Friday Talking Points [321] -- Eric Holder's Record
We have to pre-empt the usual Friday Talking Points column this week, because when we started writing about Eric Holder in the awards section, it just kind of grew and grew as a subject until it essentially consumed the rest of the column. We still have our notes on all the political foibles and foofaroo from the past week, and we promise we'll keep this list handy and try to review parts of it in next week's column, mostly because some of the stories were real doozies (like the Kansas governor's race, where the Republican is now basing his whole campaign on "my Democratic opponent once visited a strip club," while simultaneously presiding over a state which is about to hold a sex-toy auction because they really, really need the money after the Republican incumbent's disastrous implementation of "pure" conservative economic theory, which consisted of: "Cut all taxes! There, all done -- just sit back and wait for the boom times!"). But we digress.
The news that Attorney General Eric Holder would be stepping down sent a shockwave through Washington (even though he had admitted earlier in the year to an interviewer that he would likely step down before next January). Democrats (and pundits) immediately started whispering about who would be named to replace Holder, while Republicans -- laughably -- tried to make the case that no replacement should get a vote in the Senate during the lame-duck period (good luck with that one, guys). One thing worth remembering: Harry Reid's "nuclear option" is looking pretty good right about now, isn't it? If Republicans could filibuster Holder's replacement, then he might still be still in his job when Obama leaves office in 2017.
Holder certainly had a momentous term in office. Depending on when he is officially replaced, his will either be the fourth-longest or third-longest record as Attorney General in American history. Liberals found him lacking on civil liberties issues (especially in Obama's first term), and conservatives just despised him because he was serving a president they really, really hated (he's also the first Attorney General to be found in contempt of Congress by the House).
On the whole, was his term worth praising or condemning? We have to say that "both" is the only real answer to that question. Because it has many facets, we are going to spend the rest of the article examining his legacy. As we said, we'll return to our usual, more lighthearted fare next week, but for now let's weigh Eric Holder's leadership at the Justice Department, as seen through the eyes of this column.
This is going to be a rather unique awards section this week, for two reasons. The first is that it will be a "lifetime achievement" review (or, more accurately "term in office" review) of one person's accomplishments, good and bad. The second reason this is unusual is that it will actually be a review of accomplishments on the scale of "bad to good," as we switch the order of presentation of our awards for one week. This is really necessary, because of the timeline involved.
Attorney General Eric Holder's announcement that he will soon be stepping down from his job as America's Top Cop brought mixed reactions from the left. Some choose to focus on only the good he has accomplished, while some insisted that the bad outweighed any good. We're going to take a more comprehensive look, and have to say right here at the start that Holder seems to have balanced it all out fairly well.
But the story of Eric Holder's term in office is really more of a bad-to-good transition, which is why we're going to review his record of winning the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week awards first. Holder won the MDDOTW six times since this column began, and five of these occurred during Obama's first term in office. In contrast, Holder won eight Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week awards, but only two of them during Obama's first term. So you can see the progression, and why we had to flip the order of the two awards sections this week.
On the all-time Friday Talking Points "Hall Of Fame/Hall Of Shame" list, Holder's six MDDOTW awards puts him (currently) in a five-way tie for eighth place, with the following unsavory characters: Jay "Rocky IV" Rockefeller IV, Charlie Rangel, Blanche Lincoln, and Rod "Blaggy" Blagojevich.
The first-ever MDDOTW Holder won was way back in FTP [73], for continuing the Bush policy on state secrets in three separate lawsuits. Holder had many other instances of continuing Bush's national security policies, but this was the only one which earned him our award.
The second time Holder won the award was an early disappointment in how the Obama Justice Department was going to handle the War On Weed from FTP [144]. Holder sent a letter weighing in on the first serious attempt of a state's voters to legalize recreational marijuana -- California's Proposition 19 (which ultimately lost at the ballot box in 2010). At the time, we wrote:
Holder's letter, and other recent statements from the Obama administration, make it plain that they will not be happy if Prop. 19 passes, and that they will fight it with every legal weapon they can bring to bear. The timing of these statements (just before voters get a chance to make their choice) and the political nature of what is being said puts these actions over the line, as far as we're concerned. Now, if you're a retired politician, then endorsing or coming out against such a citizens' initiative is certainly fair game, such as former Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders recently throwing her support behind Proposition 19. But when you're the nation's top law enforcement officer, you have a duty to uphold the laws -- but also a duty not to influence their creation.
Attorney General Eric Holder, by threatening get-tough measures should Proposition 19 pass -- in an obvious and naked attempt by the Obama administration to throw its weight behind the political forces opposing the measure -- has more than earned this week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award. Please, Mister Attorney General, keep out of California's democratic process, as you are supposed to do. At least until after the election is over.
The third award Holder earned in FTP [173], for sending a memo out to U.S. Attorneys which, in essence, supported overzealous federal prosecutors in states with legal medical marijuana. We wrote, at the time:
The new memo seems to back up the fact that the feds seemed to be concentrating on the biggest growing operations. If an activity is deemed legal (or even "look the other way" quasi-legal), then what difference does it make whether the activity is large or small? The second problem with the new memo is that it seems to give a green light to overzealous federal prosecutors to go after state government officials for making an honest attempt to fill in the legal void when it comes to legalizing the entire seed-to-end-product production chain. Some states -- rather than leave a gaping legal hole -- decided to lay down a few rules as to what was acceptable and what was not for growers of medical marijuana. Before the new rules were even given a chance to be enacted, a few federal prosecutors sent letters to very high-ranking state officials warning them that the feds would haul their butts into court and charge them with conspiring to break federal drug laws. Got that? If a state's attorney general released regulations for legally growing medical marijuana in their state, then they would be prosecuted (read: "persecuted") for falling afoul of the drug laws. This is ridiculous, but the new Justice Department memo seems to back this reasoning up.
Almost exactly a year later, in FTP [218], Holder won again for the fallout from this memo (this was, admittedly, a rather backhanded way for us to give the award to Holder, since it was mainly about one particular U.S. Attorney in California, Melinda Haag).
In Haag's own words, and our snarky response:
"I now find the need to consider actions regarding marijuana superstores such as Harborside. The larger the operation, the greater the likelihood that there will be abuse of the state's medical marijuana laws, and marijuana in the hands of individuals who do not have a demonstrated medical need."
Well, golly gee, maybe she needs to be reassigned to Wall Street, huh? Wouldn't that be great to see? "The larger the bank or investment firm, the greater the likelihood that they are abusing financial regulations and performing transactions which are illegal, so we are hereby immediately moving to shut down [fill in the name of your least favorite "Too Big To Fail" institution], even though we have not a shred of evidence that any such crime has been committed."
This will, of course, never happen in a million billion years, but it sure is fun to daydream, isn't it?
A few months later, Holder won again in FTP [231], for the Justice Department arguing in court that marijuana did not have any accepted medical use. We took a look at the administration's position on this:
But the Justice Department is trying to square the circle. They are arguing that there simply aren't enough properly-run scientific peer-reviewed studies of marijuana's use as a beneficial medicine to prove that marijuana has accepted medical uses. The problem -- the indefensible part -- is that to run one of these proper scientific studies, you need the permission of the federal government before you begin. Marijuana is, after all, illegal, and so any legitimate scientific study has to get permission to administer an illegal substance. However, the process for getting such approval is not only long, difficult, and convoluted, even when a research team attempts to jump over the multiple hurdles set in their path by the feds, approval is almost never forthcoming.
This leaves the Justice Department lawyers to argue the following in court: there are not enough proper scientific studies to determine that marijuana is a valid medicine, and we are not going to allow proper scientific studies to take place, because we are afraid of what they will prove.
Catch-22.
Holder's final Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award came a little over a year ago, in FTP [259] in the midst of a scandal over subpoenas issued to journalists in leak investigation cases. Holder got caught right in the middle of this disgraceful episode:
The Obama administration's "War On Leakers" has now officially morphed into a "War On Journalists." On leaks, the Obama team has brought more prosecutions than all other presidents combined -- twice as many, in fact. But while Attorney General Eric Holder recused himself from the case involving the Associated Press' phone records, his signature was discovered this week on an application for a subpoena for a Fox News reporter's emails and phone records. The subpoena charged the Fox reporter, essentially, with spying. The Justice Department didn't really have any intention of prosecuting him, they just wanted to root around in his emails and phone records to pin charges on the government employee who was his source.
This is disgraceful. This is an abuse of power. The subpoena on the Fox reporter was nothing short of a fishing expedition to prosecute yet another leak case. President Obama now says he wants a federal shield law for reporters, even though he helped kill the last such effort in Congress.
Which ends our review of Holder's negative record, and brings us to taking a look at the good things Holder should be remembered for.
Eric Holder decided to stay on as Attorney General after President Obama won re-election, even though many expected him to step down. We have to admit, we jumped on that wagon ourselves quite a few times, and indicated (even, at times, while handing him the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award), that we would "cry no tears if he announced his impending retirement."
Looking back, we're glad he stayed as long as he did. His second-term accomplishments were a lot more impressive than his first, to put it mildly. He "evolved" on the marijuana issue, to a breathtaking extent. He will now be remembered as the man who did more to shift the federal government's stance in the War On Weed than anyone else in history, in fact.
Overall, Holder held the same position -- eighth place -- on the overall tally of MIDOTW awards, which is one reason why we say his good balanced his bad, when considering his entire record.
The first time Holder won the prestigious "Golden Backbone" award was in FTP [102], for defending his position on trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in federal court in New York City. This was an enormous political fight (and one that the Obama administration lost), but it was still the right thing to do. We just tried a similar 9/11 Al Qaeda terrorist in federal court and it was just announced he got a life sentence -- but the news media (and the political world) barely blinked. Federal courts have an astoundingly good record at convicting international terrorists, and Holder was right to defend his position. As we said at the time: "It's a rare thing in Washington to see a government official make a strong decision, and then defend it as the right thing to do without either (a.) trying to blame everyone else for the idea's shortcomings, or (b.) immediately apologizing for the decision, or (c.) 'walking back' or even overturning the decision at the slightest sign of political stormclouds on the horizon."
Holder's second MIDOTW award is a relevant one this week, since the news just broke of another record settlement, this time with the Navajo Nation. Back in 2010, Holder earned the award for an even-bigger settlement -- to the tune of three-quarters of a billion dollars -- the Justice Department offered in a case where Native Americans were suing the Agriculture Department for discrimination. One interesting note is that Holder won both the MIDOTW and the MDDOTW that week, back in FTP [144].
Jumping forward to Obama's second term, Holder won again in FTP [262] for finally (and belatedly) dropping a losing case the Obama Justice Department never should have argued in the first place -- trying to keep the "Plan B" morning-after pill from teens who needed it. This court case brought forth some downright scathing commentary from the judge, on the subject of the federal government's idiocy in fighting it, and in June of 2013 Eric Holder finally threw in the towel and stopped his appeals. By doing so, the morning-after pill was made available (as the scientists and doctors had recommended) over-the-counter to anyone without age limit and without having to show identification. So while Holder did win the MIDOTW for finally ending this fight, he certainly took far too long to do the right thing in this case.
The next four MIDOTW awards were all won for Holder's dramatic and historic "evolution" on marijuana law, and his leadership in changing Justice Department policy to reflect the new realities of the last two decades (since medical marijuana was first made legal by a state).
Because of the historic nature of this shift in federal policy, we tended towards rather dramatic language in summing up Holder's new direction. When he first won the award in FTP [269] for a speech he gave on reforming mandatory minimum sentencing laws, our response was: "For the first time since the days of Nancy Reagan, a Democrat publicly stated that parts of the Drug War should be scrapped. This is a big deal, in other words."
Two weeks later, in FTP [271], we had to give him another MIDOTW, for sending out a new memo to U.S. Attorneys which was drastically different than earlier memos his Justice Department had sent. This memo was the long-awaited response (it came almost a full year afterwards) to the citizens of Colorado and Washington voting to allow recreational marijuana use for adults. What it laid out was a very reasonable policy, in almost complete contradiction to the previous policy.
In a separate article (one not written on a Friday, in other words), we applauded Holder's decision, again in rather dramatic language. We began with:
It's a new day in America.
Today will be marked in history as the day the federal government finally realized that their 80-90 year war on a plant is not only ineffective and counterproductive, but also a gigantic waste of money and everyone's time.
Attorney General Eric Holder -- the nation's chief law enforcement officer -- announced today that the Department of Justice would not challenge state laws enacted by popular vote in the states of Washington and Colorado which legalized cannabis for adult recreational use. The federal government will not sue the states in court to prevent the laws from fully being implemented, and they will not waste their resources prosecuting people in these states who follow the rules. In addition, Holder informed all 50 of the state-level attorneys general that the Justice Department was issuing new guidelines for how federal prosecutors will prioritize enforcement efforts in the forty percent of the country where medicinal marijuana is now legal at the state level.
While this is not exactly the ratification of the 21st Amendment, it is indeed a historic turning point in the Marihuana Prohibition Era (using the original anti-cannabis terminology, to give the period the full century-old flavor it truly deserves). This is the first significant step the federal government has taken in almost a century which loosens rather than tightens federal law-enforcement efforts towards cannabis. While marijuana will remain illegal under federal law -- under the strictest rules of any "controlled dangerous substance" -- Holder has announced that in states where the citizens have plainly shown at the ballot box their disapproval of such federal laws, the federal government will now back off. Thus begins an end to the insanity of the War On Weed. Think "insanity" is too strong a term? Consider the fact that under federal law marijuana is considered more dangerous than the following: cocaine, opium, amphetamine, methamphetamine, and PCP. That is, truly, nothing short of insanity.
We have to admit, we ended this article with what can only be called the wildest of hyperbole:
But now the waiting is over. Marijuana enthusiasts in Colorado and Washington and sick people in 18 other states and the District of Columbia can now breathe a little deeper (if you'll pardon the pun). Because while the Marihuana Prohibition Era is not over yet, and while marijuana remains technically illegal at the federal level, and while marijuana is still listed as a Schedule I dangerous controlled substance, and while individual federal prosecutors will no doubt overstep the new boundaries -- it's still a new day in America. Eric Holder has signaled a retreat in the War On Weed -- the biggest such retreat since the intensification of the drug war hysteria in the 1980s. The war isn't over, but two states just scored immense victories which are going to signal the beginning of the end. The next generation of Americans will one day look back at the War On Weed the same way we look back on Prohibition today. And when they study the history, August 29, 2013 may be marked as the most important turning point.
I could even see "420" eventually being replaced with "829," personally.
Holder followed this historic turnaround with an attempt at assuring banks that they could now offer their services to state-legal marijuana businesses without running afoul of federal anti-drug-trafficking laws. In the same week, while winning the MIDOTW award in FTP [289], Holder also announced a new policy of providing clemency for prisoners who had been given overly-long sentences, and he backed a Senate bill on sentencing reform. All in all, a good week for Holder.
This all led to us giving Holder a sort of generic "gee, you've been impressive in the past year" MIDOTW award, when we were looking back at the column's history in our own record-setting "Friday Talking Points [Volume 300]" edition.
Which brings us to the final entry, just a few short weeks ago. In FTP [317], Holder won his eighth Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award, for his personal attention to the situation in Ferguson, Missouri. Holder, in his announcement this week, said that he'd always considered Robert F. Kennedy his role model, but Holder's personal attention to Ferguson surpassed even Kennedy (who was a bit of a reluctant warrior on civil rights, at times).
Thus endeth our rundown on the (to date) record of Eric Holder, America's first African-American Attorney General.
Volume 321 (9/26/14)
Since Eric Holder's record is so balanced, in a sort of political Purgatory (in the theological sense), we thought it would be worth the effort to convince Holder what he could do to decisively tip these scales, with one dramatic stroke of the pen, perhaps on the day before he leaves office.
As you can tell from the awards section, we have been closely following Holder's evolution on the marijuana issue. While we firmly believe that Holder will be considered historic for being the first to begin reversing the federal government's Reefer Madness attitude towards a plant that humans have been using for thousands of years, there is still one final step he could take which would be an enormous breakthrough.
So, here it is in a nutshell: Eric Holder should sign an order moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, right before he steps down. He has this power, and does not need the permission of Congress or even the president to do so. He has, in fact, always had this power.
For those not familiar with the details, here is a quick rundown on the federal drug law in question. The law divides drugs into different categories or "schedules," depending on how dangerous they are. Here is how the first three such schedules are defined, from the text of the law:
(1) Schedule I.
(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.(2) Schedule II.
(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.
(C) Abuse of the drug or other substances may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence.(3) Schedule III.
(A) The drug or other substance has a potential for abuse less than the drugs or other substances in schedules I and II.
(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
(C) Abuse of the drug or other substance may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or high psychological dependence.
The other two Schedules (IV and V) are even less restrictive, and also use: "The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States."
Elsewhere in this law are the rules for changing a substance from one schedule to another, or for removing a substance from the schedules entirely. This section begins with the basic concept: "the Attorney General may by rule... transfer between such schedules any drug or other substance.... [and/or may] remove any drug or other substance from the schedules if he finds that the drug or other substance does not meet the requirements for inclusion in any schedule."
You'll notice that Congress or the president are not mentioned in the law. The Attorney General alone has this power.
Now, reading over those classifications, which schedule do you think marijuana belongs in? To further help you, here are a few drugs currently on each list:
Schedule I -- heroin, LSD, mescaline, peyote
Schedule II -- cocaine, amphetamine, methamphetamine (crystal meth), opium, morphine
Schedule III -- barbiturates, anabolic steroids, ketamine
Where does marijuana belong on this list? Well, no matter what your answer, the law states that it is on Schedule I right now. This means it has "high potential for abuse" and has "no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." This, despite the fact that the federal government itself still provides marijuana as medicine to patients (grandfathered in from a program from the 1980s for glaucoma), and that 2014 could mark the year when fully half the country's states legalize medicinal use of marijuana (if Florida accepts it, it will be the 25th state to do so, depending on how you count).
Marijuana is treated by the federal government as more dangerous than cocaine, morphine, opium, and all those prescription opioid pills causing so much trouble. Marijuana is seen as more dangerous than crystal meth, for crying out loud! This is nothing short of insane.
Marijuana should be completely descheduled -- it should be treated by the federal government as alcohol is treated (we even had fun with a contest to rename the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives in this column, a while back, to add "Marijuana" to the acronym). For this drastic a change, though, Congress would likely feel better about being involved.
But for the time being, marijuana should be moved down the list, to (at a maximum) Schedule III. Scientifically and medically, there is no other argument to be made, really. President Obama entered office promising an end to putting politics in front of science in the federal government, and Eric Holder could dramatically follow through on this pledge by rescheduling marijuana on his way out the door.
Politically, it would cause an uproar. Fine. Let it.
Holder should wait until after the Senate confirms his successor, and then sign an order rescheduling marijuana on his last day in office. This would put the cat among the pigeons, since the incoming Attorney General would have to quickly decide whether to overturn Holder's order or not. Even if marijuana were rescheduled for a single day, it would put the issue front and center for the American people to begin a conversation about how the federal drug laws need to change.
The person who did so -- on his own, without even consulting President Obama -- would be our idea of a profile in courage.
The War On Weed needs to end. It is stupid, costly, and wildly ineffective. The American people have been pouring trillions of dollars down this rathole for almost a century now, to absolutely no effect whatsoever. Eric Holder can be the one to boldly state that the emperor has no clothes. With one swipe of his pen, he could go down in history as the biggest reformer of the War On Weed in all history (to date, that is).
If there is one thing Holder could do to tip the balance of his legacy, this would be it. We strongly urge Holder to consider leaving office with such a dramatic measure. Because, in the end, it would be the right thing to do.
-- Chris Weigant
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post
Booyakasha!
and conservatives just despised him because he was serving a president they really, really hated (he's also the first Attorney General to be found in contempt of Congress by the House).
The problem is that an AG is *NOT* supposed to serve the President..
An AG is supposed to serve the AMERICAN PEOPLE...
THAT is why Holder is the worst AG ever...
Michale
The problem is that an AG is *NOT* supposed to serve the President..
An AG is supposed to serve the AMERICAN PEOPLE...
And do you know how I know this??
Because Obama himself SAID SO... Back when he was attacking Bush's AG...
I find it really fascinating how so many of Obama's own words come back to bite him on his ass...
Michale
Chris, I object to this wording: "after the Republican incumbent's disastrous implementation of "pure" conservative economic theory"
I think "after the zombie-fearing Talibangelical Republican incumbent's well-executed implementation of disastrous "pure" conservative economic theory" is clearer.
THAT is why Holder is the worst AG ever...
michale, you should know better than to throw words like "ever" around in a forum so full of history buffs.
even were we not to favorably stack holder and his scandals against the likes of alberto gonzales, what about john mitchell, a. mitchell palmer, harry m. daugherthy, henry stanbery... hey CW, want to jump in here?
JL
even were we not to favorably stack holder and his scandals against the likes of alberto gonzales, what about john mitchell, a. mitchell palmer, harry m. daugherthy, henry stanbery...
Holder has done all the things that those guys did plus displayed an appalling amount of racism...
No comparison...
But I understand that others might have differing opinions.... :D
Michale
michale, you should know better than to throw words like "ever" around in a forum so full of history buffs.
Yea, "ever" might be a stretch.. especially since I barely am better at history than I am at economics..
Hyperbole aside, however, it's clear that Holder ranks down there with the lowest of the low...
Michale
Holder has done all the things that those guys did plus displayed an appalling amount of racism...
really? he ended reconstruction, jailed suspected communists, covered up watergate and fired US Attorneys who wouldn't drum up spurious prosecution against his political rivals? and those other guys weren't racist at all? i had no idea! heh-heh-heh.
;)
JL
really? he ended reconstruction, jailed suspected communists, covered up watergate and fired US Attorneys who wouldn't drum up spurious prosecution against his political rivals? and those other guys weren't racist at all? i had no idea! heh-heh-heh.
Very funny.. :D
He did comparable things...
He ignored the law to serve a political partisan agenda..
His incompetence got people killed..
And don't EVEN get me started on how he took completely non-racist events and turned them into a racial circus, complete with clowns...
Michale
He did comparable things...
i'm going to have to disagree with you on that one.
He ignored the law to serve a political partisan agenda..
...just like every administration since 1970, with perhaps a brief respite or two (perhaps not coincidenally by the last two presidents to lose their re-election campaigns).
His incompetence got people killed..
it takes quite a long and twisted chain of cause and effect to link holder to border guards murdered by the mexican cartels. it's not as if the cartels aren't ridiculously well-armed anyway, it's not as if holder personally dropped the ball by failing to monitor someone four levels below him in the chain of command, it's not as if he did it on purpose, and it's not as if he sold them MIM-23 Hawk Missiles, like for example edwin meese of the reagan administration.
JL
i'm going to have to disagree with you on that one.
I'de be disappointed if ya didn't. :D
...just like every administration since 1970, with perhaps a brief respite or two (perhaps not coincidenally by the last two presidents to lose their re-election campaigns).
See! We DO agree. :D
The point is that the AG is supposed to serve the American People.
NOT the President.
it takes quite a long and twisted chain of cause and effect to link holder to border guards murdered by the mexican cartels. it's not as if the cartels aren't ridiculously well-armed anyway,
So, because the cartels are armed anyways, it's OK to give them more weapons with which to kill our LEOs???
it's not as if holder personally dropped the ball by failing to monitor someone four levels below him in the chain of command,
That's EXACTLY what he did..
He is ultimately responsible for everything done and NOT done in the DOJ...
And if this was a GOP administration with a GOP AG, then no one here would disagree with me...
Michale
See! We DO agree. :D
that the office is most often used for politics first and justice second? sure, as long as we include nearly every other administration in history.
has holder made a few errors? of course he has. has somebody somewhere in the department goofed up under his watch? absolutely, i could answer that regarding the tenure of just about anybody. but if you're going to make a "worst ever" argument, my criteria would be first of all how high-level the mistakes were, secondly how intentional they were, and third of all how many people suffered as a direct causal result.
by those measures, holder isn't even in the discussion for worst ever - possibly not even worst in the past two administrations.
JL
has holder made a few errors?
That's like saying that Stalin was kinda a butthead...
Holder ignored the law when it suited his partisan agenda. He persecuted people for non-existent racism.. He signed off on the persecution of reporters, again for purely partisan reasons.. His bungling got a BP agent killed..
by those measures, holder isn't even in the discussion for worst ever - possibly not even worst in the past two administrations.
For example....????
Michale
I find it interesting, CW, that Holder is hated so much by corporate special interest groups.
Usually, this is a good sign he's fighting for justice. I'd add that Holder and the DoJ pursued in many ways within the law some level of recompense for the financial collapse.
An example is the $13 billion settlement w/ JP Morgan.
My only regret is that they never really pursued criminal charges. The argument Holder made that while what these banks did was "evil" it was often still within the law.
Here's an interesting article from John Cassidy at the New Yorker on the banking issue.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/didnt-eric-holder-go-bankers
I believe the actions Holder and DoJ took were what probably led to all fanned anti-Holder hate. Wall Street doesn't like it when they don't get everything they want.
I'm not a fan of this new "too big to jail" policy, however.
-David
David,
An example is the $13 billion settlement w/ JP Morgan.
I think I may have predicted that. Ahem. :)
I'm still a big fan of the Dodd-Frank legislation but we just won't know how effective it is until the next time, God forbid ...
I have to say that I'm quite amazed by the visceral reaction to AG Holder - throughout this blog and beyond.
I wonder how Ethel Kennedy feels about the job he has done over the last many years ... that Robert Kennedy was watching over Holder's every move in his spacious justice department office was always good enough for me!
I believe the actions Holder and DoJ took were what probably led to all fanned anti-Holder hate. Wall Street doesn't like it when they don't get everything they want.
Ya know, it's funny...
ANY opposition to the Left from the Right is based on "hate" and "racism" etc etc, but any opposition to the Right from the Left is based "logic" and "facts"...
Isn't that simply uncanny!!???? :D
Michale
I have to say that I'm quite amazed by the visceral reaction to AG Holder - throughout this blog and beyond.
Why be amazed??
It was the same reaction that the Left had against any GOP AG...
The only difference is that Holder is the ONLY AG to be charged with Contempt Of Congress....
Michale
ANY opposition to the Left from the Right is based on "hate" and "racism" etc etc, but any opposition to the Right from the Left is based "logic" and "facts"...
I just have to ask..
Has there EVER been any criticism of Obama and his minions from the Right that WASN'T based on "hate" or "racism"???
Any at all???
Michale
"Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like Winston Churchill by comparison."
-Garry Kasparov, CHESSMASTER
Hatred???
Racism???
Legitimate criticism>???
Michale
It's all just a bloody bore, Michale.
It's all just a bloody bore, Michale.
Only because the answer is obvious... :D
Michale
Besides, there is a very easy way for us to move past this, Liz.
Ya'all simply concede the point... :D
Michale
Yo David,
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/29/us/fumbled-bid-for-governor-imperils-ohio-democrats.html?_r=0
Looks like Democrats are an endangered species all over the country.. :D
As of today, GOP has a 76% of taking the Senate..
And Democrats in Ohio are very worried about a GOP wave...
Michale
Michale,
Besides, there is a very easy way for us to move past this, Liz.
"Well, I've got some news for you and, you'll soon find out it's true and, you'll have to eat your lunch all by yourself. 'Cause I'm already gone ... "
"Well, I've got some news for you and, you'll soon find out it's true and, you'll have to eat your lunch all by yourself. 'Cause I'm already gone ... "
Kudos on the music quote!! :D
One of my favorite EAGLES songs.....
Nice one.. :D
Michale
'Cause I'm already gone
But, that's OK.. A win by forfeit is still a win.. :D
Michale
But, that's OK.. A win by forfeit is still a win.. :D
Of course, winning or losing is not why we all are here..
We're here to learn and impart wisdom... :D
But, before that can happen, we must agree on the facts...
Michale
Yeah, Kasich is destroying our state. Fitzgerald can't drive.
I think your endless victimization cries finally convinced me though, Michale. I didn't realize it before but you're the true victim. Not people without jobs. Not our country that's been outsourced to China and India. Not dead Michael Brown.
You. You're the victim of mean libural words.
Does it hurt? How can I help?
-David
Yeah, Kasich is destroying our state. Fitzgerald can't drive.
AND seems to like some back seat vooody ohh doe doe with women other than his wife..
BOTH would be heinous crimes if the guy had a '-R' after his name.. :D
You. You're the victim of mean libural words.
"Al, what are you doing? Why are you bringing me into this??"
-Robin Williams, ALADDIN
:D
It's not about me..
It's about the totally BS idea that Democrats are somehow better than Republicans despite ALL the evidence to the contrary..
It's about the notion around here that, when Democrats win elections it's because it's the will of the people and because Democrats are so gosh darned awesome, but when Republicans win elections it's because of gerrymandering and voter suppression and nefarious schemes..
What it's ultimately about is that, contrary to Weigantian popular opinion, Democrats are NOT god's gift to the world, as clearly evidenced by the FACT that this country's economy and this country's place on the world stage is totally and completely decimated...
Thanx to those gosh darned awesome Democrats..
The only part that is about me is that I helped by voting Democrat...
Biggest mistake of my life... Although, truth be told, Bill Nelson has been a pretty awesome Senator for FL and I will likely vote for him next time around..
Michale
I mean, seriously...
You claim that Republicans are in bed with corporations.
Yet, your Obama Administration is in bed with those SAME corporations and did not hold ANY of them accountable for their nearly criminal malfeasence and incompetence..
Yet, it's the Republicans who earn your scorn and ire and Obama and the Democrats get a pass...
That just one of a multitude of contradictions that plague ya'all's ideological devotion...
Michale
Ya'all decry big money in elections...
Yet, Democrats are outspending Republicans 4 to 1....
And not a word from Weigantians...
ANOTHER contradiction....
It's apparent that EVERYTHING ya'all are against is solely and completely based on whether or not it's a Democrat or Republican...
If a Republican goes to war, he is a war-monger or a hitler..
If a Democrat goes to war, it's not even discussed...
If a Republican goes all out in domestic surveillance, the hysterical scream reach a crescendo...
If a Democrat far exceeds that in domestic surveillance, it doesn't even warrant ANY condemnation at all...
I could go on and on (and often do) pointing out the blatant contradictions in ya'alls beliefs...
But it all boils down to two simple statements..
If a Republican does it it's evil and bad..
If a Democrat does it, it's good and proper..
Michale
“Either the president doesn't read the intelligence he’s getting or he’s bullshitting.”
-Pentagon Intelligence Official
Once again, Obama blames anyone and everyone but himself..
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/28/why-obama-can-t-say-his-spies-underestimated-isis.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/09/29/the-odds-of-republicans-winning-the-senate-are-growing/
Read 'em and weep, people...
Michale
"Yawn"
Examines Michale's acussations.
Thinks very seriously about a point by point rebuttal.
Why bother? Michale is fucking stupid and always will be.
Com back when you discover the history section in your local library.
Pro Tip: Dan Brown, not a historian.
Thinks very seriously about a point by point rebuttal.
Why bother?
Yes, why bother.. Because, as usual, my facts are impeccable... :D
Michale is fucking stupid and always will be.
Although I am never one to resort to spelling lames, if yer gonna call someone "fucking stupid", perhaps it would behoove you to make sure your "fucking spelling" is at least somewhat above a 2nd grade level..
Just a "Pro Tip".... :D
Michale
Michale,
Kudos on the music quote!! :D One of my favorite EAGLES songs.....Nice one.. :D
Thank-you ... thank-you very much. :)
I'm pretty sure that there is an Eagles lyric to cover every one of life's situations. That's why they are so popular and always will be.
By the way, you have an uncanny knack for reversing the passion, as they say. I guess that's why I'm not really already gone. :)
:-D
"Yes, why bother.. Because, as usual, my facts are impeccable."
Hahaha omg, the fact that you really, truly, sincerely believe that always gets to me Michale. Funniest/Saddest thing you've ever posted.
Michale is fucking stupid and always will be.
YYAssyrian, I know Michale can get under people's skin but he's certainly not stupid.
Have you ever thought maybe getting to people is the point?
Now I can't speak for Michale but I can tell you that other people have advocated for this strategy. Quite effectively sometimes I might add. What if Michale believes that the moment he gets to you is the moment he's won?
Now you could play the counter game and try to get to him, but what would that accomplish? Is there a reason divide and conquer games work so well for corporate special interest groups?
Or, as you mentioned, you could spend a lot of time rebutting his arguments. We both pretty much know how that will go.
Or, you can just enjoy Michale and focus on other things (like people you can win over) if he gets to you. I happen to like Michale because he pushes me on my arguments. I accept that I'm not likely going to change him and I'm ok with that. Sometimes it's just good to have someone with a different perspective to talk things through with.
Sometimes people don't understand why I like him. It's pretty easy though. He likes Star Trek. He cares about his family. He knows a lot about IT and things like security systems. He likes beer. He likes CW.
And yeah, sometimes it's hard to see this because, well, we're online and we get into the thick of stupid politics.
Politics is stupid. Michale is not.
-David
David,
That was very nicely stated.
I would just add that Michale likes the Eagles and thinks Biden is okay. That says a lot about him and it's all good.
Getting to people probably is the point. So you got me there.
But he still can't grok even basic history.
agreed, david. politics is absolutely stupid, which is why CW calls this the silly season. it's all your fault, jafar!
http://youtu.be/-77cUxba-aA
YoYo,
Getting to people probably is the point. So you got me there.
With the utmost respect to David, it really isn't the point..
My actions really don't have a point beyond imparting and soaking up knowledge and wisdom...
If people are provoked into outrageous acts of verbal violence, well.. That's on them, isn't it??
But he still can't grok even basic history.
You mean I can't grok YOUR version of basic history... That's your problem, YoYo.. You want your own facts, your own history to rule the debate..
But, as I have amply proven beyond any doubt, your facts are not THE facts.. YOUR "facts" are that Ferguson and Sanford was all about racism. THE facts, the REAL facts, prove just the opposite.. That neither had ANYTHING to do with racism..
Your history is Left Winger sanitized version where Democrats are awesome and anything Right Wing is the epitome of ultimate evil... YOUR history shows that the KKK was actually a product of the Right, but they just pretended to be Democrats.. The REAL history shows that the Democratic Party WAS the KKK....
It's like a Vulcan talking with a Ferengi without the benefit of a Universal Translator..
There simply is absolutely NO common frame of reference.. :D
Michale
David,
Sometimes people don't understand why I like him. It's pretty easy though. He likes Star Trek. He cares about his family. He knows a lot about IT and things like security systems. He likes beer. He likes CW.
I heard "beer" and then what?? :D
Seriously, though.. Throughout my entire online experience, from FIDO thru USENET and now in blogging, there has always been debate on exactly what my motives are.. And I have always answered the same. There is no hidden agenda, no ulterior motives.. There is nothing to "get"... I am what I am. Warts and all.. :D
Michale
Liz,
I would just add that Michale likes the Eagles and thinks Biden is okay. That says a lot about him and it's all good.
How can anyone NOT like The Eagles?? :D
Michale
agreed, david. politics is absolutely stupid, which is why CW calls this the silly season. it's all your fault, jafar!
http://youtu.be/-77cUxba-aA
Was that Chelsea Clinton!!????
Michale
Your history is Left Winger sanitized version where Democrats are awesome and anything Right Wing is the epitome of ultimate evil.
What would you call your version then, Michale?
The "truth"?
My actions really don't have a point beyond imparting and soaking up knowledge and wisdom.
Everyone has an agenda, Michale. Whether you know about it or not.
If we didn't, we wouldn't get so worked up. It is amusing watching people try to claim the mantle of objectivity though. Liberals, conservatives, etc.
I don't think there's anything wrong with having an "agenda". I have an agenda. My agenda, for example, is democracy and a working economy.
-David
How can anyone NOT like The Eagles?? :D
LOL ... now you're really trying to get my goat!!!
Do I really have to explain this? (hint: Desparado)
:)
-David
BTW, I saw this posted this morning:
Definition of a "statesman": A dead politician.
We need more statesmen.
What would you call your version then, Michale?
The "truth"?
"Archaeology is the search for FACTS, not truth. If it's 'truth' you're after, Professor Tyree's Philosophy class is right down the hall.."
-Indiana Jones
Do I really have to explain this? (hint: Desparado)
One of the best songs ever!!! :D
I am kinda partial to Hotel California.. :D
Definition of a "statesman": A dead politician.
We need more statesmen.
Can't argue with the logic..
Ever read TERM LIMITS?? :D
Michale
Heheh. But Indy did have an anti-fascist agenda, didn't he?
Facts are good things. For example, knowing that if you let go of a book, it will fall down. They're much more useful, however, when you can put them into an "agenda" though.
For instance an "agenda" about gravity where Force = mass * acceleration or F=ma.
Acceleration is 9.8 m/s^2.
Using this "agenda" about gravity, I can tell you with exactly how much force an object will impact the ground.
Now, of course, this "agenda" needed to be updated a bit when relativistic mechanics came along and offered an entirely new paradigm shift, but it is still quite a useful "agenda".
I am kinda partial to Hotel California.. :D
NNnnnnoooooooo!!!! *smashes radio into thousands of bits*
-David
Heheh. But Indy did have an anti-fascist agenda, didn't he?
Facts are good things. For example, knowing that if you let go of a book, it will fall down. They're much more useful, however, when you can put them into an "agenda" though.
For instance an "agenda" about gravity where Force = mass * acceleration or F=ma.
Acceleration is 9.8 m/s^2.
Using this "agenda" about gravity, I can tell you with exactly how much force an object will impact the ground.
Now, of course, this "agenda" needed to be updated a bit when relativistic mechanics came along and offered an entirely new paradigm shift, but it is still quite a useful "agenda".
I am kinda partial to Hotel California.. :D
NNnnnnoooooooo!!!! *smashes radio into thousands of bits*
-David
Heheh. But Indy did have an anti-fascist agenda, didn't he?
Touche...
I should clarify and say that I don't have any kind of agenda posting here in Weigantia, beyond having fun discussions, intense debates and camaraderie.. :D
I am kinda partial to Hotel California.. :D
NNnnnnoooooooo!!!! *smashes radio into thousands of bits*
Welcome to the Hotel California...
Such a lovely place... Such a lovely face...
Plenty of room at the Hotel California...
Any time of year, you can find it here...
:D hehehehehehehe
It's funny.. I knew a guy in high school in Red Bank, New Jersey...
He swore up and down that the song dealt with a robot takeover of a California hotel that transported guests to another dimension...
I tried to convince him that it was all about drug addiction, but he wasn't buying..
:D
Michale
I should clarify ...
Fair enough. I respect you for this.
He swore up and down that the song dealt with a robot takeover of a California hotel that transported guests to another dimension.
Holy interplanetary Don Henley, Batman!
I tried to convince him that it was all about drug addiction, but he wasn't buying.
Perhaps because of the drugs he was on ...? :)
Perhaps because of the drugs he was on ...? :)
Could be.. It WAS New Jersey, after all.. :D
Michale
Holder urges tech companies to leave device backdoors open for police
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/09/30/holder-urges-tech-companies-to-leave-device-backdoors-open-for-police/
To paraphrase Toby Keith...
"How Do You Like Him Now??"
:D
Michale
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/17/woman_allegedly_attacked_roommate_for_listening_to_the_eagles/
I still have an Eagles T-shirt that I bought at a concert 34 years ago. It's one of those baseball jerseys with the long sleeves. I still could wear it, but I haven't in many years - too busy being fabulous.
Heh.
You are right about there being no frame of reference. But It's not my problem that you've taken such a deep dive in obvious bullshit that you can't get anyone else to take a swim with you.
See this is the thing Michale, I know that you can't understand Race and racism in America. This much is obvious. Your racism set so deep inside your brain that it reaches out for anything in order to justify itself.
Take Ferguson. Race is hugely important to understanding the context of the events there. Just like it is to understanding American history. This is not left wing propaganda, this is the reality we live in. However if you willfully ignore race, then sure we can see how you twisted your brain arrive at that point. That doesn't make it better however, it just means you had to erase a history that goes back to 1619 in order to justify your position that Michael Brown was a "good kill." A history of Emmett Till and lynching and constant unremitting violence by whites upon black males.
History doesn't bother me the way it does you. I don't need to edit it, I don't need to deny it, it's just there and it informs my world view. The fact that white southerners were a key part of the new deal coaltion is just fact. Just like how they are a key part of the current Republican position. It tells us how we got from point A to point B.
And it further informs why you are so desperate to keep the history of the south "democratic" so to speak. Acknowledging the mere fact that Alabama votes Republican these days is beyond you.
Which just goes to show you, I am most certainly not off the liberal deep end of history, go read some Howard Zinn if you want a taste of that. And it's also not my problem that conservative thought actively needs false history in order to justify myself. The problem isn't history, or my facts. the problem is that your political ideology cannot be reconciled to an accurate view of history. Which is really too bad.
Might have headed this off at the pass for instance.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/sam-brownbacks-tax-cut-push-puts-kansas-out-on-its-own-1402448126
Stupid is as stupid does.
Nice speech...
Only ONE thing missing..
Facts....
Give me ONE fact that race played a part in Ferguson..
Not code words, not supposition, not fantasy..
ONE FACT that you can point to a say, "See!! That PROVES it was racism"...
You can't do that, because no such fact exists...
So, you can launch into all the pretty speeches you want to. You can call me names, you can damn the Right Wing to hell..
But what you simply CAN'T do is claim that race had anything to do with Sanford or Ferguson...
Because you have NO FACTS to back it up...
Michale
Hell, I'll make it even easier for you..
Point to ONE bona fide factual instance of racism committed by Republican leadership in Obama's entire presidency..
Oh, and provide the facts to support the claim.. No "code words", no innuendo, no hearsay, no rumor...
FACT....
Unimpeachable, unequivocal, inarguable, dead on ballz accurate FACT...
Shirley you can do at least THAT, right??
A thousand quatloos says ya can't.... :D
Michale
Dem leader calling for Secret Service Director resignation..
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/219418-cummings-on-secret-service-director-i-think-this-lady-has-to-go
Democrats and their war on women.. Jeeesh... :D
Michale
And NOW we have Ebola in the US to contend with...
I tell ya, Obama must be thinking the gods are out to get him, eh???
Michale
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/10/01/boston-herald-apologizes-for-obama-watermelon-toothpaste-cartoon/
Not everyone has such a racist outlook as the Hysterical Left...
Having said that, I think the cartoon is hilarious! :D
Michale
Ohh look Michale has METRICS!
"YAWN"
Ohh look Michale has METRICS!
You've been hanging around JFC too long...
You are beginning to sound just like him..
In your own little world and making absolutely no sense whatsoever... :D
Michale
However if you willfully ignore race,
EXACTLY!!! You are dead on ballz accurate!!!
I completely and utterly ignore race in my day to day activities.
It's what people who are NOT RACIST do...
The racists are the people who are ALL ABOUT race.. Who care NOTHING about character or integrity.. Those people care ONLY about the color of the skin...
You have hit the nail dead on the head...
Non racist don't think about race at all..
Racists think ONLY about race and nothing else..
We completely agree... :D
Michale
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/10/02/exclusive-george-w-bush-says-some-us-forces-should-have-stayed-iraq
Now THERE is a leader.... A man of honor and integrity...
Granted, he is still a politician, but still....
Michale
http://youtu.be/-77cUxba-aA
Was that Chelsea Clinton!!????
i don't think so, but it is a pretty fracking awesome video.
JL
Willful Ignorance is the best, and george w. bush was the best president.
...
Stupid is as stupid does.
Willful Ignorance is the best, and george w. bush was the best president.
Oh what bullshit...
At least Bush showed LEADERSHIP and didn't give a whit about politics when the safety of the country was at stake..
Bush went against his own Party to do what was right for the country...
THAT is leadership..
Compare that to Obama who doesn't take a dump before holding his finger up to see which way the political winds are blowing..
Face it, Yo Yo... Obama is an Edsel... Pure and simple...
Michale
LoL, the only bullshit you're smelling here is your own.
LoL, the only bullshit you're smelling here is your own.
"Of course, you can PROVE that, right?? Oh that's right, I forgot. You were absent the day they taught LAW at Law School."
-Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN
:D
Michale