You know what Eric Holder REALLY did wrong?

[Bugsy McGurk]

Forget "IRSgate," "Fast and Furious" and all the other concocted Holder "scandals" batted around by the GOP.

There is a REAL Holder scandal - his willingness to let the bankers and others who crashed the economy in 2008 off WAY to easy. No prosecutions, and mushy civil sanctions.

The GOP never goes after Holder on this stuff because they are even more in cahoots with the culprits than the Dems are.

Anyone interested is encouraged to read Matt Taibbi's article in the current Rolling Stone. It's an eye opening article written by a wonderful writer.

 

[UPNYA2]

Forget "IRSgate," "Fast and Furious" and all the other concocted Holder "scandals" batted around by the GOP.

There is a REAL Holder scandal - his willingness to let the bankers and others who crashed the economy in 2008 off WAY to easy. No prosecutions, and mushy civil sanctions.

The GOP never goes after Holder on this stuff because they are even more in cahoots with the culprits than the Dems are.

Anyone interested is encouraged to read Matt Taibbi's article in the current Rolling Stone. It's an eye opening article written by a wonderful writer.

First of all, Holder has never done, CAN never do, anything wrong for he is both a minority AND a di m, so lets get that out there right away.

Now, second thing.........

Buggy, is there EVER anything, ANYTHING, that you hold dems/libs responsible for doing?

I mean, holy sh it on a stick, sport, YOU actually state Holder didn't go after bankers enough, a grand start, but then the real buggy returns, yapping about how the GOP is really at fault because they don't go after Holder, because they are "more in cahoots with the culprits than the Dems are"!!!!!

Even when YOU think that you KNOW a dim does wrong somehow you still feel the need to lay "more" of the blame on the GOP.

Damn........

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

First of all, Holder has never done, CAN never do, anything wrong for he is both a minority AND a di m, so lets get that out there right away.

Now, second thing.........

Buggy, is there EVER anything, ANYTHING, that you hold dems/libs responsible for doing?

I mean, holy sh it on a stick, sport, YOU actually state Holder didn't go after bankers enough, a grand start, but then the real buggy returns, yapping about how the GOP is really at fault because they don't go after Holder, because they are "more in cahoots with the culprits than the Dems are"!!!!!

Even when YOU think that you KNOW a dim does wrong somehow you still feel the need to lay "more" of the blame on the GOP.

Damn........

If you can stop yammering and express a view as to whether Holder deserves the criticism I leveled at him, give it a go.

 

[Arkady]

Forget "IRSgate," "Fast and Furious" and all the other concocted Holder "scandals" batted around by the GOP.

There is a REAL Holder scandal - his willingness to let the bankers and others who crashed the economy in 2008 off WAY to easy. No prosecutions, and mushy civil sanctions.

The GOP never goes after Holder on this stuff because they are even more in cahoots with the culprits than the Dems are.

Anyone interested is encouraged to read Matt Taibbi's article in the current Rolling Stone. It's an eye opening article written by a wonderful writer.

Yes, there were two huge scandals: the one you identify, and also the fact that the war crimes of the Bush administration were given a free pass. We literally tortured people to death, and there weren't even prosecutions. It's horrifying. And it was absolutely political. The Obama administration figured they'd be hurt, politically, if they tried to bring accountability for Bush administration wrongdoing. Letting war criminals off the hook for political advantage is about as corrupt as it's possible for an A.G. to be.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Yes, there were two huge scandals: the one you identify, and also the fact that the war crimes of the Bush administration were given a free pass. We literally tortured people to death, and there weren't even prosecutions. It's horrifying. And it was absolutely political. The Obama administration figured they'd be hurt, politically, if they tried to bring accountability for Bush administration wrongdoing. Letting war criminals off the hook for political advantage is about as corrupt as it's possible for an A.G. to be.

True, but putting our people on trial for torture, etc. would have generated a huge backlash in our military and intel communities. I can see Obama concluding that doing that would make all our people look over their soldiers instead of doing their jobs. Many likely would have quit. Not necessarily the right decision for Obama to make, but arguable and defensible.

No such "public safety" rationale surrounds the decisions to go so easy on the bankers and others who brought us the 2008 crash.

BTW, note how Pugs decline to weigh in on this one. We're bashing Holder - their favorite hobby - but that also requires bashing bankers. Pugs say "no can do."

;-)

 

[Arkady]

True, but putting our people on trial for torture, etc. would have generated a huge backlash in our military and intel communities.

Yes, it would have. But that's a political situation, and letting the worst sort of criminals get away with murder (literally) to avoid political inconvenience is inexcusably corrupt. If, as you suggest, people would have quit if they thought there would be consequences for torturing detainees, then those are exactly the kind of people we should WANT to quit. That's a BENEFIT, not a drawback, to holding the crooks accountable. We want our intelligence and defense forces made up by people with consciences, not sadists or "just following orders" Nazi types.

BTW, note how Pugs decline to weigh in on this one. We're bashing Holder - their favorite hobby - but that also requires bashing bankers. Pugs say "no can do.
​

With Holder and Obama alike, they're only interested in regurgitating the utterly trivial criticisms they've been fed by Fox News. When it comes to serious wrongdoing, their masters don't want the touching it with a ten foot pole, because that's the kind of misconduct for which they want to preserve a executive prerogative, for the next time a Republican is our Autocrat.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Yes, it would have. But that's a political situation, and letting the worst sort of criminals get away with murder (literally) to avoid political inconvenience is inexcusably corrupt. If, as you suggest, people would have quit if they thought there would be consequences for torturing detainees, then those are exactly the kind of people we should WANT to quit. That's a BENEFIT, not a drawback, to holding the crooks accountable. We want our intelligence and defense forces made up by people with consciences, not sadists or "just following orders" Nazi types.

BTW, note how Pugs decline to weigh in on this one. We're bashing Holder - their favorite hobby - but that also requires bashing bankers. Pugs say "no can do.
​

With Holder and Obama alike, they're only interested in regurgitating the utterly trivial criticisms they've been fed by Fox News. When it comes to serious wrongdoing, their masters don't want the touching it with a ten foot pole, because that's the kind of misconduct for which they want to preserve a executive prerogative, for the next time a Republican is our Autocrat.

It's certainly an issue worthy of media discussion, but they have no interest in covering real issues. If it's not likely to draw ratings it doesn't get covered.

And Pugs just can't get too excited about alleged wrongdoing of bankers or torturers, so such stories get no media attention. They're too busy obsessing over whether IRS bean counters analyzed whether entities with "tea party" in their names were apolitical, as they claimed.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Hmm...a thread offering free whacks at Holder but the "Holder haters" are taking a pass?

Do they love criminal bankers more than they hate Holder?

;-)