITED STATES

This recent SCOTUS ruling ought to concern people regarding the 4th amendment.

Indeed. If the phrase “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” does not apply to a number of individuals in the Bush Administration, including Bush, himself, then there is no such thing. Nixon did far less that was patently illegal and paid the price; Clinton did only one thing that was irrelevant to his duties as POTUS.

As to the subject of International Law. it is my understanding that if such law is part of a treaty that the US Senate has ratified, then you are correct. There is some International Law that the US does not recognize, such as the definition of territorial waters and the extent of said.

Just my $0.02.

Not a good idea. At least with the body meeting in New York, we can keep a watchful eye over them.

Sparky Malarkey: Your knowledge of the Law could be placed on the back of a postage stamp, leaving plenty of room for a USPS advertisement or two. That Supreme Court to which you are referring is one that you, with your support of That One, wants to change.

Well so do I. Hopefully your False Messiah will be so distracted by all the adoration and fawning by you boobs and the former press give him that he will forget and appoint jurists who actually consider the Constitution to be more than a piece of paper as Bush believed and not at all a flawed document, as your own provocateur soon-to-be POTUS believes.

If Eric Holder becomes Attorney General , then he will be, in effect, Patrick Fitzgerald’s boss.

This may pose a potential conflict of interest.

What iron-clad guarantee can Barack Obama give to the American people that in the event Holder becomes Attorney General, what guarantee is there that Holder will not IN ANY WAY interfere with Fitzgerald’s ongoing and BI PARTISAN efforts to investigate corruption in Barack Obama’s home state?

There are no guarantees. Everything That One does is calculated to the tenth decimal place plus or minus the 11th. His strategy and the reasons behind it will never see the light of day, any more than Shrub’s did. The electorate only controls who gets elected not how they behave while in office, unfortunately.

“appears straightforward”
Hasn’t anyone learned by now that appearances are meaningless–Solomon could be appointed as Attorney General but it wouldn’t matter one bit because this is all a farce–the people that selected BO as POTUS will be running the show.

Investigation? Hannity?

Hannity couldn’t investigate a cream spill in a coffee shop.

Thanks for the article, Larry. Wouldn’t it be novel? Following the law!

It will be the eternal shame of the Democratic Congress that they refused to impeach George W. Bush. Even Republicans wanted him impeached to restore the rightful balance of the powers.

Democrats/Republicans–two sides of the same dirty penny, each just as nasty as the other.

novel and sure different.

However, isn’t it convenient that Obama is retaining the Bush Admin’s freedom to listen in on citizens’ phone calls and read their emails in the interest of “national security,” and for “flexibility?” It’s easy not to break the law when you redefine it so it is not a crime.

Well, one thing is for sure, terrorist groups like FARC are smiling tonight. In Holder they know they have an ally.

Why am I not surprised that the very man who wrote an op-ed on July 10, 2001 telling us that terrorism was not the biggest threat to America is thrilled about Holder?

One other thing, Larry, Republicans are not worried about Holder. We know he is just Janet Reno in pants.

I don’t care how anyone answer for the cameras and the public, they will say what is needed to be said because they all want their positions. Once approved then the sting will be in the tail, I have no hope for this incoming administration, they all started off badly and they will end badly.

Each one of them has a question and no of you can deny that be it Hillary, Holder, Tim, all of this have some hidden question that the media is avoiding and leaving alone for the sake of not making Obama look bad.

The will all get approved and they will all be answerable to Obama, all he will have to do now is give the orders and none of them will rock the boat they will all comply and do exactly as he wants, so I am not looking forward to anything the ugliness will soon begin to show its head.

You reveal your character, like Holder’s, to be suspect of serious flaws. No other conclusion to be drawn from your post.

TeakWoodKite,
I agree. This ruling should be of great concern…
Here is an interesting editorial on this decision:

http://www.infowars.com/?p=7168

Supreme Court Rules Against Fourth Amendment

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
January 15, 2009

“As the Democrats in Congress methodically plot against the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court works in unison against the Fourth Amendment.

On January 14, the Court ruled that evidence obtained through illegal searches may be used to prosecute criminal defendants.

According to Mark Sherman of the Associated Press, the justices split 5-4 along “ideological lines.”

In other words, the ideology of the majority of the Supreme Court is apparently arrayed against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas rule against the exclusionary rule, which requires evidence to be suppressed if it results from a violation of a suspect’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches or seizure. ”

Read the rest of the editorial on the link provided…

Not agreeing with Larry here! Holder is a pawn for Obama! He’ll do NOTHING to keep Mr. Mafia Obama in line from bringing Chicago style politics to the White House…

It would be great to follow the law BUT FOR EVERYONE and not just for some! That’s the problem with Holder… he’ll make sure everyone but Obama operates within the law!

Thanks for the link athy, I am looking to the weekend, but read the first pages of the opinion.

The link confirms my fears.

I did not know the FISA court superseded SCOTUS either. Thanks. UG.

I felt that way when I heard Hillary speak at her confirmation hearings

missed Holder’s

looks like there will be a few gems in OBambi’s cradle

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=yduzIrVrnz

C-Span 1/16/09

“After evading a question on the fairness doctrine from Senator Specter, Eric Holder was confronted by his own liberal views of media fairness through questioning by Senator Sessions.”

Should we be concerned?

Yes, Jeffry Immelt just got his appointment to the NY Fed and Valerie Jarrett got appointed to the Chicago Fed.

Immelt has definite conflicts of interest, similar to Hank Greenberg who was chair of the NY Fed at the same time he was CEO of AIG. AIG is costing us billions. Hank continues his lifestyle and is still esteemed enough to serve on the Group of 30 that Volcker put together to advise Obama on how to handle this mess. They only intend for us to paper over the current system so they can continue on. They are untroubled by the fact that this “crisis” represents an incredible transfer of wealth from the nation as a whole into the hands of a small group of king makers.

I hope Holder restores a sense of justice, but the bigger problem is that the worst crime is legal since Washington participates in it.

NO to Holder. This person is NOT okay! He is directly responsible for the overwhelming numbers of Black and Brown people behind bars in this country because he pushed DRACONIAN sentencing laws for minor crimes! He had no issues with the Clinton crime bill which is one of the worst things that came out of that administration. Good of you who are not buying THIS clown. Do not keep being fooled because someone can talk straight. There are other people who can be selected for this position. Why do people keep giving these slimey people a break?

Larry,

I am glad you are man enough and honest enough to admit when Obama has done something right. Not like the rest of the people on this site, who’s blind hatred of Obama, leaves them critical of everything. At least you have some intelligence.

fif,
I agree.
Also, look what else we learned about Barack Obama’s nominee for Attorney General:

Under Obama, feds may still snoop library files
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

Saturday, January 17, 2009

EXCERPT

President-elect Barack Obama’s nominee for attorney general has endorsed an extension of the law that allows federal agents to demand Americans’ library and bookstore records as part of terrorism probes, dismaying a national group of independent booksellers.

Eric Holder said at his confirmation hearing Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee that he supports renewing a section of the USA Patriot Act that allows FBI agents investigating international terrorism or espionage to seek records from businesses, libraries and bookstores. If not renewed by Congress, the provision will expire at the end of 2009.

The searches must be authorized by a court that meets secretly and has approved the government’s requests in nearly all cases, according to congressional reports. The target of the search does not have to be suspected of terrorism or any other crime. A permanent gag order that accompanies each search prohibits the business or library from telling anyone about it

.

Read the rest of this article-follow link- very informative.

If you scan through most of the so-called liberal blogs out there, they are posting articles in support of Holder and writing about his desire to tackle the torture issue and close down Guantanimo Bay.

How convenient that few of these same blogs are posting any articles about the potential threat Holder confirmation poses to our US citizens’ rights as guaranteed to us by the Bill of Rights portion of our constitution?

My apologies- I neglected to add the link to the article I refer to above in my post:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/17/MNH515C1KK.DTL&type=politics

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=e4qGQuQuQu

Posted: November 21, 2008

Posted By: Naked Emperor News

In a 2007 radio interview, Barack Obama promised that one of his first acts as president would be to call in his new attorney general to investigate the Bush administration.

Interesting comments given by Barack Obama & Eric Holder (separate incidents combined in one You Tube)

Words versus actions…

The Patriot, aka Last-Refuge-of-Scoundrel’s Act, should be the second thing to go–right after Gitmo.

That One, like the one before him, lied to get the office. This means that honor and integrity will have to wait yet another four years before being brought back to the White House.

Beener-you really ought to stay on topic and stop the ad hominems. Simply because you have partaken of the bootlegger’s liquor does not mean we have to join you in your chemically-induced delusions. To the contrary, those of us who do not buy the crap you are selling are quite happy seeing the world as it is.

As I have said to you many times–kindly go lower the collective IQ of another site that is more in line with the adoration you want to heap on PEBO. Your fellow cult members await you.

The question is not IF there will be an interdiction of Obama’s Presidency by the Supreme Court, the questions are WHEN and HOW that interdiction will transpire — that is, if the USA is to continue as the Constitutional Republic that now exists.

Speaking of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder:

Eric Holder is a racial-minority individual, and in his heart and mind he inevitably does not endorse hate crimes committed by George W. Bush.

George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism (indicated in my blog).

George W. Bush did in fact commit innumerable hate crimes.

And I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed other hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention.

Many people know what Bush did.

And many people will know what Bush did—even to the end of the world.

Bush was absolute evil.

Bush is now like a fugitive from justice.

Bush is a psychological prisoner.

Bush has a lot to worry about.

Bush can technically be prosecuted for hate crimes at any time.

In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.

Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993

“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
______________________
I am not sure where I had read it before, but anyway, it is a linguistically excellent statement, and it goes kind of like this: “If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memories so they never got stale and faded.” Oh wait—off the top of my head—I think the quotation came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.