Breaking: Formal Impeachment Charges To Be Introduced Tommorow Against Eric Holder

[Derideo_Te]

Watergate went on for quite some time and it ended a very popular presidency. Because of Watergate we were thrust into the Ford/Carter years ending with Carter's Malaise speech. I believe had Nixon did not step down we would have been economically better off. But we stood as a nation and said that truth and honesty were important. I think it right what happened but there is no doubt in my mind the nation paid a price.

Then we got Clinton and ended all of that. Truth no longer mattered.

If we allow an AG to ignore congress, to not tell the truth to congress, and to run a gun running program incompetently then where are we as a nation?

If the charges are false then damn Congress. But we must hold the AG accountable and he is accountable to Congress. Otherwise we are just a banana republic.

Does the name Ollie North ring any bells when it comes to gun running and lying to Congress?

Just to refresh you memory, North was TRIED and found guilty.

North was tried in 1988. He was indicted on sixteen felony counts, and, on May 4, 1989, he was initially convicted of three: accepting an illegal gratuity; aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry; and ordering the destruction of documents via his secretary, Fawn Hall. He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years' probation, $150,000 in fines, and 1,200 hours community service. Oliver North performed some of his community service within Potomac Gardens, a public housing project in Southeast Washington, DC.[17]

However, on July 20, 1990, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),[18] North's convictions were vacated, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been impermissibly affected by his immunized congressional testimony.[19]

Because North had been granted limited immunity for his Congressional testimony, the law prohibited a prosecutor from using that testimony as part of a criminal case against him. To prepare for the expected defense challenge that North's testimony had been used, the prosecution team had—before North's congressional testimony had been given—listed and isolated all of its evidence.[citation needed] Further, the individual members of the prosecution team had isolated themselves from news reports and discussion of North's testimony. While the defense could show no specific instance in which North's congressional testimony was used in his trial, the Court of Appeals ruled that the trial judge had made an insufficient examination of the issue. Consequently, North's convictions were reversed. After further hearings on the immunity issue, Judge Gesell dismissed all charges against North on September 16, 1991.
Oliver North - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you notice he got convicted of the same thing Holder is charged?

Did you notice that all convictions were overturned and all charges against him were subsequently dismissed?

 

[Freewill]

Does the name Ollie North ring any bells when it comes to gun running and lying to Congress?

Just to refresh you memory, North was TRIED and found guilty.

North was tried in 1988. He was indicted on sixteen felony counts, and, on May 4, 1989, he was initially convicted of three: accepting an illegal gratuity; aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry; and ordering the destruction of documents via his secretary, Fawn Hall. He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years' probation, $150,000 in fines, and 1,200 hours community service. Oliver North performed some of his community service within Potomac Gardens, a public housing project in Southeast Washington, DC.[17]

However, on July 20, 1990, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),[18] North's convictions were vacated, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been impermissibly affected by his immunized congressional testimony.[19]

Because North had been granted limited immunity for his Congressional testimony, the law prohibited a prosecutor from using that testimony as part of a criminal case against him. To prepare for the expected defense challenge that North's testimony had been used, the prosecution team had—before North's congressional testimony had been given—listed and isolated all of its evidence.[citation needed] Further, the individual members of the prosecution team had isolated themselves from news reports and discussion of North's testimony. While the defense could show no specific instance in which North's congressional testimony was used in his trial, the Court of Appeals ruled that the trial judge had made an insufficient examination of the issue. Consequently, North's convictions were reversed. After further hearings on the immunity issue, Judge Gesell dismissed all charges against North on September 16, 1991.
Oliver North - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you notice he got convicted of the same thing Holder is charged?

Did you notice that all convictions were overturned and all charges against him were subsequently dismissed?

Yes, I remember the time very well. He was tried and got off on a technicality. The point was, he was tried.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Just to refresh you memory, North was TRIED and found guilty.

North was tried in 1988. He was indicted on sixteen felony counts, and, on May 4, 1989, he was initially convicted of three: accepting an illegal gratuity; aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry; and ordering the destruction of documents via his secretary, Fawn Hall. He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years' probation, $150,000 in fines, and 1,200 hours community service. Oliver North performed some of his community service within Potomac Gardens, a public housing project in Southeast Washington, DC.[17]

However, on July 20, 1990, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),[18] North's convictions were vacated, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been impermissibly affected by his immunized congressional testimony.[19]

Because North had been granted limited immunity for his Congressional testimony, the law prohibited a prosecutor from using that testimony as part of a criminal case against him. To prepare for the expected defense challenge that North's testimony had been used, the prosecution team had—before North's congressional testimony had been given—listed and isolated all of its evidence.[citation needed] Further, the individual members of the prosecution team had isolated themselves from news reports and discussion of North's testimony. While the defense could show no specific instance in which North's congressional testimony was used in his trial, the Court of Appeals ruled that the trial judge had made an insufficient examination of the issue. Consequently, North's convictions were reversed. After further hearings on the immunity issue, Judge Gesell dismissed all charges against North on September 16, 1991.
Oliver North - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you notice he got convicted of the same thing Holder is charged?

Did you notice that all convictions were overturned and all charges against him were subsequently dismissed?

Yes, I remember the time very well. He was tried and got off on a technicality. The point was, he was tried.

No, the point is that impeachment is a partisan political process. Bringing impeachment action against Holder is going to do more harm to the GOP than it will gain. In politics when your opponent is self destructing the smart move is to stand back and let them proceed.

Who was it that said "Please proceed, Governor Romney" and what was the outcome?

 

[Truthseeker1]

Did you notice that all convictions were overturned and all charges against him were subsequently dismissed?

Yes, I remember the time very well. He was tried and got off on a technicality. The point was, he was tried.

No, the point is that impeachment is a partisan political process. Bringing impeachment action against Holder is going to do more harm to the GOP than it will gain. In politics when your opponent is self destructing the smart move is to stand back and let them proceed.

Who was it that said "Please proceed, Governor Romney" and what was the outcome?

While I fundamentally agree with your statement, it's rather difficult to stand back and watch our justice system implode while Holder procedes with business as usual.

 

[Sarah G]

I find this a bit puzzling - go ahead and Google "Eric Holder impeachment" ... ZERO follow up reports!!! ZERO!!! What the hell happened? I watched the entire HOR proceedings that day - nada!!!

Was this a fake? Why no follow up reports?

Because Republicans are impotent. Case closed.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Yes, I remember the time very well. He was tried and got off on a technicality. The point was, he was tried.

No, the point is that impeachment is a partisan political process. Bringing impeachment action against Holder is going to do more harm to the GOP than it will gain. In politics when your opponent is self destructing the smart move is to stand back and let them proceed.

Who was it that said "Please proceed, Governor Romney" and what was the outcome?

While I fundamentally agree with your statement, it's rather difficult to stand back and watch our justice system implode while Holder procedes with business as usual.

The impeachment charges that are in the OP are not intended to seek "justice". It is utterly ridiculous to charge Holder with failing to enforce a law that the Supreme Court has found to be unconstitutional. That is a mockery of justice if ever there was one. It doesn't get any better when one charge is accusing of failing to investigate while another is accusing him of conducting an investigation. That is on a par with a witch trial where if they float they are a witch and if they drown they aren't. This a travesty that will come back to bite the GOP in 2014 in my opinion.

 

[Freewill]

Did you notice that all convictions were overturned and all charges against him were subsequently dismissed?

Yes, I remember the time very well. He was tried and got off on a technicality. The point was, he was tried.

No, the point is that impeachment is a partisan political process. Bringing impeachment action against Holder is going to do more harm to the GOP than it will gain. In politics when your opponent is self destructing the smart move is to stand back and let them proceed.

Who was it that said "Please proceed, Governor Romney" and what was the outcome?

North was not impeached, he couldn't be impeached.

As for being partisan of course it is usually partisan. Those who president is in the WH will do whatever to protect him. But in my life time I know of only three times impeachment was really seriously mentioned. One was Nixon and he left because it wasn't partisan the Republicans told him it was time to go. Then there was Clinton who was guilty as sin of lying under oath. All a defender can say is him lying under oath is not important, his presidency is more important. So what does that mean to a smuck like me? That I too don't need to tell the truth although I was sworn to not only tell the truth but uphold the truth as was Clinton. Of course the democrat made it totally partisan but it really didn't hurt the Republicans in trying to make truth important. The Republicans won the Presidency and until the disaster of 2007 held congress. Now we have Holder which by what I read did not tell the truth to congress, maybe he had a good reason we can't know. F&F sure sees like a clusterf..k that needs honesty looked at. Can't do that when the man in charge fails to cooperate.

So, if you want what is happening to be the standard for future presidents I think you are mistaken. I think we need a president that leads by example that is honest and trust worthy, Clinton proved not to be by cheating on his wife then lying under oath denying a woman her constitutional right to a fair trial. Holder is at least looking like he did the same.

 

[Truthseeker1]

No, the point is that impeachment is a partisan political process. Bringing impeachment action against Holder is going to do more harm to the GOP than it will gain. In politics when your opponent is self destructing the smart move is to stand back and let them proceed.

Who was it that said "Please proceed, Governor Romney" and what was the outcome?

While I fundamentally agree with your statement, it's rather difficult to stand back and watch our justice system implode while Holder procedes with business as usual.

The impeachment charges that are in the OP are not intended to seek "justice". It is utterly ridiculous to charge Holder with failing to enforce a law that the Supreme Court has found to be unconstitutional. That is a mockery of justice if ever there was one. It doesn't get any better when one charge is accusing of failing to investigate while another is accusing him of conducting an investigation. That is on a par with a witch trial where if they float they are a witch and if they drown they aren't. This a travesty that will come back to bite the GOP in 2014 in my opinion.

I could go on to mention the many abuses of this race baiting AG, but I fear it would be a waste of everyones time. We've all heard the evidence, and it won't change anybody's mind. You progressives keep chugging along with the status quo until the wheels fall off. Just don't knock on my door begging when they do.

 

[Votto]

I find this a bit puzzling - go ahead and Google "Eric Holder impeachment" ... ZERO follow up reports!!! ZERO!!! What the hell happened? I watched the entire HOR proceedings that day - nada!!!

Was this a fake? Why no follow up reports?

Because Republicans are impotent. Case closed.

No, it has more to do with the realization that they are all dirty. If they impeach a political foe, they could be next. That is why the days of impeachment are long over.

 

[Truthseeker1]

I find this a bit puzzling - go ahead and Google "Eric Holder impeachment" ... ZERO follow up reports!!! ZERO!!! What the hell happened? I watched the entire HOR proceedings that day - nada!!!

Was this a fake? Why no follow up reports?

Because Republicans are impotent. Case closed.

No, it has more to do with the realization that they are all dirty. If they impeach a political foe, they could be next. That is why the days of impeachment are long over.

That's the post of the day. Kudos!!!

 

[Zona]

Late to the party. How did it turn out?

Not funny!

High crimes and misdemeanors, buddy!!!

Boner will officially charge him as soon as the looney left allows it!!!

WMD lie and killing over 4k americans and not a fucking single trial "buddy".

 

[freedombecki]

Late to the party. How did it turn out?

Not funny!

High crimes and misdemeanors, buddy!!!

Boner will officially charge him as soon as the looney left allows it!!!

WMD lie and killing over 4k americans and not a fucking single trial "buddy".

The WMD "lie" as you call it was first noted by Madeline Albright of the Clinton State Department, and the recommendation was to go after Saddam Hussein without further delay.

You mean your talking point memo at the Huff 'n' Puff Post didn't tell you that?

Naughty, naughty!

 

[rightwinger]

Why do republicans impeach so much?

Still trying to make up for Nixon?

 

[Truthseeker1]

Perhaps one of you scholars can show me exactly where in our Constitution the provisions for 'executive privilege' [IE; I'm KING, so STFU] are. Since many of you believe this document is an irrelevant antiquity and our Government fails to adhere to it's provisions, I have a modest proposal.
Suppose we scrap it and you can all battle the American Civil War ll that so many of you seem to be thirsting for. In the mean time I'll utilize my passport and liquidate my assets, seeking safer ground. I understand that might be an exercise in futility as modern progressivism is likened to a giant cephalopod, with tenticles stretching throughout the globe.
On a more positive note, due to the fact I recently 'died' twice in an ER cath lab, and have since signed a DNR document.......I likely won't have to endure this bullshit much longer.

 

[freedombecki]

Why do republicans impeach so much?

Still trying to make up for Nixon?

If you don't know, nobody would be able to tell you, Mr. 'right'winger.

 

[rdean]

Republicans have this determination to make themselves look as ridiculous as possible.

 

[R.C. Christian]

Try him as a traitor and execute his worthless black ass. I'm certain we could whip some legitimate charges up.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Yes, I remember the time very well. He was tried and got off on a technicality. The point was, he was tried.

No, the point is that impeachment is a partisan political process. Bringing impeachment action against Holder is going to do more harm to the GOP than it will gain. In politics when your opponent is self destructing the smart move is to stand back and let them proceed.

Who was it that said "Please proceed, Governor Romney" and what was the outcome?

North was not impeached, he couldn't be impeached.

As for being partisan of course it is usually partisan. Those who president is in the WH will do whatever to protect him. But in my life time I know of only three times impeachment was really seriously mentioned. One was Nixon and he left because it wasn't partisan the Republicans told him it was time to go. Then there was Clinton who was guilty as sin of lying under oath. All a defender can say is him lying under oath is not important, his presidency is more important. So what does that mean to a smuck like me? That I too don't need to tell the truth although I was sworn to not only tell the truth but uphold the truth as was Clinton. Of course the democrat made it totally partisan but it really didn't hurt the Republicans in trying to make truth important. The Republicans won the Presidency and until the disaster of 2007 held congress. Now we have Holder which by what I read did not tell the truth to congress, maybe he had a good reason we can't know. F&F sure sees like a clusterf..k that needs honesty looked at. Can't do that when the man in charge fails to cooperate.

So, if you want what is happening to be the standard for future presidents I think you are mistaken. I think we need a president that leads by example that is honest and trust worthy, Clinton proved not to be by cheating on his wife then lying under oath denying a woman her constitutional right to a fair trial. Holder is at least looking like he did the same.

Let's recap the WJC administration so that we have what happened in context. During the campaign before he was even elected the nation discovered that he was a philanderer and a draft dodger and there was the Rose Law firm scandal surrounding his spouse and yet he was still elected. Shortly thereafter one of his supreme court nominations is discovered to have employed an illegal. There was the HilaryCare and Don't Ask, Don't Tell controversies. The Whitewater affair results in the appointment of an Independent Council. The GOP took over the House and proceeded to force a government shutdown. Clinton came out on top and that further infuriated the right. On top of that the Paula Jones lawsuit was thrown out as being baseless. They decided to impeach him on the basis of lying about having an affair. The irony being that 4 or 5 of those leading the impeachment process were equally guilty of having affairs and their careers were ruined while Clinton was acquitted of all charges in the Senate.

The lessons learned were that trying to use the political impeachment process to overturn 2 elections over something as trivial as having an affair is an exercise in futility. The Dems chose not to impeach Bush even after there was clear evidence that he had lied to Congress and the nation about WMD's in order to invade Iraq. The standard for honesty and trustworthiness was not evident when it came to Romney either. All politicians are inherently dishonest since it is part of the job description.

None of the 4 charges against Holder are going to withstand scrutiny in my opinion. They will be exposed as a partisan agenda and as such will backfire on the GOP. The attempt to claim the high ground of demanding "honesty and integrity" will ring hollow once the political agenda becomes apparent. The impeachment process is a double edged sword and it won't produce the result that you expect.

 

[Sarah G]

Why do republicans impeach so much?

Still trying to make up for Nixon?

If you don't know, nobody would be able to tell you, Mr. 'right'winger.

He knows, he just wants to see what your explanations will be.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Late to the party. How did it turn out?

Not funny!

High crimes and misdemeanors, buddy!!!

Boner will officially charge him as soon as the looney left allows it!!!

WMD lie and killing over 4k americans and not a fucking single trial "buddy".

Um ... turn your sarcasm detector on.