Skip to comments.Exclusive: Holder Says 'No' to Special Counsel to Investigate Benghazi
Posted on 05/15/2013 7:07:26 PM PDT by Justaham
Breitbart News has obtained an exclusive video of Attorney General Eric Holder flatly rejecting the idea of appointing a special counsel to investigate Benghazi.
Filmed on May 15 and provided to Breitbart News by Special Operations Speaks, the video shows Holder emerge from his car and walk towards the Rayburn House Office Building for hearings on the IRS scandal. Holder is clearly asked, "Mr. Holder, will you appoint a Special Counsel to investigate Benghazi?"
In equally clear tones, Holder answers, "No," and disappears into the building.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
It was Patreaus who protested the revisions to the Benghazi talking points. Is that why his affair was revealed?
I don’t think they can. The law was changed in 1999 so that only the Attorney General can appoint a special counsel/investigator.
I believe Congress can appoint a select committee to investigate but the investigation is limited to 90 days. And if I’m not mistaken the end result is that they can recommend that the AG appoint a special counsel...
This is why the Senate confirmation of somebody who hates America is downright dangerous to the country and must NOT be done. Once the guy is in as AG, only impeachment can take him out, and then there’s STILL no AG to appoint special counsel. The AG is a placeholder to keep anybody else from being able to investigate the most serious crimes in the country.
I believe the criteria for confirming an AG should be that they have a solid lifelong history of non-partisan investigation/prosecution. Anybody else in that position is way, way too dangerous for this country to tolerate.
The Obama regime has lied about why they denied security before this attack, why they refused standard protocols during this attack, and why they lied about what really happened after the attack. Those lies are smokescreens to keep from having to say the truth. IOW, the truth is worse than whatever has been allowed to come out thus far.
If Obama is arming terrorists against us (as, for instance, the 20,000+ Manpads that Ty Woods was trying to locate - enough to take down a US 747 every day for the next 54 years!), that would rise to the level of treason.
If they planned on the Al Qaeda-affiliated Ansar al-Islam attacking and capturing Chris Stevens and left him unprotected, leading to his death - that is manslaughter at the very least.
When you look at the way these people desecrated the members of SEAL Team 6 (after setting them up to be slaughtered and then conducting a whitewash “investigation”) - as if it was arranged by our own military for the terrorists to get revenge on those who had allegedly killed Bin Laden - you see a pattern that’s mighty ugly.
And speaking of ugly, it’s also ugly that Michelle Obama visited in the hospital a Saudi who had been tackled at the Boston marathon finish line, whom she knew to be Hamza, the son of Bin Laden. The supposed “first lady” yukking it up with the guy who planned the Boston marathon bombing to avenge the death of his father Osama Bin Laden. The guy’s smiling face was plastered in front of the Muslim world as it was reported that Michelle had visited him personally. He didn’t even have to work to get Michelle to put out for him; she came to him in full view of the Muslim world. And afterwards, CIA and/or FBI whistleblowers risked 20 years in prison to give the evidence of what had happened to 10 members of Congress and to Glenn Beck who then gave the documentation to all the media companies. And the media companies watched Michelle Obama put out for Bin Laden’s son in full view of everybody and did nothing about it.
So that’s 2 instances where it really looks like Valerie Jarrett’s Iranian and terrorist “friends” were able to get “payback” for the killing of Bin Laden, with a little help from Valerie Jarrett’s puppet regime.
I hope Valerie Jarrett learns the hard way what she gloated over shortly before the stolen 2012 election: “Payback’s a b!tch.”
Question: Does the DOJ need to be involved in appointing a Special Counsel? Is this some the House can do on their own?
can’t say I blame him
remember Fitzgerald or Walsh
or Jaworski even
they all have bitten the hand that fed them
The irony about this is that while our privacy is being invaded by the government, and the IRS is demanding intrusive information from private citizens, there are layers and layers of secrets held by the Obama administration. We don't know where much of the money came from that financed his campaigns. We've never seen his college transcripts. A US military physician went to jail because this administration refused to provide a verifiable paper notarized copy of his Hawaii birth certificate. And, the influence and connections to shadowy figures like Soros remain obscure.
Obammy used the fbi to gather dirt on every member of congress and the senate.
You think these punks will do anything?
Not gonna happen.
They’ve all been neutered.
Bet she has one big, bad Swiss Bank account.
At least Holder is an objective and neutral voice in all this. Imagine how bad it could be if he were an angry, racist, radical socialist who didn’t like America and would do anything to bring her down?
Well this should be fun.
Holder is never going to appoint a special counsel for anything. He will have to be indicted and removed and Barry Soetoro, Barack Obama, Steve Dunham or whatever his name is will have to be impeached.
They are delaying until they appoint the two new SCOTUS judges, then all will be ok. /sarc
Likewise, the GOP will be delaying all this to bring it closer to the election. /puke
I keep seeing references to this alleged debauchery in comments here and on other discussion boards but have yet to read any real reference. What is your source for stating the Ambassador was either pre- or posthumously defiled?