Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is what will be filed tomorrow.I am not sure there is anything to celebrate here.
For one thing all this political crap, valid or not, must make us look like fools in he world.
Second, if nothing comes of this then the Republicans in the House will once again look like they are doing nothing but playing politics which I hope they are not doing. I hope they already have the goods on him and are not just doing this to get the democrats to not vote to have him removed. That is bad politics in my opinion.
In the end if he is guilty as charged then both sides should be happy that justice is served, but I doubt that will be the case.
CHARGES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST ERIC HOLDER:
The Articles of Impeachment lay out four charges:
1.Refusal to comply with the subpoena issued by the Oversight Committee regarding Fast and Furious. This violates 2 U.S.C. 192
2.Failure to enforce DOMA, the Controlled Substances Act, and the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. This violates the AGs oath of office.
3.Refusal to prosecute the IRS officials involved in the targeting and disclosure of tax records to political donors. This violates Mr. Holders oath.
4.False testimony under oath before Congress in May 2013 about the Justice Department investigation of journalist James Rosen. This is a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1621.
We will have the FINAL language as soon as it is published.
Yawn, do Republicans ever get tired of introducing or blabbing about "impeachment." You know what, keep doing it...it just proves what dunces they are.
Doesn't matter. It is a political gimmick that may backfire on the GOP.
Oh, brother. Go ahead with this crap - the next government shut down looms ... no worries! This is more important.
Can you go back and edit the post making paragraphs? It would be easier to read. Thanks.Of course all the political operatives on the board will minimize this with the accuasation that there is nothing here.
Here are the details of Article IV from: Republican Congressman from Texas seeks to impeach Attorney General Eric Holder | Gretawire
Article IV
Eric H. Holder, Jr., while Attorney General of the United States, testified under oath before Congress on May 15, 2013, that he was neither involved in nor had heard of a potential prosecution of the press. However, three days later, the Department of Justice released documents that included a search warrant that named journalist James Rosen as a co-conspirator in an alleged violation of the Espionage Act. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, confirmed to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives in a letter dated June 19, 2013 that he, indeed, approved of the search warrant on James Rosen.
Misleading Testimony to Congress
On May 15, 2013, Attorney General Holder appeared before the House Judiciary Committee for its annual Justice Department oversight hearing. In response to a question from Rep. Hank Johnson regarding the use of the Espionage Act to prosecute members of the media, Mr. Holder testified, under oath: Well, I would say this. With regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material, that is not something that I have ever been involved, heard of, or would think would be a wise policy [emphasis added].[12]
The following week it was revealed that, in 2010, the Justice Department obtained a search warrant for the emails of FOX News Chief Washington Correspondent James Rosen, alleging that he was a possible co-conspirator to State Department employee Stephen Kim in violation of the Espionage Act.[13] In a letter to the House Judiciary Committee dated June 13, 2013, Attorney General Holder wrote:
As you know, in the course of the ongoing investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information that appeared in a news article in June 2009, the Department, with my approval, sought a search warrant for a reporters emails from an internet service provider.[14]
In admitting that he approved the search warrant, Attorney General Holder directly contradicts his testimony on May 15, 2013. Clearly, Attorney General Holder knew that the Justice Department was investigating James Rosen as a co-conspirator in alleged violations of the Espionage Act as early as June 2009. Under the Privacy Protection Act, journalists cannot be investigated in order to obtain information about a third party. The fact that there was a search warrant carried out on James Rosen means that the Justice Department either intended to prosecute him, or the Justice Department clearly violated the Privacy Protection Act.
Why is this offense impeachable?
In United States v. Dunnigan, the Supreme Court used the following definition that has gained general acceptance and common understanding under the federal criminal statue to describe the crime of perjury, as defined in 18 U.S.C.1621: A witness testifying under oath or affirmation violates this section if she gives false testimony concerning a material matter with the willful intent to provide false testimony, rather than as a result of confusion, mistake, or faulty memory.[15]
Attorney General Holder provided false testimony to the House Judiciary Committee on May 15, 2013, when he said that he has never been involved with or heard of a potential prosecution of the press. This is a clear violation of 18 U.S.C. 1621.
Oh, brother. Go ahead with this crap - the next government shut down looms ... no worries! This is more important.
What do you not find wrong with this?
4.False testimony under oath before Congress in May 2013 about the Justice Department investigation of journalist James Rosen. This is a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1621.
Do you think a person should give false testimony and not be held accountable?
It doesn't matter what we think. The democrats proved without a doubt that party matters over truth when they let the proven liar Bill Clinton slide. Clinton wasn't impeached for a BJ in the Oval Office. He was impeached for lying under oath in a civil case depriving a woman of her civil rights. Sounds like high crime to me but not to soulless democrats. So I think this will go down the same way. The MSM will paint it like a witch hunt regardless of the evidence and political tools like we see on this board will say there is nothing to these charges. They sound serious to me but then again I thought Billy boy lying under oath was serious. Especially after he waged his finger in our collective faces and lied, lied and lied.
Oh, brother. Go ahead with this crap - the next government shut down looms ... no worries! This is more important.
What do you not find wrong with this?
4.False testimony under oath before Congress in May 2013 about the Justice Department investigation of journalist James Rosen. This is a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1621.
Do you think a person should give false testimony and not be held accountable?
It doesn't matter what we think. The democrats proved without a doubt that party matters over truth when they let the proven liar Bill Clinton slide. Clinton wasn't impeached for a BJ in the Oval Office. He was impeached for lying under oath in a civil case depriving a woman of her civil rights. Sounds like high crime to me but not to soulless democrats. So I think this will go down the same way. The MSM will paint it like a witch hunt regardless of the evidence and political tools like we see on this board will say there is nothing to these charges. They sound serious to me but then again I thought Billy boy lying under oath was serious. Especially after he waged his finger in our collective faces and lied, lied and lied.
Impeach everyone - great plan.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
It doesn't matter what we think. The democrats proved without a doubt that party matters over truth when they let the proven liar Bill Clinton slide. Clinton wasn't impeached for a BJ in the Oval Office. He was impeached for lying under oath in a civil case depriving a woman of her civil rights. Sounds like high crime to me but not to soulless democrats. So I think this will go down the same way. The MSM will paint it like a witch hunt regardless of the evidence and political tools like we see on this board will say there is nothing to these charges. They sound serious to me but then again I thought Billy boy lying under oath was serious. Especially after he waged his finger in our collective faces and lied, lied and lied.
Impeach everyone - great plan.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Reductio ad absurdum
Not everyone just the ones lying under oath. Or doesn't the rule of law mean a damn anymore?
So...how's that impeachment going?
It doesn't matter what we think. The democrats proved without a doubt that party matters over truth when they let the proven liar Bill Clinton slide. Clinton wasn't impeached for a BJ in the Oval Office. He was impeached for lying under oath in a civil case depriving a woman of her civil rights. Sounds like high crime to me but not to soulless democrats. So I think this will go down the same way. The MSM will paint it like a witch hunt regardless of the evidence and political tools like we see on this board will say there is nothing to these charges. They sound serious to me but then again I thought Billy boy lying under oath was serious. Especially after he waged his finger in our collective faces and lied, lied and lied.
