Eric Holder warns of ‘constitutional crisis’ unless House compromises

[RetiredGySgt]

So how do you see it ?
Is he trying to scare congress into backing down in an attempt to save the country a "crisis" or is he basically blackmailing them, insinuating that the "crisis" could hurt congress or a party ?

Defending Executive turf is certainly warranted. You can't let the Legislative branch exceed its reach.

I see what Holder is doing as just like what every other Executive branch in this spot has done. His behavior is identical.

Of course, past Presidents have used this tactic for less than honorable reasons.

It is impossible to determine what his true motives are. Anyone who thinks they do know is speaking from a partisan viewpoint, and not an objective one.

Meanwhile we have how many examples right in this thrad where liberals have stated they believe that a similar request of a Republican Executive was not only warranted but proved they acted illegally all the while insisting that since a "republican" got away with what they claim was an illegal act that the same should hold for this Democrat because of past supposed misdeeds.

get the point yet?

My personal opinion is the Republicans in Congress that have a LEGAL right to demand documents pertaining to a Department they fund and have authority over in a criminal investigation should charge Holder with a crime and take it to federal Court. They should also hold him in contempt and take all appropriate action they have the legal power to.

There is no conflict of interest and no security concern with turning over documents when it can be handled with the 2 senior members of a committee that both have appropriate OVERSIGHT and CLEARANCE.

 

[The T]

So how do you see it ?
Is he trying to scare congress into backing down in an attempt to save the country a "crisis" or is he basically blackmailing them, insinuating that the "crisis" could hurt congress or a party ?

Defending Executive turf is certainly warranted. You can't let the Legislative branch exceed its reach.

I see what Holder is doing as just like what every other Executive branch in this spot has done. His behavior is identical.

Of course, past Presidents have used this tactic for less than honorable reasons.

It is impossible to determine what his true motives are. Anyone who thinks they do know is speaking from a partisan viewpoint, and not an objective one.

Meanwhile we have how many examples right in this thrad where liberals have stated they believe that a similar request of a Republican Executive was not only warranted but proved they acted illegally all the while insisting that since a "republican" got away with what they claim was an illegal act that the same should hold for this Democrat because of past supposed misdeeds.

get the point yet?

My personal opinion is the Republicans in Congress that have a LEGAL right to demand documents pertaining to a Department they fund and have authority over in a criminal investigation should charge Holder with a crime and take it to federal Court. They should also hold him in contempt and take all appropriate action they have the legal power to.

There is no conflict of interest and no security concern with turning over documents when it can be handled with the 2 senior members of a committee that both have appropriate OVERSIGHT and CLEARANCE.

Precisely and Holder saying he has "Superior Knowlege" and asking Congress to 'take his word for it...doesn't cut it.

Congress has every RIGHT to do thier mandated duties no matter IF they are arguing with A pompus ARROGANT AG.

Word to Holder? Produce, or go DOWN.

 

[edthecynic]

He and obozo sold weapons to our enemy Mexico just like Reagan sold weapons to our enemy iran 25 years ago. That's treason.

WOW! A CON$ervoFascist finely admits St Ronnie was a treasonous traitor.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So how do you see it ?
Is he trying to scare congress into backing down in an attempt to save the country a "crisis" or is he basically blackmailing them, insinuating that the "crisis" could hurt congress or a party ?

Defending Executive turf is certainly warranted. You can't let the Legislative branch exceed its reach.

I see what Holder is doing as just like what every other Executive branch in this spot has done. His behavior is identical.

Of course, past Presidents have used this tactic for less than honorable reasons.

It is impossible to determine what his true motives are. Anyone who thinks they do know is speaking from a partisan viewpoint, and not an objective one.

Meanwhile we have how many examples right in this thrad where liberals have stated they believe that a similar request of a Republican Executive was not only warranted but proved they acted illegally all the while insisting that since a "republican" got away with what they claim was an illegal act that the same should hold for this Democrat because of past supposed misdeeds. // get the point yet? // My personal opinion is the Republicans in Congress that have a LEGAL right to demand documents pertaining to a Department they fund and have authority over in a criminal investigation should charge Holder with a crime and take it to federal Court. They should also hold him in contempt and take all appropriate action they have the legal power to. // There is no conflict of interest and no security concern with turning over documents when it can be handled with the 2 senior members of a committee that both have appropriate OVERSIGHT and CLEARANCE.

Let the House take the matter to SCOTUS, which has the right to compel the Executive to follow the letter of the law and deliver documents. Why? Because the House cannot compel the Executive to do anything.

 

[WillowTree]

Unfortunately the Republicans won't have the balls to persue this and nothing will happen. I guarantee it.

Me thinks you be wrong! Contempt of Congress.. only needs the House..

 

[Ariux]

The f-ing cold (coon) Holder openly thinks he's above the Law.

 

[Si modo]

The f-ing cold (coon) Holder openly thinks he's above the Law.

Piss off.

 

[The T]

The f-ing cold (coon) Holder openly thinks he's above the Law.

Son? WE could have done without that bullsqueeze.

 

[Synthaholic]

Unfortunately the Republicans won't have the balls to persue this and nothing will happen. I guarantee it.

There is nothing to pursue.

This started under Bush and his AG, Mukasey.

Why hasn't car thief Darrell Issa called anyone from the Bush administration to testify?

 

[Si modo]

Defending Executive turf is certainly warranted. You can't let the Legislative branch exceed its reach.

I see what Holder is doing as just like what every other Executive branch in this spot has done. His behavior is identical.

Of course, past Presidents have used this tactic for less than honorable reasons.

It is impossible to determine what his true motives are. Anyone who thinks they do know is speaking from a partisan viewpoint, and not an objective one.

Meanwhile we have how many examples right in this thrad where liberals have stated they believe that a similar request of a Republican Executive was not only warranted but proved they acted illegally all the while insisting that since a "republican" got away with what they claim was an illegal act that the same should hold for this Democrat because of past supposed misdeeds. // get the point yet? // My personal opinion is the Republicans in Congress that have a LEGAL right to demand documents pertaining to a Department they fund and have authority over in a criminal investigation should charge Holder with a crime and take it to federal Court. They should also hold him in contempt and take all appropriate action they have the legal power to. // There is no conflict of interest and no security concern with turning over documents when it can be handled with the 2 senior members of a committee that both have appropriate OVERSIGHT and CLEARANCE.

Let the House take the matter to SCOTUS, which has the right to compel the Executive to follow the letter of the law and deliver documents. Why? Because the House cannot compel the Executive to do anything.

Actually, the committee is the one who initiates the motion to compel. And, the house in which the committee resides is the only house needed to pass that.

Additionally, Article II: the principle duty of the Executive is to execute the law.

Congress makes law.

Obama has a choice to do his constitutionally mandated job, or not.

 

[dilloduck]

So how do you see it ?
Is he trying to scare congress into backing down in an attempt to save the country a "crisis" or is he basically blackmailing them, insinuating that the "crisis" could hurt congress or a party ?

Defending Executive turf is certainly warranted. You can't let the Legislative branch exceed its reach.

I see what Holder is doing as just like what every other Executive branch in this spot has done. His behavior is identical.

Of course, past Presidents have used this tactic for less than honorable reasons.

It is impossible to determine what his true motives are. Anyone who thinks they do know is speaking from a partisan viewpoint, and not an objective one.

Well I'll take a wild guess and accuse him of stalling.

 

[Papageorgio]

A) What are the PF boards? Anyone heard from the Swede?

B). Booosh had the same program. The ATF agent would have been shot by one of the millions of guns that Pub policies have allowed into Mexico ANYWAY. This whole thing is a Pub Propaganda joke.

40k have been killed in Mexico- Legalize and tax pot. that's supposedly 60% of this Pub mess.

Catch up on the whole issue and comeback when you are informed. The whole Bush did it to was debunked and hashed out. And even if it was the same how does one bad policy make it okay to double down on stupid. Love how liberals love stupidity.

 

[hortysir]

Amazing that dingbat Rs are accusing him of withholding information in spite of more than 150K pages of information and more than one million emails.

This is another example of the partisan Rs telling the same lies over and over and the rw's blindly following their owners words.

Will the rw's ever demand that the GObP/R's put their own country ahead of their profits? I doubt it.

In all fairness, Lud, there's no controversy over whether or not all documents requested have been turned over. Holder isn't saying, "I've already given you guys everything you aksed for." He's saying that the rest of what they've requested (i.e. those documents that haven't been turned over) are private as they pertain to ongoing investigations, and thus he doesn't have to (can't) turn them over.

No one's accusing him of withholding anything. They're accusing him of withholding those documents BECAUSE THEY'RE INCRIMINATING in relation to Fast and Furious. That he's got more documents that have been requested but not yet handed over is pretty much common knowledge.

Love when rabid partisans call each other partisans.

And the political acrobats started with the OP.

It would be a 'constitutional crisis' for the AG to be formally charged by Congress.

Holder wasn't making a threat. Just stating the obvious.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Unfortunately the Republicans won't have the balls to persue this and nothing will happen. I guarantee it.

There is nothing to pursue.

This started under Bush and his AG, Mukasey.

Why hasn't car thief Darrell Issa called anyone from the Bush administration to testify?

Fast and Furious started in 2009. The program that was kinda similar but not the same was in 2004 as I recall and was stopped AFTER it was found the Mexican Government could not track the guns.

The SAME people in 2004 that knew with the cooperation of the Mexican authorities they could not track the weapons even with gps on them decided suddenly in 2009 to redo the program only 5 times as big with no cooperation from Mexico, hell they did not even inform the Mexicans what they were doing. They did not put GPS on the weapons and they did not even track the weapons or make any arrests.

To repeat under Bush the program operated in close contact with Mexican authorities. 400 guns were lost before the Mexicans informed the US they could not track the weapons, were upon the program was shut down never to be restarted under Bush.

Under Obama 2000 guns were lost, no one tried to track them and no one even informed the Mexicans there was a program.

Under Bush we have all records released, open testimony of those involved and closure. Under Obama Holder denies he even knew of the program denying E-Mails that clearly show he not only knew about but was part of the program, Under Obama we have refusal of the Justice Department to release records and the open promotion of those involved to better jobs IN Washington DC with close scrutiny to prevent testimony to Congress.

 

[The T]

Meanwhile we have how many examples right in this thrad where liberals have stated they believe that a similar request of a Republican Executive was not only warranted but proved they acted illegally all the while insisting that since a "republican" got away with what they claim was an illegal act that the same should hold for this Democrat because of past supposed misdeeds. // get the point yet? // My personal opinion is the Republicans in Congress that have a LEGAL right to demand documents pertaining to a Department they fund and have authority over in a criminal investigation should charge Holder with a crime and take it to federal Court. They should also hold him in contempt and take all appropriate action they have the legal power to. // There is no conflict of interest and no security concern with turning over documents when it can be handled with the 2 senior members of a committee that both have appropriate OVERSIGHT and CLEARANCE.

Let the House take the matter to SCOTUS, which has the right to compel the Executive to follow the letter of the law and deliver documents. Why? Because the House cannot compel the Executive to do anything.

Actually, the committee is the one who initiates the motion to compel. And, the house in which the committee resides is the only house needed to pass that.

Additionally, Article II: the principle duty of the Executive is to execute the law.

Congress makes law.

Obama has a choice to do his constitutionally mandated job, or not.

Lately? He's been circumventing it.

 

[bripat9643]

What exactly does he think would create a Constitutional Crisis here?

Liberal Dictionary:
===============================================
Constitutional crisis - Whenever libs don't get their way.

Petulant whining - Whenever anyone points out that libs wipe their asses on the Constitution.

 

[The T]

So how do you see it ?
Is he trying to scare congress into backing down in an attempt to save the country a "crisis" or is he basically blackmailing them, insinuating that the "crisis" could hurt congress or a party ?

Defending Executive turf is certainly warranted. You can't let the Legislative branch exceed its reach.

I see what Holder is doing as just like what every other Executive branch in this spot has done. His behavior is identical.

Of course, past Presidents have used this tactic for less than honorable reasons.

It is impossible to determine what his true motives are. Anyone who thinks they do know is speaking from a partisan viewpoint, and not an objective one.

Well I'll take a wild guess and accuse him of stalling.

Stalling so he can purge or hide.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Meanwhile we have how many examples right in this thrad where liberals have stated they believe that a similar request of a Republican Executive was not only warranted but proved they acted illegally all the while insisting that since a "republican" got away with what they claim was an illegal act that the same should hold for this Democrat because of past supposed misdeeds. // get the point yet? // My personal opinion is the Republicans in Congress that have a LEGAL right to demand documents pertaining to a Department they fund and have authority over in a criminal investigation should charge Holder with a crime and take it to federal Court. They should also hold him in contempt and take all appropriate action they have the legal power to. // There is no conflict of interest and no security concern with turning over documents when it can be handled with the 2 senior members of a committee that both have appropriate OVERSIGHT and CLEARANCE.

Let the House take the matter to SCOTUS, which has the right to compel the Executive to follow the letter of the law and deliver documents. Why? Because the House cannot compel the Executive to do anything.

Actually, the committee is the one who initiates the motion to compel. And, the house in which the committee resides is the only house needed to pass that. // Additionally, Article II: the principle duty of the Executive is to execute the law. Congress makes law. Obama has a choice to do his constitutionally mandated job, or not.

Co-equal branches and all that. Congress can compel no Executive officer. SCOTUS can direct the President to produce papers and personnel if Congress wants to go that route.

End of story.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, RGS, the constitution and the law do not support that. Congress must issue a call to the Executive for papers and or personnel, BHO will or will not do it, then Congress can stick the summons up its collective butt or go to SCOTUS.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No, RGS, the constitution and the law do not support that. Congress must issue a call to the Executive for papers and or personnel, BHO will or will not do it, then Congress can stick the summons up its collective butt or go to SCOTUS.

Wrong Congress has OVERSIGHT on NUMEROUS specific departments and sections of the Federal Government. To include the Justice Department.