I’m sure it’s within the statute of limitations. His predecessor should have prosecuted as well, but that does nothing to reduce Holder’s accountability. I suspect the problem stems from the White House: they are discouraging such investigations, being bought out by Wall Street.
Ok, then can you give us the names of the people who broke the law, cite the federal laws they broke, and give us compelling evidence that they broke said laws.
Thanks.
Oh, please. What do you think I am, a federal prosecutor? Do you think only DAs should be able to post to this board?
As noted in the other thread that where you trotted out this unsubstantiated claim, perhaps this little tidbit is why no one is prosecuting Paulsen:
But don’t let that pesky inconvenience get in the way of saying that he should be tried for breaking the law.
Er… you claim that Eric Holder should be forced to resign for refusing to prosecute certain people.
If Eric Holder was really guilty of such flagrant dereliction of duty then it shouldn’t be hard then for you to actually name the people he should have jailed and to list the specific laws they broke.
I’m also a bit surprised that you’re upset at me for asking you to provide such evidence.
If one of the right-wing posters on the site proclaimed that Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi should all be impeached and put in jail I don’t think anyone would find it unreasonable if I were to ask them to name the laws that Obama, Biden, and Pelosi broke as well as evidence they broke them.
I’m sorry, but if you’re unable to provide the names of the alleged lawbreakers or even name the laws that they allegedly broke much less provide evidence of such lawbreaking, then every reasonable person would have to conclude that you made false statements.
Note, false statements does not mean statements that are knowingly false.
Now if you want to rebut the suggestion that your statements are false, then doing so should be childishly simple.
Merely provide the names of the lawbreakers Holder has refused to indict, the names of the laws they broke, and provide evidence of said lawbreaking.
Thanks.
I found some videos of Congerssional Hearings. You may debate at your leisure. It doesn’t change my opinion. On the one hand, Holder doens’t have any answers. On the other hand, they keep interrupting him. On the first hand again, he’s trying to give mealy-mouthed non-statements filled with weasel words and rag it out at length. On the second hand again, I actually feel sorry for the poor bastard.
you left out the preceding line:
Note that there’s no evidence that they did so, not from public documents, but I’m sure Federal investigators studying a fraud case are free to subpoena whatever kind of documents would make their case. So there are a dozen insider trading cases sitting out there waiting to be made, but our Justice dept. does not deign to bother.
I’m also finding it a curious loophole that Paulson can give away insider information without breaking the law whereas corporations being bought/making an IPO are under very strict rules. Boggles the mind. But hey, nobody expects logic and fairness out of Wall Street and Washington any more. Well, I don’t.
I can’t name names, they are the unnamed manager that Hank Paulson spoke to. Plus, there are many allegations that brokers at Goldman Sachs and elsewhere were shorting mortgage-backed securities with the firm’s money while recommending them as sound investments to pension fund managers, which does constitute fraud. However, the Feds, although they’ve issues slap-on-the-wrist fines for this behavior, dont have the balls to send any of the perps to jail or even make them admit wrongdoing. Cite.
Maybe you think this is a fine state of affairs. I don’t.
The interesting thing is that Smiling Bandit and I are both angry with the conduct of Holder and the Justice Dept. for different things, though I agree with him that Fast and Furious was a prime piece of governmental idiocy. The speed and ease with which some people lost their jobs over it makes me think the higher ups were doing it to save their own asses.
Nobody important lsot a job yet. But I must say Eric Holder cannot legally do what you want him to do, and in any case it would be morally wrong: you attribute to malice what is purely foolishness in the vast majority of cases.
They should all resign, but this is reality not ideality, so if he does it’s got nothing to do with “should”. (all of government officials, not just democrats and their appointees, this comment just so I don’t get reaction-splashed by partisans)
I think the head of the ATF should resign over the fast and furious thing. What type of irresponsible asshole allows his agency to go unsupervised like that, it’s almost as if the guy hasn’t shown up to work in years.
Wait, what, Obama’s picks to run the ATF have been blocked since he took office. Maybe rather then trying to string Holder up we should be holding the Republicans responsible for blocking that nomination. I’m willing to bet the ATF might run better if it was allowed to have a leader.
An excellent point. I wonder how the Republicans slipped up and allowed Obama to make an appointment in the first place.