From the diaries by Erick . . . Eric Holder testifies before Congress today on his department’s outrageous Operation Fast and Furious scandal. Eager to provide political cover for Obama’s embattled Attorney General, House Democrats yesterday released a report attempting to exonerate Holder and his political appointees for failing to do their jobs. Of course, their report says Holder’s innocent. The facts say he’s guilty. I say he must resign. This cynical ploy is just the latest effort by Democrats to cover up the truth. Slowly but surely, their web of misstatements, falsehoods, and shifting blame is coming unraveled, revealing a reckless and incompetent administration. First, a recap: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) lost track of more than 2,000 weapons in a 2010 trafficking sting operation gone bad. Most ended up in the hands of Mexican drug cartels. Many ended up at crime scenes. Some were used in murders, kidnappings, and other violent crimes. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. border agent. It’s a disaster and tragedy that could have been prevented, and the Justice Department refuses to take responsibility. First came the denials. ATF chief Kenneth Melson claimed he didn’t know about Fast and Furious until January 2011. But DOJ officials said otherwise in a letter sent to Congress. Melson was briefed in December 2009, before the operation began, and received periodic updates afterward. Attorney General Eric Holder also feigned ignorance when questioned. First he said he hadn’t heard of Fast and Furious until Spring 2011. Then documents showed he received briefings in 2010. When called out, Holder admitted his testimony was “inaccurate” and “imprecise.” Holder frantically backpedalled again when it was discovered that DOJ officials sent a letter with false information to Sen. Chuck Grassley. When asked if they were lying, Holder dodged: “It all has to do with your state of mind.” Democrats will do anything to avoid blame. The DOJ withheld information. The White House accused congressmen of “playing politics.” Officials “screamed” and “cussed at” CBS investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson. The administration sealed the court documents connected to the murder of the border patrol agent. If Holder and Obama’s appointees are innocent, why won’t they hand over relevant documents? Why won’t they answer forthrightly in congressional inquiries? Why won’t they talk politely to investigative reporters instead of screaming and cursing? Why do they seal court documents from public view? It begs a bigger question: What more are they hiding? Amid all this, Obama still insisted in October that he has “complete confidence in Attorney General Holder and how he handles his office.” That’s the biggest problem. Obama has “complete confidence” in a scandal-ridden department. Perhaps it “all has to do with your state of mind.” Americans, meanwhile, have lost their confidence in this administration, and I, along with many other Republicans, have repeatedly called for Holder’s resignation. It’s time he heed those calls. In his State of the Union address, President Obama said, “I am asking my Attorney General to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis.” A new agency run by Eric Holder? I wouldn’t get my hopes up on that one.
More:
The Fast and Furious Cover Up
Another brilliant essay by Jeffrey T. Kuhner. (The Washington Times) — 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
Link:
Will Obama steal the 2012 election?
You know he’s getting desperate. (NYT) — For nearly three years, Republicans have attacked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on national security and civil rights issues. For months, they have criticized him over a gun-trafficking investigation gone awry, with dozens of leaders calling for his resignation. Last week, more than 75 members of Congress
Excerpt from:
Holder Plays The Race Card On His Critics: They’re Attacking Me And Obama Because We’re Both Black…
Red Dog: Attorney General Holder Declares War on Texas
See more here:
Red Dog: Attorney General Holder Declares War on Texas
Maybe . Just possibly maybe . Check out the video below showing freshman Rep. Sandy Adams of Florida – I had the pleasure of interviewing her last year , by the way – grilling Attorney General Eric Holder over Operation Fast & Furious. For those of you unfamiliar with the Congresswoman, Rep. Adams is a former police officer whose first husband (also a police officer) was killed in the line of duty … so you can imagine what kind of reception Holder got from her when it came to Holder explaining why the US government deliberately gave guns to cop-killers. The part that I want to highlight starts at about 4:38: a transcript of the relevant comments after the fold, with items of especial note particularly highlighted. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozsWUV87Umg&lr=1 Rep. Sandy Adams (R, FL) : …let me ask you another question, because one of my colleagues asked you about your e-mails and you went straight to your work e-mail. Hardly anybody has that. I’m going to ask you a very direct question. You have a personal e-mail account. Did you at any time – at any time – e-mail on your personal account with Lanny Breuer – or Lanny Breuer and Gary Grindler in regards to Fast and Furious ever? Attorney General Eric Holder : Ever? Adams : Yes… (CROSSTALK) Judiciary Chair Lamar Smith (R, TX) : The gentlewoman is recognized for an additional minute so the attorney general can respond to her questions. Holder : I don’t know. I can tell you that I didn’t know… (CROSSTALK) Adams : Would you check and get back with us? If you need some help, I’m sure that your agency personnel can get into those computers. Holder : Well, with regard to provision of e-mails, I thought I’ve made it clear that after February the 4th it is not our intention to provide e-mail information consistent with the way in which the Justice Department has always conducted itself. The exception that I made, that I made in the hope that the Justice Department would be seen as transparent was to go against that tradition and to make available deliberative material around the February 4th letter. (CROSSTALK) Adams : So, again, as in when you were here before and I asked you about a totally different issue, you were saying that you refused to provide that information, is that correct? Holder : I didn’t hear the – you were talking the same time I was talking. And, please, she can have more time. I don’t – I don’t want to cut off your time. I’m – I just didn’t hear the question. Adams : Previously, in another committee, when you were here earlier I asked you another question, you said you would not answer that question. Now you’re saying that you won’t provide those e-mails because that’s not consistent with whatever policy was previous. I’m asking you, if there is clean hands here, will you provide those e-mails to this committee… Holder : As I said… Adams : … yes or no? Holder : … I’m going to act in a way that’s consistent with all attorneys general before me. Adams : That’s not my question, Attorney General. (CROSSTALK) Adams : I – you know, with due respect, that was not my question. I asked you, with clean hands, would you supply those e-mails, whether it’s work-related or personal e-mails, as they apply to anything that had to do with and to this committee, yes or no? Holder : And as I said – as I said, with regard to the Justice Department as a whole… Adams : I yield back. Holder : And I am… (CROSSTALK) Adams : Mr. Chair, I’m not going to get the answer… (CROSSTALK) Holder : … with regard to the Justice Department as a whole – and I’m certainly a member of the Justice Department – we will not provide memos after February the 4th. And that is a way in which we are… Adams : With regards to e-mails, I didn’t ask memos, I said e- mails. Holder : E-mails, memos – consistent with the way in which the Department of Justice has always conducted itself in its interactions… (CROSSTALK) Adams : What about prior to February 4th? Smith : The gentlewoman’s time has – the answer was no, is that correct, Mr. Attorney General? Holder : No, but consistent with the way in which the Justice Department has always conducted itself. This is not something that I am making up in terms of new policy. Smith : I know, but you used the word “not.” I took “not” to be no. Holder : Oh, I said no. Smith : OK. Holder : I’m saying no. But, again, consistent with DOJ policy. …Now, I am not a lawyer; but that sounds to me a whole lot like the Attorney General tacitly admitting that there are personal emails originating from him and sent to Lanny Breuer (Assistant AG; admitted knowing of Operation F&F in April 2010 ) & Gary Grindler (Holder’s Chief of Staff: possibly briefed on Operation F&F in March 2010 ) that discuss Operation Fast & Furious. Now, I understand that AG Holder is trying to use the old Jesuit tactic of “I am not a priest and if I were I would lie to you about it:” specifically, that he doesn’t remember any emails and if there were he wouldn’t give them to the Judiciary committee anyway. Whether or not that tactic will be permitted to work depends on whether the the Judiciary committee is willing to accept that a Justice Department that went out and got cops killed is really qualified to do its own internal vetting. Judging by the response from Judiciary so far, they very well may not accept that. Isn’t it nice to have more people in public office who get upset about the same things that get you upset? I think that it’s nice… Moe Lane ( crosspost )
See the rest here:
Are there SECRET Fast & Furious emails from Eric Holder?
