Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

255 to 67 vs. Holder


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> 255 to 67 vs. Holder Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 7:58:40 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
...and shockingly, the Congressional Black Caucus played the race card.

Holder in contempt

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 8:50:58 PM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline 		They walked out arm in arm signing kum by ya..

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 8:56:15 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

...and shockingly, the Congressional Black Caucus played the race card.


Well, they're called the Black Caucus for a reason.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 8:58:11 PM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline 		Because they are a bunch of bigots. They don't allow whites in their group..

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:00:14 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Then it's hardly a shock. What's your point?

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:01:05 PM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline 		I'm not following. Obama claimed executive privilege in withholding the documents. At that point, Holder was doing nothing other than what Obama directed. Why should Holder be cited and not Obama?

_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:02:10 PM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline 		Maybe there should be a congressional white caucaus that excludes black congressmen ? They are a bunch of bigots.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:03:47 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		Ever consider there`s nothing but they`re baiting you guys into more embarrassment when it`s revealed that there is in fact,nothing there....playing you guys like fiddles?


I mean that`s going to be the fall back story if it goes down that way......right?


It`s not your fault......the President fooled ya`ll into thinking there was something to hide and ya`ll fell for it.....like you all were TRICKED.....AGAIN and are the victims of the mastermind of political theater.......


Similar to the birther nuts.....who`s are now saying President Obama set them up.......by baiting them into thinking he was born in Africa...


And when Issa`s other disaster....the "contraception hearing for men",exploded in their faces......


It was all a trick.....with plants and fakes and activists making cons embarrass themselves.


Remember what for mom said about running with scissors.......

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 6/28/2012 9:10:32 PM >

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:07:21 PM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline 		Executive priveledge is for the executive branch, not to protect is bro in the judiciary branch. Makes you wonder just what Obama is covering up.

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:08:40 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
I'm not following. Obama claimed executive privilege in withholding the documents. At that point, Holder was doing nothing other than what Obama directed. Why should Holder be cited and not Obama?


Its very simple, blunt, and completely without principle: The whole thing was politically motivated to score points with conseratives upset over the Affordable Care Act doing so well in the US Supreme Court today. The House GOP needed.....something....to try to move the news from their failed legal attempt to destroy the ACA to contempt for Eric Holder. Yes, they didnt get any information of wrong doing; but when has THAT stopped the GOP from doing stuff?

How about we hold the US House of Representatives in Contempt of Annoyance? Throw all the Republicans out for both wasting money and time on stupid bills everyone (Democrats, Republicans, The Press, etc, etc) knew would never go anywhere.

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:11:22 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Maybe there should be a congressional white caucaus that excludes black congressmen ? They are a bunch of bigots.

There is. It's called the rest of Congress.

It includes a number of bigots, sure.

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:16:58 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Because they are a bunch of bigots. They don't allow whites in their group..


Wow....such bitter and angry people.......


Did you know professor, that men aren`t allowed in the Democratic Woman's Caucus?


Ponder that.........

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:47:19 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Executive priveledge is for the executive branch, not to protect is bro in the judiciary branch. Makes you wonder just what Obama is covering up.


Makes reasonable people wonder, anyway.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:55:55 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Then it's hardly a shock. What's your point?



It seems to me there is a word for situations where one group of people has different rules than another group of people, because of their skin color... It's right on the tip of my tongue...


As to the Holder vote, it's the cover-up that gets them.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 9:58:14 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
It is because Holder and his Justice Department is supposed to be a completely separate entity from the Executive

You know, the "Justice" Department, as in justice itself

Above politics, and all that old fashioned stuff

And its Holder, the head of the Justice Department, who is covering up the facts concerning the Fast and Furious operation our government (ATF agents) gave Mexican terrorists thousands of weapons illegally

Not exactly what the ATF was set up to do btw

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

I'm not following. Obama claimed executive privilege in withholding the documents. At that point, Holder was doing nothing other than what Obama directed. Why should Holder be cited and not Obama?







< Message edited by Sanity -- 6/28/2012 10:05:06 PM >

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/28/2012 10:07:15 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Then it's hardly a shock. What's your point?



It seems to me there is a word for situations where one group of people has different rules than another group of people, because of their skin color... It's right on the tip of my tongue...


As to the Holder vote, it's the cover-up that gets them.

There's a word for people "shocked" at the obvious too. No, not that n-word, another one...

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/29/2012 1:19:25 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline 		Why does the Congresional Black caucus only allow Democrats in. Shouldn't they change the name to the Democratic congressional black caucus?

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/29/2012 1:43:32 AM   
SadistDave


Posts: 801
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline 		Allen West is in the CBC. He's their token Republican... and called them racists today for their unified support of Holder based on his skin color.

-SD-

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/29/2012 6:04:54 AM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Executive priveledge is for the executive branch, not to protect is bro in the judiciary branch.


Isn't DOJ part of the executive branch? I think it's only the courts themselves that make up the judiciary.

According to our friends at Wikipedia, there appears to be precedent for invoking executive privilege vis-a-vis DOJ:

President George W. Bush first asserted executive privilege to deny disclosure of sought details regarding former Attorney General Janet Reno,[2] the scandal involving Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) misuse of organized-crime informants James J. Bulger and Stephen Flemmi in Boston, and Justice Department deliberations about President Bill Clinton's fundraising tactics, in December 2001.[8]

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: 255 to 67 vs. Holder - 6/29/2012 6:13:52 AM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Executive priveledge is for the executive branch, not to protect is bro in the judiciary branch. Makes you wonder just what Obama is covering up.


DOJ is part of executive branch, as are all other departments that answer to the President. The judiciary branch consists ONLY of the courts and judges.

_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> 255 to 67 vs. Holder Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094