# Obama Gets Holder Off The Hook\_Implications? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 20, 2012, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753 "2012-06-20T15:07:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/21 "2012-06-20T18:22:25Z")
> [@furt](#): > > Obama was unwilling to hand them Holder’s scalp Exactly- which is perhaps not surprising given what Congressional Republicans have done with smaller controversies or complete non-controversies. But I think you’re kidding yourself if you think this could have been minimized. The attorney general resigning under pressure is a huge deal and would have been revived as an election issue under any circumstance, and I’m guessing there would’ve been an investigation even if Holder were out on the street. Oh, and then there’s the matter of getting another AG approved. I’m not saying this is the right choice, but I think you’re looking at this like it’s a staffer saying something embarrassing in a leaked memo or an ugly-looking disclosure from a committee member, and it isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/22 "2012-06-20T18:33:21Z")
Maybe that Obama is worried that if he tosses out Holder, he’ll never get a replacement confirmed through a fillibuster happy senate. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/23 "2012-06-20T20:07:38Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Exactly- which is perhaps not surprising given what Congressional Republicans have done with smaller controversies or complete non-controversies. But I think you’re kidding yourself if you think this could have been minimized. The attorney general resigning under pressure is a huge deal and would have been revived as an election issue under any circumstance, and I’m guessing there would’ve been an investigation even if Holder were out on the street. Oh, and then there’s the matter of getting another AG approved. I’m not saying this is the right choice, but I think you’re looking at this like it’s a staffer saying something embarrassing in a leaked memo or an ugly-looking disclosure from a committee member, and it isn’t. Of course it’s a big deal. There is no way for it not to be a big deal. But after he’s shitcanned, he’s much less of a target; pubs can keep flogging the issue, but they get a lot less traction if Obama’s answer is “Yeah, I know, that’s why he’s gone.” With him still in office, Obama has to stand up and defend the guy. And given the way he’s been cocking this up, it figures he will continue to say and do questionable things. I’d prefer people not ask embarrassing questions about the women I date. But if I take it as a given that people are going to bring it up at parties in an attempt to make me look bad, I’d much prefer it be my \*\*\*ex-\*\*\*girlfriends they’re making fun of. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/24 "2012-06-20T20:14:30Z")
> [@furt](#): > > But after he’s shitcanned, he’s much less of a target; pubs can keep flogging the issue, but they get a lot less traction if Obama’s answer is “Yeah, I know, that’s why he’s gone.” Yes, then he just has to justify hiring him and deal with a Senate confirmation hearing (spoiler alert: it’ll get filibustered). Holder should probably be out, but since axing him and keeping him both offer serious negatives, I’m not surprised he’s still there. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/25 "2012-06-20T20:44:51Z")
If this controversy is actually meant to be tried in the court of public opinion, it may come down to a popularity contest. Obama and his approval rating of 45%, and Congress with its approval rating of 9%. I would not rule out that the public would see this as Washington politics as usual, and decide that even though Holder isn’t a very well-regarded person, people _loooooove_ to hate whiny, partisan congressmen. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/26 "2012-06-21T01:04:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In my opinion, the President’s claims of executive privilege must be given great deference. If Obama says its privileged, then it’s privileged. Period. Of course you would agree that the Administration should be prepared to defend this claim for each of the documents in question, and that this privilege cannot be used to shield misconduct (per _U.S. v. Nixon_). Right? ---
**Author:** ![Beastly\_Rotter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@Beastly\_Rotter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beastly_Rotter)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/27 "2012-06-21T01:28:53Z")
> [@Caffeine.addict](#): > > I agree with this. I think that the whole thing is a bit too complicated to distill to a sound bite that will resonate with voters. Vin Diesel drag races Paul Walker. ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/28 "2012-06-21T05:39:06Z")
Or maybe the Obama Shield wasn’t quite so effective. [Panel votes to cite Holder for contempt](http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/20/politics/holder-contempt-qa/index.html) Admitted, politics and the whole process definitely aren’t my strong suite. I believe it’s now scheduled, or due to be scheduled, for a full vote and where it will go next is beyond me. But I think it’s about 6 months too late for a throw Holder under the bus or let him fall on his sword play. There’s too little time for it to fade much before November. So I do think this is going to cost Obama significantly, maybe even a second term. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/29 "2012-06-21T07:14:43Z")
> [@Caffeine.addict](#): > > I agree with this. I think that the whole thing is a bit too complicated to distill to a sound bite that will resonate with voters. “An American border patrol agent was murdered with a weapon that Holder’s Justice Dept. deliberately placed in the hands of Mexican gangs. Holder has been engaged in a coverup to prevent Officer Brian Terry’s parents, and the American people, from learning what really happened. A coverup endorsed by Barack Obama. Why does Obama fear the truth coming out, and what’s he hiding?”’ Seems simple enough to me. Compared with Iran-Contra, this is Dr. Suess territory. ---
**Author:** ![What\_the](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f4b2a3/32.png) [@What\_the](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_the)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/30 "2012-06-21T14:09:57Z")
Does this assertion necessarily mean that Obama or those in his executive office were a part of the discussions or can it be asserted for cabinet offices? ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/31 "2012-06-21T14:41:01Z")
Necessarily? Not really. OTOH, Obama wouldn’t have asserted priviledge because he’d finished his soduku and had nothing better to do. He and his advisors had to know the furor and speculation this action would cause but determined that those problems were preferable to the ones that would be caused by releasing the documents. So if the documents do come out, he get’s beat up for whatever is in them _and_ for attempting to cover them up. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/32 "2012-06-21T14:54:09Z")
> [@Projammer](#): > > Or maybe the Obama Shield wasn’t quite so effective. > > [Panel votes to cite Holder for contempt](http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/20/politics/holder-contempt-qa/index.html) That was going to happen anyway. Obama was asserting the documents are privileged so they don’t have to be turned over to Congress, not to keep Congress from citing Holder for contempt. ---
**Author:** ![mkecane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9e8a1a/32.png) [@mkecane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mkecane)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/33 "2012-06-21T15:50:55Z")
Is there speculation as to why the “Feds” (in quotes because I don’t know exactly who this was, FBI, DOJ, ATF, etc) weren’t just open with the family of the agent who was killed? Or did they lose track of more guns than was to be expected? Either way, I’ve got to think that a gang member in Mexico who’s in a position to shoot a US agent is someone who would have a gun regardless of where it came from. Or did the Feds know who the killer was, but didn’t go after him because they still wanted to follow that gun further up the chain? Please excuse my ignorance to the situation. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/34 "2012-06-21T15:53:06Z")
I think that the justification for keeping some things secret is that it would reveal things about ongoing investigations and/or confidential sources. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/35 "2012-06-21T16:04:26Z")
> [@hajario](#): > > I think that the justification for keeping some things secret is that it would reveal things about ongoing investigations and/or confidential sources. That does not fall under executive privledge. Unless the president is an investigator. Congress deals with classified material which could be harmful to national defense if it got out. Any confidential material does not have to come out in open session. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/36 "2012-06-21T16:23:33Z")
Anyone want to start placing bets as to when Obama is going to kick Holder’s ass down the White House steps? I’m guessing July 4th, with the hope being that not too many people will be watching the news that day. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/37 "2012-06-21T16:53:47Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > That does not fall under executive privledge. Unless the president is an investigator. Congress deals with classified material which could be harmful to national defense if it got out. Any confidential material does not have to come out in open session. Thanks. So what would be a real justification for a President to assert that? ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/38 "2012-06-21T16:54:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m no fan of the Democrats, but I believe Obama has the right to unfettered advice from his subordinates. They have to feel free to give unvarnished opinions and debate without the worry that the information will become public later. > > In my opinion, the President’s claims of executive privilege must be given great deference. If Obama says its privileged, then it’s privileged. Period. I dunno. Under oath, didn’t Holder say that he did not know nor authorize the program? Didn’t he also say that the President also knew nothing? How can there be Executive Priveledged Advice about something they didn’t know about until it blew up on the national news? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/39 "2012-06-21T17:01:43Z")
A new twist: Napolitano apparently lied under oath to Congress when she said she didn’t know about the operation until after the death of the agent. A video is circulating of her talking about the operation in a press conference in 2009, more than a year before Brian Terry was killed. Full press conf: [http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/284798-4](http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/284798-4) Edited to show relevant portions: [- YouTube](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L54gOgJxIRQ#) ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2012, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753/40 "2012-06-21T17:13:13Z")
I personally find it a little hard to believe that, in composing a lie, she completely forgot that she mentioned the same program in public just three years previous. I’d like to confirm that this is the same program, and exactly what she said to Congress. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-gets-holder-off-the-hook_implications/625753.md?page=3)