There was a massive amount of financial crime which resulted in the financial catastrophes and bank bailouts at the end of the Bush and beginning of the Obama administration.
No AG would have prosecuted the banks. If they’re too big to fail, they’re too big to sue to death. If a nominee says he would prosecute the banks, he’s doomed to be rejected.
Fast & Furious, spying on reporters, not enforcing immigration law (and SUING states that would), the piss-poor defense of Obamacare, suing states with voter ID laws, and otherwise politicizing every issue and not giving a rat’s ass about the actual law he is sworn to protect.
Other than these things, he was a great Attorney General.
I think we can all agree, though, that he’s still one of the worst. If you made a list of all the worst US attorneys general, I’ll bet he’d be in the top 100. Probably even in the top 50.
The government allows the sale of firearms to drug cartels, which later turn up in dozens of crime scenes including the killing of Americans, and you say “non-scandal?”
I think that’s all I needed to see from you. You can find your own cites for the others.
Yeah, why should the Attorney General being concerned with whether or not people can vote?
You guys, I just died laughing.
But I’ll come back from the dead to say that while I thought a few years ago that he should’ve quit over Fast and Furious - which turned out to be less scandalous than I thought - his work on sentencing reform and civil rights is tremendously meaningful, and so is his recent work with regard to policing and community relations. All of that would represent a huge improvement to the justice system.