Getting hot on Holder

Getting hot on Holder (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Yachtie -> Getting hot on Holder (11/14/2013 5:32:05 AM)
Be interesting watching the Senate Ds rally around the AG. (Reuters) - Republicans in the House of Representatives plan to introduce articles of impeachment against Attorney General Eric Holder on Thursday, in the hopes of removing a cabinet member they say has lied to Congress as well as failed to uphold federal law. "This was not a decision that I made lightly. Since the House voted in 2012 to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt, the pattern of disregard for the rule of law and refusal to be forthright has only continued," Texas Representative Pete Olson, who drafted the articles, said in a statement provided to Reuters on Wednesday. The resolution could pass the Republican-dominated House but would likely sputter in the Democratic-dominated Senate, which would have to hold a trial to remove Holder, who has been attorney general since 2009, from office. What will the Senate do if impeachment proceedings reach it? Be an interesting trial, watching to see if the Ds will hang one of their own.

mnottertail -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/14/2013 5:39:20 AM)
I doubt the articles can be substantiated. Just theater.

DomKen -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/14/2013 7:19:49 AM)
The accusations against holder include stuff that is crazy and then stuff that is just plain stupid. Including, quite unbelievably, that Holder is not enforcing the part of DOMA that was overturned by the Supreme Court. From the op link quote: The other impeachment articles rest on issues that have raised conservatives' ire in recent years, including Holder's decisions not to enforce laws on same-sex marriage

muhly22222 -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/14/2013 2:15:47 PM)
I think that Eric Holder has been an embarrassment as AG. I would love to see him resign. With that being said, there probably aren't grounds for impeachment, and even if there were, there's no way the Senate is going to take out one of the President's chief officers. This is nothing more than political theater, designed to draw a line between two parties that have (jointly) caused plenty of problems already and need to start figuring out how to work together to find some common ground.

Yachtie -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/14/2013 2:19:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: muhly22222 This is nothing more than political theate Good theater is always entertaining.[:D]

sloguy02246 -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/14/2013 7:06:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: muhly22222 I think that Eric Holder has been an embarrassment as AG. I would love to see him resign. With that being said, there probably aren't grounds for impeachment, and even if there were, there's no way the Senate is going to take out one of the President's chief officers. This is nothing more than political theater, designed to draw a line between two parties that have (jointly) caused plenty of problems already and need to start figuring out how to work together to find some common ground. Whether there are actual grounds or not for impeachment no longer matters in DC. Everything there is now nothing but theater, grandstanding, and playing to the media and the respective bases back home. Next the House will vote (unsuccessfully) for a 44th time to repeal the ACA, and after that we will be treated to yet another shutdown crisis, complete with all the requisite finger-pointing on both sides. Well, I guess we got what we paid for.

switchdavid69 -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/14/2013 7:14:55 PM)
The 2014 midterms will be very interesting. We will soon see if the majority of voters are in favor of the ACA, or throw out the dems that voted for it.

DomKen -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/14/2013 8:37:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: switchdavid69 The 2014 midterms will be very interesting. We will soon see if the majority of voters are in favor of the ACA, or throw out the dems that voted for it. Sure. People with new affordable health coverage will vote for the batshit insane Republicans who opposed it. Keep in mind that in 2012 more than 1 million more votes were cast for Democratic House candidates than were cast for Republicans. It is only through extreme gerrymandering that the Republicans control the House. Demographics say even that gerrymandering cannot save the GOP. They will lose seats in 2014, 2016 and without major position changes well into the next decade.

popeye1250 -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 2:59:28 AM)
That POS belongs in prison. The guns he smuggled are still killing people.

joether -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 3:59:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 That POS belongs in prison. The guns he smuggled are still killing people. I find it amusing when conservatives will leave out large tracts of 'facts' and 'logic' when making a case against Democrats. Try to follow... The Republicans in the House impeached one of two US Presidents for lying to the American People: A ) Bill Clinton, for lying about getting blowjobs from a young, Jewish intern to the White House. B ) George W. Bush, for getting 4,000+ US Soldiers killed, 32,500+ US Soldiers wounded, 100K-600K Civilians killed, and costing the nation $4 Trillion of dollars that went straight to the outstanding debt at the time. Which one sounds WORST than the other. If its 'B', than Republicans might have some credibility going into this process. If its 'A', than it was all done for political reasons and NOT for anything REALLY bad. Oh look, it was 'A', wasn't it? Yeah, he lied, so what? He's a politician....they all lie.....if you believe the Republican/Tea Party propaganda literature for the last decade. Shouldn't a US President be impeached for getting this nation into a war when all the things they were saying were false? Now, if Mr. Holder is to be put on trial, will the judges rule without bias? Of course not! They are REPULICANS. They have NOTHING to offer this nation for 2014 and 2016. Why do you think they are doing this? Their approval rating cant drop below 0%, right?

mnottertail -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 4:43:50 AM)
Well, they sent a bill of impeachment for trial to the senate. Clinton was not impeached. It's not just a good idea, its the LAW!

Phydeaux -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 4:44:06 AM)
Unfortunately joel Its not a question of worse. You have a president who lied in a trial. Bush didn't declare war - congress did. For goals the nation decided were worth while. And congress had the means and the responsibility to make its own determination on whether the causes of war were sufficient. You can't even make the case that bush lied - since you have no evidence about what he knew. Only that lots of other nations believed Iraq had wmd. Democrats in a fine example of hindsight being 20/20 now attack the wars. But the only proof of criminal wrongdoing was clinton's perjury. He lied in a trial. Frankly it was stupid to attempt impeachment with that many democrats in the senate. But don't try to whitewash it and say having a liar in chief is great. All other crimes require lying to conceal.

mnottertail -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 4:51:57 AM)
We have excellent evidence of what he knew. He was briefed by Tenet of the CIA and others: https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/press-release-archive-2003/pr08112003.htm He fuckin lied.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 6:03:06 AM)
Holder has been a disaster from day one. My only concern is that the lame fuck president will appoint someone even worse, once Holder is where he belongs; on the trash heap.

mnottertail -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 6:11:16 AM)
But two things are apparent at the outset. He aint gonna be, and nobody gives a fuck about the nutsackers rantings.

Phydeaux -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 6:25:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Well, they sent a bill of impeachment for trial to the senate. Clinton was not impeached. It's not just a good idea, its the LAW! Sending a bill of impeachment IS impeachment. That he was found not guilty doesn't change the fact that he was impeached.

mnottertail -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 6:26:55 AM)
No, no more than the nutsackers sending a dogshit budget bill to the senate is a budget. No more than sending a bill repealing Obamacare 42 times to the senate is repeal. learn the constitution.

Phydeaux -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 6:31:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail We have excellent evidence of what he knew. He was briefed by Tenet of the CIA and others: https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/press-release-archive-2003/pr08112003.htm He fuckin lied. Um... the document you linked concludes Iraq HAD wmd..

Phydeaux -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 6:33:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail No, no more than the nutsackers sending a dogshit budget bill to the senate is a budget. No more than sending a bill repealing Obamacare 42 times to the senate is repeal. learn the constitution. You learn it. I realize you have a problem with English. So I am providing the definition of impeach: "b. To charge (a public official) with improper conduct in office before a proper tribunal." Again. Clinton was impeached. He was also found not guilty. It stems from French. empecher - to bring charges against.

Yachtie -> RE: Getting hot on Holder (11/15/2013 6:35:32 AM)
You two are arguing past each other. The House sending a Bill of Impeachment is just that, and only the House does it. Whether the alledged behavior rises to removal from office is the Senate's job. From Wiki - The House has some exclusive powers: ... ,[1] to impeach officials (impeached officials are subsequently tried in the Senate),[2] Being Impeached, itself, is not really a big deal except that it has happened so infrequently.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625