« SEIU Threatens Legal Action over Rogue Boy Scout | Main | O Bow Mao »
November 18, 2009
9/11 Mother Dope Slaps Eric Holder
Posted by The MaryHunter at November 18, 2009 6:28 PM
An eye-opening moment from Alice Hoagland, who lost her son on Flight 93, as she confronted Holder today:
Again, the Blame Bush meme throughout even this clip, as Holder had do squirmfully deal with a 9/11 relative.
But she had to close with "I will trust you..."
That's the problem with this nation: 53% of us put our trust in an Obama who turns out (*yawn* surprise) to be not at all what he claimed to be. Just how much more trust can we afford?
On a twip from Mary Katherine Ham
Comments
Good Christ! Will SOMEONE please shout in this guy’s face his law firm and other liberal legal influences slowed the ‘process’ in Gitmo trials for 8 years???
http://tinyurl.com/yksyohh
Posted by: drillanwr at November 18, 2009 6:39 PM
Someone should look into charges leveled today that lawyers in Holder's former law firm are representing the terrorists.
Conflict of Interest? ...nah. Standard Operating Procedure in the Skidmark Administration.
Posted by: Stymie at November 18, 2009 6:51 PM
Mark Levin played a clip from the Senate hearing today of Goober Lindsay Graham asking Holder where he would try Osama bin Laden if he was suddenly captured. Holder started stuttering and said "well, we would go through our protocols". Lindsay asked him why he would try Osama somewhere different than KSM? Holder just couldn't speculate because he would have to look at the evidence and facts leading to the capture. Then Lindsay gave him the wallop: In federal court a criminal case is governed by constitutional protections such as the Fifth Amendment and the rules of evidence. The law is clear that if KSM was not mirandized then his confession does not come into evidence (so wait for that one!). Levin asked if Osama was going to have the constitutional right to face his accusers from the battlefield. This is how ridiculous it is to criminalize a national security/military defense matter.
People are asking why Obama and Holder want to try KSM in a federal court. Well, kids, it's all about politics. If KSM goes to federal court, there will be a suppression hearing on whether his confession comes in. His defense is that his confession was coerced through torture. Therefore, the confession doesn't come in. If the government is unable or unwilling to produce intelligence information or other credible witnesses, KSM walks. THe point of all this? Twofold.
1. KSM was tortured under Bush therefore it's all Bush's fault that he walked.
2. It will provide a distraction from the economy and rally his leftie base prior to the 2010 elections.
It should be no surprise to anyone here that Obama is willing to put politics ahead of our national security. This is just disgusting. I hope Congress grows a spine and insists that the decision be rescinded. BTW, Obama promised in his campaign that terrorists would not be mirandized. The FBI is in Afghanistan mirandizing the terrorists we capture. Since the point of capture is to obtain intelligence, the intelligence debriefer does not start with these words: You have the right to remain silent. See how ridiculous this is? Do you wonder that our troops in Afghanistan are demoralized? The ROE say our troops can't shoot until they are shot at; the terrorists are mirandized; and the General's request for more troops sits on the back burner.
If the trial goes forward in federal court, I expect this to blow up in Obama's face. He has a tin ear to the desires of patriotic Americans. I think he's going to get another big wake up call if someone doesn't save him from this folly. Where's the WaPo? The New York Waste of Times?
Posted by: TrickleUpPolitics at November 18, 2009 7:02 PM
"That's the problem with this nation: 53% of us put our trust in an Obama who turns out (*yawn* surprise) to be not at all what he claimed to be."
That's really the point, isn't it? He HAS turned out to be EXACTLY what the other 49% of us knew him to be in our very marrow.
Posted by: Ziggy at November 18, 2009 7:39 PM
"That's the problem with this nation: 53% of us put our trust in an Obama who turns out (*yawn* surprise) to be not at all what he claimed to be."
That's really the point, isn't it? He HAS turned out to be EXACTLY what the other 49% of us knew him to be in our very marrow.
Posted by: Ziggy at November 18, 2009 7:39 PM
Goober Graham nailed him...sort of. This woman nailed him...sort of.
It wasn't a great day for Holder, but he could have been shot out of the water. I don't understand why everyone is so damn afraid to shove the policies, gaffs and seditious behavior RIGHT BACK IN THEIR FACES.
Hey, this isn't negative politics or "gotcha" or partisan rhetoric: YOU GUYS DID (and said) IT! Now that you've got your collective (and I do mean "collective") tits in a wringer, EXPLAIN YOURSELVES. You CAN'T? Then that sort of explains it FOR you, doesn't it?
The tide has turned. Even liberal friends of mine (those that aren't Kool-Aid drinkers) are getting it and going "...but..."
The tide has turned.
2010, baby!
Posted by: Wyatt's Torch at November 18, 2009 7:52 PM
A Canadian writer of British ancestry has coined a phrase after watching Britain give away her country to the Jihadists:
“Come back Luftwaffe, all is forgiven!”
Sadly, we're about to follow Britain's lead.
Posted by: Sylvia at November 18, 2009 7:58 PM
I have the greatest respect and sympathy for anyone who lost a loved one on 9/11 but I think Ms. Hoagland is an extremely naive individual who does not understand the real reason for and consequences of the decision to try KSM and the other terrorists in New York. She completely bought into Holder's line of BS. The reason these terrorists were not tried years ago is because of legal obstacles put in the way by Holder's law firm and others. It took years for Congress to codify policies acceptable to the Supreme Court. One of Obama's first acts was to put a halt to the military tribunals that were suppose to begin last January. Moving the trials into a Federal Court will guarantee that there will be at least four more years of delay before justice is finally served (maybe). I believe this decision is connected with another terrible decision Obama and Holder made several months ago to investigate CIA interrogators for possible crimes for using enhanced interrogation techniques. Holder is giving KSM a platform to, in essence, testify against the CIA agents and boslter his claim they acted illegally. This will be another blow to the morale of our intelligence agencies. Ms. Hoagland has apparently forgotten that the 9/11 Commission determined the leading cause for the 9/11 attacks which killed her son was a failure of our intelligence agencies. Obama and Holder are doing everything imaginable to put our intelligence agencies back to where they were before 9/11. Osama bin Laden must be laughing his head off in his cave in Pakistan watching our buffoon in chief and his AG make complete fools of themselves.
Posted by: JerryM at November 18, 2009 8:20 PM
Even when Americans get into the faces of those in power, we're more polite and reasonable than the Reds when they do so.
A Red - e.g., a Code Pink dumbass, or other liberal - would've thrown red paint or cow's blood (we can only hope that that's would it would be) on Holder, and started screaming "Murderer!" at him hysterically until forcibly dragged out.
Ms. Hoagland calmly and politely made her point, treating Holder with courtesy and respect (the latter of which he most certainly does not deserve).
This is one reason why Americans' wishes are not taken as seriously as Reds'; we're too adult.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 18, 2009 8:34 PM
Holder responded to her with equal respect.
Posted by: Lao at November 18, 2009 8:38 PM
I would have spat in her face if I were Holder. America got what it deserved on 9/11. If KSM is acquitted, Bush's humiliation will be complete.
Posted by: Lao at November 18, 2009 8:59 PM
Typical right wing name highjacking and it's happening in multiple threads. How do you like the courage and integrity of your side so far?
Posted by: Lao at November 18, 2009 9:10 PM
Eric Holder as vile as all members of obamas LEGION OF DOOM
Posted by: SPURWING PLOVER at November 18, 2009 9:14 PM
I know or care nothing for integrity. As a left wing liberal, I live by Alinsky rules and am willing to do anything and everything to destroy this facist nation.
Posted by: Lao at November 18, 2009 9:15 PM
Um "Lao" that would be "fascist". At least learn to spell, I would hate to get a bad name around here. LOL!!
Posted by: Lao at November 18, 2009 9:21 PM
Holder's actions treated her with disrespect. Get your head out of your ass.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 18, 2009 10:02 PM
Besides which, he could hardly do anything else, especially with a zillion cameras on him. What was he going to do, punch her out, like that shithead at Columbia? Holder more or less had to take it.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 18, 2009 10:03 PM
it's funny that the same guys here who ridicule any opposition to their idiocy as coming from "anonymous trolls" then turn around and post repeatedly under other users names. Who are the trolls? I'd say the regulars here are the lowest of the low, by any standard.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 19, 2009 3:54 AM
Again, what Holder is saying is SCREW YOU, we'll do as we damn please. Exactly what the Obama administration has told all AMERICANS since his election.
Oh yes, "lowest of the low, by any standard." LEAVE dip shit, no one is forceing you to stay here TROLL. DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU!! ;-))
Posted by: TED at November 19, 2009 5:47 AM
Posted by: TED at November 19, 2009 7:10 AM
Lao:
Let me help you.
When you are namejacked the resulting post is what everyone expects you to think and say.
In short, they beat you to it.
It is more efficient than saying "No doubt Lao would say..." and then you follow up with a prissy denial that you would not use those exact words and so on.
I suggest you just read the namejacked post and nod and say, "Well, that saves me wasting time putting my point of view. A bit uncouth, or poorly phrased, but capturing the essence of my usual post."
I hope I have helped you here. It distresses me to see so many people laughing at you.
Posted by: Jim at November 19, 2009 1:34 PM
Thanks Jim. You don't know what you are talking about.
Posted by: Lao at November 19, 2009 2:35 PM
Get used to it, Lao. You irritate us; name-jackers irritate you. I don't see a problem either way.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 19, 2009 2:45 PM


