Skip to comments.Holder staying on for second term means more of same for Fast and Furious probe
Posted on 11/14/2012 9:26:26 AM PST by marktwain
Most likely ending speculation Eric Holder started last week when he announced he may not stay on for a second term, the New York Post reported today that the attorney general will remain on the job at the request of the president.
Gun Rights Examiner raised troubling concerns that the floated resignation could remove Holder as a subject for further investigation into Fast and Furious gunwalking, and also raised the alarm that potential replacements being discussed in the press must be vetted with the gun issue being a non-negotiable litmus test. Holders reported decision not to resign now means he will still be the top decision-maker responsible for fielding House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform inquiries related to its ongoing investigation.
If the Post report is correct, Holder will stay on knowing he remains under the presidents executive protection. Also to be decided will be his motion that the U.S. District Court has no jurisdiction over the civil contempt of Congress complaint against him, but no matter which way that goes, the case can be dragged on for years via appeals.
This might leave some to speculate, What does Holder have on Obama? Seattle Gun Rights Examiner Dave Workman observed in a report today. This might be a natural progression from the question people were asking this summer when Obama granted executive privilege protection to the subpoenaed documents: What is Obama trying to hide?
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Gunwalker / Murdergate.
Holder is goin down.....book it...I’ll be here
A lot is known about Fast & Furious, so a large organization should conduct a mock *grand jury* inquiry, based on the available information, and listing known participants as “unindicted co-conspirators”, with the presentation of evidence that they *should* be indicted.
Video it as a documentary, and put it out as an “instructional DVD.”
The grand jury is a very interesting thing in common law and history, and though today grand juries are seen as a function of government, this was not always the case:
“Any citizen could bring a matter before a grand jury directly, from a public work that needed repair, to the delinquent conduct of a public official, to a complaint of a crime, and grand juries could conduct their own investigations.
“In that era most criminal prosecutions were conducted by private parties, either a law enforcement officer, a lawyer hired by a crime victim or his family, or even by laymen.
“A layman could bring a bill of indictment to the grand jury; if the grand jury found there was sufficient evidence for a trial, that the act was a crime under law, and that the court had jurisdiction, it would return the indictment to the complainant.
“The grand jury would then *appoint* the complaining party to exercise the authority of an attorney general, that is, one having a general power of attorney to represent the state in the case.”
Now here’s the zinger.
Though today grand juries are conducted differently, much US law is based on this older type of grand jury, so if someone were to conduct a grand jury in this traditional manner, it would have a bizarre resonance throughout the US judicial system.
Federal judges would note that, at least historically, a grand jury of this sort would be enough to indict many of the federal agents and officers involved with Fast & Furious.
Federal judges take this sort of thing very seriously, and it could create some serious judicial animosity to these federals who are hiding behind their badges right now.
Grand jury bump.
A traditional grand jury action makes more sense than the secession tantrum going on now.
It would also make a very clear presentation of Fast & Furious to the public, without the spin, stonewalling, and obstruction that exists right now.
A seasoned prosecutor would present the known evidence to the audience seated as a grand jury, lay down the specifics of the case, and ask that they return an indictment, as if it were a grand jury hearing.
Beyond that, is just the editing and the distribution of the DVD.
He’s in contempt of Congress, why would the Senate re-confirm him?
Probably wouldn’t last more than a few days.
Sign me up.
Still, will McConnell use his confirmation hearing as a de facto Fast and Furious hearing?