Publicidad | Vea su anuncio aquí

Responder
Necesitas ingresar para participar. Login | Regístrate
Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005
0 Kudos

Our Dangerous Attorney General

[ Editado ]

Our Dangerous Attorney General

 


[This article originally appeared as the editorial in the March 4th issue of HUMAN EVENTS newspaper.]

   Eric Holder should’ve never been confirmed as attorney general.  Any man who would, as he did, urge President Bill Clinton to grant clemency to 16 members of the Puerto Rican domestic terrorist outfit FALN (a Spanish acronym for Armed Forces of National Liberation) was not only unfit to be America’s lawyer, but he himself should have been investigated.

Yet Holder is, indeed, our attorney general, and his priorities are exactly where we’d expect them to be: dangerous.

Consider that righteous retribution against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his 9/11 cohorts remains in limbo as Holder’s Justice Department continues to seek out ways to try them in civilian courts.

Moreover, Holder refuses to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, a bipartisan bill passed by Congress and signed into law by a Democratic President.

What’s more, under congressional questioning, he declined even to suggest that there are radical elements within Islam that contribute to anti-Americanism and terrorist activity around the world.

And that’s just off the top of our head.

Now comes a story that will have you wondering whether Holder is suffering from a debilitating mental breakdown.

Let’s meet Safoorah Khan.  Khan was a nontenured computer math lab teacher at the Berkeley School District in Illinois up until she resigned her pposition in November of 2008.  She resigned because the superintendent of the school district denied her request for an unpaid leave of absence from Dec. 1, 2008, to Dec. 19, 2008, so that she could make a hajj, the pilgramage made by Muslims to Mecca.  It turns out that the 19 days of leave Khan requested came during a critical time in the school semester: examinations.  And not only was it a crucial time of the year, but Khan was brought on specifically to assist with test preparation.  At the time her request was made, Khan had been employed by the district for only nine months.

If you’re keeping tabs, a Muslim woman who was hired to help students prepare for state tests and who didn’t even have a year under her belt at a Chicago suburban school district sought her supervisor’s blessing to ditch the classroom during the exact time that the test-taking would occur in the hope that she could jump on a plane to Mecca.

And when the supervisor said no (we know—shocker), Khan filed a religious discrimination charge with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  The EEOC thought the case had enough merit to zip it over to the Justice Department, which has decided to sue the small school district for forcing Khan “to choose between her job and her faith.”

The Justice Department is asking an Illinois federal court to grant Khan “back pay with interest and reinstatement with accompanying benefits, including retroactive seniority” as well as to award damages to her “to fully compensate her for pain and suffering” caused by the resignation.

Holder’s case is unfathomably absurd.

U.S. law requires an employer to reasonably accommodate an employee’s request for time off to fulfill his or her religious obligation.  If, however, that accommodation would create an undue hardship on the employer (like, for instance, failing to provide extra tutoring during exam week for students), then it doesn’t have to be met.  There’s also no reference in the Koran that says, “Fulfill this requisite Muslim journey in December of 2008 or else face the wrath of Allah,” so Khan herself should’ve kept her cool.

The Justice Department defends its lawsuit by claiming that Khan’s appeal was “a profoundly personal request by a person of faith.”  If that’s the new standard now for religious accommodations, watch out.  There’s about to be an avalanche of truant employees.  Heck, perhaps the next time the teachers union organizes a walkout, it can justify it all under the rubric of the Islamic hajj.

Holder knows that this lawsuit doesn’t stand a chance.  But that’s not his goal.  He wants to energize the Left’s demoralized base leading up to the 2012 election.  That’s why he’s flouting a law on the books by not defending the Defense of Marriage Act and why he’s taking this politically correct stance that hopscotching to Mecca at any time should be enshrined in all American business employee handbooks.


Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: Our Dangerous Attorney General

OBAMA Arming Mexican Drug Cartels?

 

 

 

 

America Arming Mexican Drug Cartels?

 By Arnold Ahlert On April 6, 2011  In Daily Mailer,FrontPage

 

     The Obama administration is apparently stonewalling a congressional investigation of Project Gunrunner, a federal arms trafficking sting operation which may have played a role in the murder of border agent, Brian Terry.

Darrell Issa (R-CA), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, isn’t going to allow the administration to keep the details of an Project Gunrunner under wraps. The project, begun in 2009, was an effort by Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) officials allowing straw buyers to purchase weapons in the United States and illegally ship them to Mexico. According the the ATF, the goal of Project Gunrunner was to track the flow of weapons into Mexico in order to bring down the major drug cartels involved in gun trafficking. In a March 16 letter to Acting ATF Director Kenneth Melson, Mr. Issa requested information, including specifics about an Arizona-based component known as “Fast and Furious,” which led to the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. He gave the agency until last Wednesday to comply. They failed to respond, so Mr. Issa issued a subpoena.

     When one considers what is already known about this debacle, ATF’s refusal to respond is understandable. To begin with, Agent Terry’s death was the direct result of a policy that can best be described as political correctness taken to the extreme: the first line of defense used by border patrol agents against those attempting to cross illegally is beanbags. Seriously. Beanbag guns were what Agent Terry and his fellow squad members were armed with when they encountered a group of illegals armed with assault rifles. When the illegals were ordered to drop their weapons, they refused. Terry’s squad fired at them with bean bags. They fired back with real bullets. Agent Terry was killed.

    But it doesn’t stop there. It turns out that the weapons used by the illegals to murder Mr. Terry were traced back to “Project Gunrunner.” According to Federal Agent and principle whistleblower John Dodson, he and other border agents were ordered to allow guns to be “walked” into Mexico, as part of the aforementioned effort to build big cases against Mexican drug cartels. Incredibly, Mexican authorities were left completely in the dark regarding the operation.

    But who gave the order? This is where the case promises to be explosive. Last week, president Obama, in an interview with a Univision reporter, claimed neither he nor U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder had any previous knowledge of the operation. “Absolutely not,” said the president. ”This is a pretty big government, the United States government. I’ve got a lot of moving parts. There may be a situation here in which a serious mistake was made. If that’s the case we’ll find out and we’ll hold somebody accountable…I did not authorize it; Eric Holder the attorney general, did not authorize it. He’s been very clear that our policy is to catch gunrunners and put them into jail.”

     Yet according to a CBS News report issued early in March, Agent Dodson’s claims were corroborated by ”a dozen other ATF sources — all telling the same story.” Agent Dodson has indicated that he isn’t backing down. “I’m boots on the ground in Phoenix, telling you we’ve been doing it every day since I’ve been here,” he said. “Here I am. Tell me I didn’t do the things that I did. Tell me you didn’t order me to do the things I did. Tell me it didn’t happen. Now you have a name on it. You have a face to put with it. Here I am. Someone now, tell me it didn’t happen.”

    Mr. Dodson’s contempt for the policy was also corroborated. Again from CBS News: ”at least 11 ATF agents and senior managers voiced fierce opposition to the strategy. ‘It got ugly…’ said one. There was ‘screaming and yelling’ says another. A third warned: ‘this is crazy, somebody is gonna get killed.’”

     Mr. Issa isn’t alone in his attempt to find out what actually occurred. Senator Charles Grassley’s (R-IA) has attempted to get the truth about the operation as well. The DOJ’s response? ”Practically zilch,” said the Senator back in March, after sending several letters to the organization (all of which can be found here) demanding answers. He added that “…we have even sent them documents that come to people within the organization that know a little bit about this, that contradicts (sic) everything the agency has told us, and we’re just getting stonewalled…” He applauds Mr. Issa’s current efforts.

    ”Senator Grassley is pleased that Mr. Issa has joined him in getting to the bottom of the ATF’s policy on letting guns walk, and he plans to coordinate and share information with Mr. Issa as the investigation continues,” Sen. Grassley’s spokeswoman Beth Levine said.

     According to reports, a videotape of the transactions exists. It show suspicious individuals buying huge quantities of weapons ostensibly for “personal use” with cash in paper bags–filmed by the ATF itself. How many purchases did the ATF allow? “The numbers are over 2,500 on that case by the way. That’s how many guns were sold–including some 50-calibers they let walk,” said one Gunrunner source, who, like his colleagues, didn’t want to be identified for fear of retaliation. (A sidebar: 50-caliber rifles are the number one choice for snipers and have a confirmed kill range of over 2600 yards.)

 

Agent Terry was killed with one of those guns. It was sold at a Glendale, Arizona shop monitored by the ATF. It is also likely another American, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Jaime Zapata, killed in Mexico on February 15th, was also a victim of Project Gunrunner. The weapon used in that crime was traced to Otilio Osorio, a Dallas-area man, allegedly tied to a crime group that assists cartels by illegally selling them guns from the U.S. Yet because 40 separate guns were involved in the purchase, ties to Agent Zapata’s death have yet to be officially confirmed.

      There is also another explosive charge revealed, once again, by CBS News. The network is reporting that the ATF wasn’t the only agency involved in the gunrunning operations. ”Documents show ATF had conference calls with ‘DHS’ (Homeland Security). ‘USMS’ (U.S. Marshals) and DEA. An ‘Ice’ or Customs Agent was on ATF’s Fast and Furious team. They were advised by an ‘AUSA’ or Assistant U.S. Attorney under the Justice Department,” says CBS. In addition, Mr. Issa believes the State Department was also involved. He sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding her agency’s refusal to turn over documents and information about the ATF as well, characterizing the State Department’s stonewalling as “simply unacceptable.”

        AG Eric Holder claims an investigation is proceeding. “The aim of the ATF is to try to stop the flow of guns. I think they do a good job in that regard. Questions have been raised by ATF agents about the way in which some of these operations have been conducted. I think those questions have to be taken seriously, and on that basis, I’ve asked the Inspector General to look at it.” Senator Grassley remains skeptical regarding the IG. ”The president saying the Inspector General is investigating is a laugh,” Grassely told radio host Laura Ingraham. ”I have respect for most Inspector Generals, and maybe even this one. But we’ve been stonewalled so much, that I’m not even going to trust an Inspector General’s report on this particular incidence. I want the facts to come, I want the documents, we need to know this because, you know there’s a murder come out of this[.]”

    He also had some blunt advice for both Attorney General Holder and DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, another administration official who, under questioning, has claimed not to know anything about Project Gunrunner: ”I can tell these two folks, relatively new in their office (sic) two years…the longer they’re stonewalling, the longer they’re trying to protect their public relations so they don’t look bad, and when things eventually come out, they got more egg on their face (sic) than ever. So they ought to wake up, get the information out and get this thing behind them.”

     Mr. Issa has made it clear where his investigation is headed. ”The unwillingness of this Administration–most specifically the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms–to answer questions about this deadly serious matter is deeply troubling,” said the chairman in a statement. “Allegations surrounding this program are serious and the ability of the Justice Department to conduct an impartial investigation is in question. Congressional oversight is necessary to get the truth about what is really happening.”

     For those who appreciate irony, it should be noted that last Monday, President Obama accepted a transparency in government award from the organizers of the National Freedom of Information Day Conference. The ceremony was off limits for the press. With the notable exception of CBS News and the work of reporter Sharyl Attkisson, it appears that Project Gunrunner has also been largely “off limits” for the mainstream media, along with a “transparent” Obama administration which requires a subpoena in order to release information.

    There is a major scandal brewing here, and the deaths of one, or possibly two, Americans may be just the beginning: according to several reports, guns from this botched sting operation are showing up at crime scenes in Mexico. The United States? Guns that can be “walked” into Mexico can just as easily be walked back.

Plata
eleuteriogochez
Mensajes: 9,756
Registrado: ‎01-28-2011

ULTIMO TESTIGO EN EL JUICIO DEL TERRORISTA POSADA CARRILES.

[ Editado ]

Ultimo testigo en juicio de Luis Posada Carriles.



Alfonso Chardy

 

Alberto Milián, un conocido abogado de Miami, testificó citado por la fiscalía en el juicio contra Luis Posada Carriles a favor de la credibilidad de la periodista Ann Louise Bardach, a quien la defensa ha tratado de mostrar como hostil a la comunidad cubanoamericana.


Milián regresó el martes de El Paso, Texas, donde se lleva a cabo el juicio contra Posada, de 83 años. Allí declaró ante el jurado que Bardach, ex reportera de The New York Times, lo trató profesionalmente y lo citó con veracidad en su libro Cuba Confidential, publicado en octubre del 2003.


“Creo que hizo un excelente trabajo de comparación entre las élites políticas de Miami con las élites políticas de Cuba y de cómo sus vidas se entrelazan indisolublemente, y cómo sus luchas políticas terminan por afectar a la mayoría de los cubanos en la isla y en el exilio, casi siempre en de manera perjudicial’’, comentó Milián a El Nuevo Herald.


Con el testimonio de Milián, ex fiscal estatal en el Condado Broward, los fiscales trataron de refutar el de Otto Reich, un importante testigo de la defensa. Reich, ex embajador de Estados Unidos en Venezuela, calificó a Bardach en marzo como prejuiciada contra exiliados cubanoamericanos y con una reputación de periodista poco veraz.

Bardach, que entrevistó a Posada en 1998 en Aruba, fue clave para la fiscalía. En la grabación de la entrevista, Posada parece indicar que organizó una ola de atentados contra instalaciones turísticas en Cuba en 1997. Un mes después, en un artículo en The New York Times, Bardach y su colega Larry Rohter dijeron que Posada había admitido con “orgullo” la autoría de los ataques. Posada está acusado de mentir a las autoridades federales sobre su papel en los ataques, uno de los cuales costó la vida a un turista italiano. También se le acusa de mentir sobre las circunstancias de su entrada a Estados Unidos desde México en el 2005.

Interrogada por Arturo V. Hernández, abogado principal de la defensa, Bardach indicó que Posada nunca dijo en la entrevista que era el “orgulloso autor” de los ataques. Bardach precisó que Posada había contestado “sí” a la pregunta de si se sentía orgulloso de la campaña de atentados.


Dos días después, Reich ofreció testimonio.

Además de lo referente a Bardach, los fiscales preguntaron a Milián su opinión sobre el gobierno cubano.

“Dije que Castro era un tirano, un megalómano, que dividió a una nación, a un pueblo, y destruyó el país social, económica y políticamente”, comentó Milián.


Emilio Milián, padre del mencionado, fue un influyente comentarista radial. En 1976, perdió las piernas por una bomba en su auto al salir de la radioemisora WQBA. Falleció en el 2001. En el libro de Bardach Milián lamenta que las autoridades locales y federales en Miami no procesaran a los presuntos implicados en el atentado.



...



.

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: Our Dangerous Attorney General

Fast & Furious Was . . . Bush’s Fault

November 8, 2011 3:20 P.M.

By Andrew C. McCarthy

 

I was only able to take in parts of Attorney General Eric Holder’s just-completed Senate testimony. But that was enough to see that “Bush did it” is going to be the Democrats’ excuse for the inexcusable “Fast & Furious” operation conducted by ATF on the Obama administration’s watch.

On the Obama administration’s watch. That is the biggest problem with the Democrats’ strategy. Fast & Furious did not begin until 2009, months after the end of the Bush administration. Given that, one might think that even today’s Democrats would be unable with a straight face to lay this disaster at the feet of Obama’s predecessor. But then one wouldn’t know today’s Democrats.

The key to their strategy is conflating two very different programs: Operation Fast & Furious and a Bush era ATF initiative known as “Operation Wide Receiver.” In the questions from Judiciary Committee Democrats (principally, Senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer — there may have been others but, again, I didn’t see the entire hearing), it emerged that Wide Receiver began in 2006, when Alberto Gonzales was the Bush administration attorney general. Senator Schumer took pains to describe Wide Receiver as involving the “tracing” of firearms that crossed into Mexico. As we shall see, Wide Receiver’s notion of tracing was night-and-day different from the tracing involved in the reckless gun-walking approach employed by Fast & Furious. Obviously, however, Democrats hope that if they get enough help from their friends in the media, the public will miss the distinction.

Schumer made much of the happenstance that a briefing, said to have included information on Wide Receiver, was prepared for Michael Mukasey in late 2007, after he succeeded Gonzales as AG. (This is an amusing contradiction in the Democrats’ strategy: If a memo addressed to Holder in the middle of Fast & Furious emerges, you’re supposed to understand that, as attorney general, he is way too busy to read every memo; but if a memo is found to have been addressed to Mukasey or Gonzales years before Fast & Furious began, you should see them as the architects of gun-walking!)

Schumer pointed out that AG Mukasey had met with his counterpart, the Mexican attorney general, after the briefing, and that he had expressed a commitment to stanch the flow of guns to destinations south of the border. Schumer took these unremarkable facts, added the gloss that Wide Receiver involved gun tracing, and wildly theorized that it was very likely the subject of gun-walking came up in the Mukasey briefing — even though both Schumer and Holder conceded that they did not really know what was discussed at the briefing or even who was present at it (details you might figure Holder would be up on if it actually showed that this whole Fast & Furious fiasco was a Bush creation).



 

 

It was left to Republican Senators Charles Grassley and John Cornyn to lay bare some crucial distinctions between to two ATF operations. Wide Receiver actually involved not gun-walking but controlled delivery. Unlike gun-walking, which seems (for good reason) to have been unheard of until Fast & Furious, controlled delivery is a very common law enforcement tactic. Basically, the agents know the bad guys have negotiated a deal to acquire some commodity that is either illegal itself (e.g., heroin, child sx or illegal for them to have/use (e.g., guns, corporate secrets). The agents allow the transfer to happen under circumstances where they are in control — i.e., they are on the scene conducting surveillance of the transfer, and sometimes even participating undercover in the transfer. As soon as the transfer takes place, they can descend on the suspects, make arrests, and seize the commodity in question — all of which makes for powerful evidence of guilt.

Senator Schumer’s drawing of an equivalence between “tracing” in a controlled-delivery situation and “tracing” in Fast & Furious is laughable. In a controlled delivery firearms case, guns are traced in the sense that agents closely and physically follow them — they don’t just note the serial numbers or other identifying markers. The agents are thus able to trace the precise path of the guns from, say, American dealers to straw purchasers to Mexican buyers.



Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

 

To the contrary, Fast & Furious involved uncontrolled deliveries — of thousands of weapons. It was an utterly heedless program in which the feds allowed these guns to be sold to straw purchasers — often leaning on reluctant gun dealers to make the sales. The straw purchasers were not followed by close physical surveillance; they were freely permitted to bulk transfer the guns to, among others, Mexican drug gangs and other violent criminals — with no agents on hand to swoop in, make arrests, and grab the firearms. The inevitable result of this was that the guns have been used (and will continue to be used) in many crimes, including the murder of Brian Terry, a U.S. border patrol agent.



In sum, the Fast & Furious idea of “trace” is that, after violent crimes occur in Mexico, we can trace any guns the Mexican police are lucky enough to seize back to the sales to U.S. straw purchasers … who should never have been allowed to transfer them (or even buy them) in the first place. That is not law enforcement; that is abetting a criminal rampage.

As Sen. Cornyn pointed out, there is another major distinction between Wide Receiver and Fast & Furious. The former was actually a coordinated effort between American and Mexican authorities. Law enforcement agents in both countries kept each other apprised about suspected transactions and tried to work together to apprehend law-breakers. To the contrary, Fast & Furious was a unilateral, half-baked scheme cooked up by an agency of the Obama Justice Department — an agency that was coordinating with the Justice Department on the operation and that turned to Main Justice in order to get wiretapping authority. 

By the time Cornyn was done drawing this stark contrast between Wide Receiver and Fast & Furious, Holder was reduced to conceding, “I’m not trying to equate the two.” That is big of him given that the two cannot be equated. But the attorney general seemed fine with the effort to equate them — to make them one and the same — when it was Schumer asking the questions. Expect the effort to continue. “Bush did it” may be a tired defense, and in this instance a preposterous one, but it’s the one the Democratic base loves to hear.

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: Our Dangerous Attorney General

Chief House Investigator Says Holder and/or Obama are Doomed

godfatherpolitics.com ^ | Da Tagliare

images2

If you’ve ever watched a beagle track down a rabbit or a bloodhound track down an convect, you might get a glimpse into the workings of Rep Darrell Issa, a Republican from California.

Issa is the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. This basically means that he heads the main investigative body used to delve into the Obama administration and their dealings. Because of his bulldog tenacity of not letting go until the job is done, many on Capitol Hill refer to Issa as Mr Subpoena.

In an interview given over the weekend, Issa said, “If the [Obama] administration continues to have full confidence in a failed administration by Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer, then ultimately the administration is going to be doomed. Eric Holder seems to have the full confidence of the president, and I can’t understand why.”

Joining Issa in his search for truth in the Fast and Furious scandal is Senate Judiciary Committee member, Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa.

As Issa was stating the impending doom of US Attorney General Eric Holder and the Obama Administration, presidential candidate Michele Bachmann joined the growing list of Congressional members who are calling for Holder’s immediate resignation. That list is not at 52, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see that number rise to 100 by the end of the month.

This may surprise many of you who have been reading my blogs on here, but I disagree with the members of Congress calling for Holder’s resignation. Just demanding his resignation is not really holding the nation’s top cop responsible for his flagrant disregard of the law.

Instead of his resignation, I would file criminal charges against him for dereliction of duty, willful failure to carry out his sworn duty to uphold ALL of the nation’s laws, preferential treatment of convicted felons based upon their race, religion and political status and impersonating a US Attorney General. I would tap into the minds of some of the nation’s best legal experts and throw as many criminal charges against the man as possible.

Eric Holder is no different than any other mob boss or crime syndicate leader. Rather than following the law, he makes his own law as he operates an organization that likewise has no respect for the law. And like any other moss boss, he deserves to spend the rest of his miserable life in jail with the rest of the criminal world.

Zafiro
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,642
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: Our Dangerous Attorney General

Obama’s plan to steal the election of 2012

Flopping Aces ^ | 01-05-11 | DrJohn

 

"I will see nutting!"


Or, why Eric Holder will remain in office until 2013 at least.

A pair of articles from the Washington Times make clear that the White House has a plan for the 2012 election, and that is to guarantee victory for Obama regardless of the outcome of the vote. A large part of it depends on Eric Holder and his continual bastardization of the law.

The first comes from Robert Knightand his account of why democrats despise voter id laws:

Assistant AG Thomas Perez, the same official who terminated the Black Panther voter intimidation case, ordered South Carolina to stop enforcing its voter photo ID law. South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson explained precisely why the law is necessary:

The state Department of Motor Vehicles audited a state Election Commission report that said 239,333 people were registered to vote but had no photo ID. The DMV found that 37,000 were deceased, more than 90,000 had moved to other states, and others had names not matched to IDs. That left only 27,000 people registered without a photo ID but who could vote by signing an affidavit as to their identity.

Contrary to left wing claims, requiring photo ID has not been shown to suppress voter ID:

A bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform in 2005 chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker III found no evidence that requiring photo IDs would suppress the minority vote. The panel recommended a national photo ID system and a campaign to register voters.

The second article comes from Jeffrey Kuhner. Against the backdrop of the Carter/Baker report (of which Holder appears to be completely ignorant) Eric Holder plays the race card for South Carolina:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. claims Jim Crow is returning. In a recent speech, Mr. Holder said that attempts by states to pass voter identification laws will disenfranchise minorities, rolling back the clock to the evil days of segregation. He said that a growing number of minorities fear that “the same disparities, divisions and problems” now afflict America as they did in 1965 prior to the Voting Rights Act.   According to the Obama administration, our democracy is being threatened by racist Republicans. Hence, the Justice Department must prevent laws requiring a photo ID to vote from being enacted.

Holder's argument has no foothold in reality.



Kuhner points out that Holder’s real problem is that photo ID laws will impair ACORN’s ability to conduct fraud:

Mr. Holder evidently wants to scuttle ID laws because he knows which organization will be hurt most: ACORN. For years, community activist groups, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, have engaged in massive electoral fraud – registering illegal aliens, offering bribes to numerous politically disinterested people in the inner cities as inducements to vote and pushing underage and multiple voting. Election reform, therefore, is a stake aimed at the heart of Democratic corruption and ACORN’s power. Clean up the voter rolls and Mr. Obama’s re-election is in serious jeopardy.

Free photo ID cards are made available to anyone who needs one in South Carolina as are absentee votes for those who would trouble getting to the polls. Additionally, in blocking the South Carolina law Holder runs afoul of stare decisis:

Moreover, the Supreme Court already has ruled on the issue – upholding state voter ID laws. In the 2008 Crawford v. Marion County Election Board decision, the high court held that an Indiana law mandating photo identification at the voting booth was indeed constitutional. If it is good enough for the Supreme Court and the overwhelming majority of the states, then it should be for Mr. Holder as well.

Holder claims that requiring a photo ID is tatamount to a poll tax but that is laughable:

“He has a particularly hard time explaining how the South Carolina requirement of government-issued photo identification amounts to a ‘poll tax’ when the state has also made provisions to provide that identification, free of charge. Hear that, Mr. Attorney General? The only thing the voter has to do is show up and get his or her photo taken. And if that’s too much darn trouble well, then, that person can do something else on election day.”

Why is too burdensome to show up and obtain a photo ID but not too burdensome to show up to vote?

The ducks are aligning in a row. Blocking the South Carolina law will allow ACORN and other left wing operations to run amuck with voter fraud. The problem is that election fraud is a Federal offense, and that’s where Holder becomes critical.

I fully expect no end to election chicanery on the part of the ACORN and the left, whether it involves “finding” lost votes as in Minnesota, printing out enough democrat ballots to guarantee a victory, forging signatures, or forging more signatures. I also expect that Holder would dismiss out of hand all claims beneficial to Obama and democrats and pursue only those in which the outcomes favored Republicans.

Ultimately the job of the Attorney General of the United States is protect the law from abuse but it is painfully clear that Eric Holder was appointed to protect abuse from the law.

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote:

”There is no question about legitimacy or importance of a state ‘s interest in counting only eligible voters.”

The integrity of the vote means nothing to Holder. Eric Holder would not know integrity if it bit him in the asss.

And that’s exactly why he was appointed.

Banned
sirjohn
Mensajes: 137,146
Registrado: ‎12-15-2005

Re: Our Dangerous Attorney General

Eric Holder has become a litmus test for democrats

June 8, 2012 at 6:23 pm by DrJohn

 

The. Most. Corrupt. Attorney. General. In. History.

Eric Holder’s contempt for America and its citizens is nothing less than astonishing. He has done one stupid thing after another but this time Eric Holder has peed on the leg of the United States and claimed it was raining:

Holder Claims Emails Using Words ‘Fast and Furious’ Don’t Refer to Operation Fast and Furious

(CNSNews.com) – Attorney General Eric Holder claimed during congressional testimony today that internal Justice Department emails that use the phrase “Fast and Furious” do not refer to the controversial gun-walking operation Fast and Furious.

Under questioning from Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who read excerpts of the emails at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Justice Department oversight, Holder claimed that the phrase “Fast and Furious” did not refer to Fast and Furious but instead referred to another gun-walking operation known as “Wide Receiver.”

However, the emails refer to both programs — “Fast and Furious” and the “Tucson case,” from where Wide Receiver was launched — and reveal Justice Department officials discussing how to handle media scrutiny when both operations become public.

Among three of the emails (see Jason Weinstein Email Fast, Furious.pdf), the second, dated “October 17, 2010  11:07 PM,” was sent by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein to James Trusty and it states:  “Do you think we should have Lanny participate in press when Fast and Furious and Laura’s Tucson case [Wide Receiver] are unsealed? It’s a tricky case, given the number of guns that have walked, but it is a significant set of prosecutions.”

In the third email, dated Oct. 18, 2010, James Trusty writes back to Weinstein: “I think so, but the timing will be tricky, too. Looks like we’ll be able to unseal the Tucson case sooner than the Fast and Furious (although this may be just the difference between Nov. and Dec).”

“It’s not clear how much we’re involved in the main F and F [Fast and Furious] case,” reads the email, “but we have Tucson [Wide Receiver] and now a new unrelated case with [redacted] targets. It’s not any big surprise that a bunch of US guns are being used in MX [Mexico], so I’m not sure how much grief we get for ‘guns walking.’ It may be more like ‘Finally, they’re going after people who sent guns down there.’”

Fast and Furious does not refer to Fast and Furious. You have got to be kidding.

Predictably, he blamed Bush.

This is a litmus test for the honor, intelligence and integrity of democrats. Eric Holder has no integrity of his own left, nor would any democrats who stand behind him.

And I still blame these jerks for Eric Holder.

Publicidad | Vea su anuncio aquí