• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Kidnapper-in-Chief for Attorney General

Texan

Well-known member
How many of you remember when the Reno Justice Department snatched the little Cuban kid back in 2000? Kidnapped him, actually. Eric Holder was the ringleader of that kidnapping. Interesting interview from 2000 between Holder and Judge Andrew Napolitano of Fox News.

(PS: I found a neat pic to go with it - a pic of a "very sensitive" federal agent - NOT at gunpoint. Just for you Obamaniacs. :wink:)

=============================================


Napolitano: When is the last time a boy, a child, was taken at the point of a gun without an order of a judge. Unprecedented in American history."

Holder: "He was not taken at the point of a gun."

Napolitano: "We have a photograph showing he was taken at the point of a gun."

Holder: "They were armed agents who went in there who acted very sensitively..."


eliansmallx.gif



Napolitano: Tell me, Mr. Holder, why did you not get a court order authorizing you to go in and get the boy?

Holder: Because we didn’t need a court order. INS can do this on its own.

Napolitano: You know that a court order would have given you the cloak of respectability to have seized the boy.

Holder: We didn’t need an order.

Napolitano: Then why did you ask the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for such an order if you didn’t need one?

Holder: [Silence]

Napolitano: The fact is, for the first time in history you have taken a child from his residence at gunpoint to enforce your custody position, even though you did not have an order authorizing it.



http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2008/06/13/obama-vp-committe-member-helped-enable-2000-elian-gonzalez-seizure
 

garn

Well-known member
I was watching Hannity & Colomes tonight on the AG nomination and was thinking this is supposed to be change? Then Breaking News of HRC being named Secretary of State sometime after Turkey Day.

Just how is HRC qualifed to be SOS? Oh let me guess, she's just as qualifed at being this country's top diplomat much the same way she was appointed to attempt to overhaul America's healthcare system.

Change my a$$ :roll:
 

nonothing

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
HRC? Her Royal C---ness?

Where is officer Steve..He never seems to be around when a conservative steps over the same line that he hold the liberals too...Maybe he can start another poll thread about Sandhusker and his langauge,but I bet we do not even hear a peep fron Steve...The hypocrocisy of Officer Steve is again on the fore front....... :roll: :roll: :roll:

Book em Steve "O"
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
The two of you get your minds out of the gutters and stop imagining things that aren't there. HRC=Hillary Rodham Clinton. MAYBE even Her Royal Cuteness. I have been exposed to the foulest of language for close to half a century, and the word you 2 are imagining I have never heard of. Trust me, Mrs. Greg, there is an extremely small number of women in the world that the "C" word does apply to. Not nice, pretty or Christian, but applicable.
 

jigs

Well-known member
I think the "C" word is a very rude word. and I reserve it for very few places....Hillary is one place I would use it repeatedly.....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Mrs.Greg said:
Sandhusker said:
HRC? Her Royal C---ness?
Hmmmm,in my world ANY man that thinks using that as a description of ANY woman is truly no man at all! And you profess to be a Christian..... :?

I am a Christian, but that doesn't prevent one from calling it like you see it. She is one of the nastiest and most dispicable woman that I've ever encountered.
 

Texan

Well-known member
Ummm....well....it was just before dawn...it wasn't really night? LMAO

Here's two interviews that Tim Russert did with Eric Holder - one of them two weeks before the kidnapping and one of them just after it:

Russert, April 9: "You wouldn’t send a SWAT team in the dark of night to kidnap the child, in effect?"

Holder: "No, we don’t expect anything like that to happen. We will do what is necessary to reunite father and son, however."

Back on the April 23 show, Russert asked: "Why such a dramatic change in position?
Holder replied: "I’m not sure I’d call it a dramatic change. We waited till five in the morning, just before dawn..."


http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2000/cyb20000426.asp
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Sandhusker said:
HRC? Her Royal C---ness?
Hmmmm,in my world ANY man that thinks using that as a description of ANY woman is truly no man at all! And you profess to be a Christian..... :?

I am a Christian, but that doesn't prevent one from calling it like you see it. She is one of the nastiest and most dispicable woman that I've ever encountered.

What a shining example you are for your belief system.

I didn't know that Jesus was a hateful sexist and racist.

It's good to find out that all those portayals of him caring for the poor, liberating the downtrodden, and casting out the moneychangers must not be true.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Great, a Clinton truth protoge - it wasn't really sex - it wasn't really night - it wasn't really at gun point.

This is the "change" you libs championed?
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
Texan said:
Ummm....well....it was just before dawn...it wasn't really night? LMAO

Here's two interviews that Tim Russert did with Eric Holder - one of them two weeks before the kidnapping and one of them just after it:

Russert, April 9: "You wouldn’t send a SWAT team in the dark of night to kidnap the child, in effect?"

Holder: "No, we don’t expect anything like that to happen. We will do what is necessary to reunite father and son, however."

Back on the April 23 show, Russert asked: "Why such a dramatic change in position?
Holder replied: "I’m not sure I’d call it a dramatic change. We waited till five in the morning, just before dawn..."


http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2000/cyb20000426.asp
I remember following these events when it was happening,it upset me greatly that it was the little boys life they were playing with,pretty disgusted when that was going on...... :?
 

Texan

Well-known member
badaxemoo said:
Sandhusker said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Hmmmm,in my world ANY man that thinks using that as a description of ANY woman is truly no man at all! And you profess to be a Christian..... :?

I am a Christian, but that doesn't prevent one from calling it like you see it. She is one of the nastiest and most dispicable woman that I've ever encountered.

What a shining example you are for your belief system.

I didn't know that Jesus was a hateful, sexist and racist.

It's good to find out that all those portayals of him caring for the poor, liberating the downtrodden, and casting out the moneychangers must not be true.
Now that you've commented on Sandhusker, maybe you'd like to comment on the selection of Eric Holder for Attorney General? Do you feel like he is the best person for that job and that he represents the "CHANGE" that the voters were promised?
 

Texan

Well-known member
Mrs.Greg said:
I remember following these events when it was happening,it upset me greatly that it was the little boys life they were playing with,pretty disgusted when that was going on...... :?
You're right, Mrs.Greg. It's a sad day when a kid gets caught in the middle of something political like that.

That whole incident was just another example of overreaching federal law enforcement - similar to Ruby Ridge and Waco. Fortunately in this case, the federal agents didn't overreach to the extent that they did in those cases - and no citizens (subjects?) were murdered.
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Texan said:
Now that you've commented on Sandhusker, maybe you'd like to comment on the selection of Eric Holder for Attorney General? Do you feel like he is the best person for that job and that he represents the "CHANGE" that the voters were promised?

Sure. Perhaps you should ask Sandhusker to do the same. Or is it acceptable to you to have someone flinging that kind of misogynistic bile on your thread?

I don't know much about the Elian Gonzales case, other than the outcome was the correct one. As far as the tactics that DOJ used to retrieve the child I'm just not familiar enough to comment.

I am disturbed by the Marc Rich pardon. It stunk from the beginning and it is unfortunate that Holder apparently didn't make a fuss about it, but once again, I don't know what the internal politics were all about concerning his involvement. Bureaucrats make mistakes like anybody else, and I'm betting Holder regrets not throwing the red flag.

Other than that, it appears to me that Holder is extremely well qualified for the position. I don't see any evidence of repeated malfeasance or incompetence in Holder's record like we saw with Gonzales. I think that Obama is being prudent by bringing on board a number of federal bureaucracy veterans.

Clinton and Carter both had very rough transition periods, largely because they appointed too many outsiders that didn't have the necessary connections to be effective out of the gate. I think the Obama transition team understood this.

As far as "change" goes, it's still important to realize that the policy directives will be coming from Obama. The heads of the various administrative agencies have a large influence on the management of operations and they have input into policy, but Obama will be the boss.

Simply putting people that believe in science and the power of the government to protect the public good into some of these agencies will be a radical change for the better.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
badaxemoo said:
Sandhusker said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Hmmmm,in my world ANY man that thinks using that as a description of ANY woman is truly no man at all! And you profess to be a Christian..... :?

I am a Christian, but that doesn't prevent one from calling it like you see it. She is one of the nastiest and most dispicable woman that I've ever encountered.

What a shining example you are for your belief system.

I didn't know that Jesus was a hateful, sexist and racist.

It's good to find out that all those portayals of him caring for the poor, liberating the downtrodden, and casting out the moneychangers must not be true.

Ah, once again, the oxymoron that is Liberal logic. I've called your male chosen one a "snaky btard" several times, but as soon as I call a woman a derogatory term, them I'm a sexist. I've mentioned that I greatly respect Clarence Thomas in several posts, but as soon as I point out that race was the biggest reason Obama is where he is, you call me a racist. I suggest you do some deep knee bends in an asparagus patch.

So, how about Holder being the "top cop" in the country?
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
badaxemoo said:
Texan said:
Now that you've commented on Sandhusker, maybe you'd like to comment on the selection of Eric Holder for Attorney General? Do you feel like he is the best person for that job and that he represents the "CHANGE" that the voters were promised?

Sure. Perhaps you should ask Sandhusker to do the same. Or is it acceptable to you to have someone flinging that kind of misogynistic bile on your thread?

I don't know much about the Elian Gonzales case, other than the outcome was the correct one. As far as the tactics that DOJ used to retrieve the child I'm just not familiar enough to comment.

I am disturbed by the Marc Rich pardon. It stunk from the beginning and it is unfortunate that Holder apparently didn't make a fuss about it, but once again, I don't know what the internal politics were all about concerning his involvement. Bureaucrats make mistakes like anybody else, and I'm betting Holder regrets not throwing the red flag.

Other than that, it appears to me that Holder is extremely well qualified for the position. I don't see any evidence of repeated malfeasance or incompetence in Holder's record like we saw with Gonzales. I think that Obama is being prudent by bringing on board a number of federal bureaucracy veterans.

Clinton and Carter both had very rough transition periods, largely because they appointed too many outsiders that didn't have the necessary connections to be effective out of the gate. I think the Obama transition team understood this.

As far as "change" goes, it's still important to realize that the policy directives will be coming from Obama. The heads of the various administrative agencies have a large influence on the management of operations and they have input into policy, but Obama will be the boss.

Simply putting people that believe in science and the power of the government to protect the public good into some of these agencies will be a radical change for the better.

Badax.....bureaucrats don't make too many mistakes...if they did more of them would be in prison rather than still in government. But they do make a lot of "sweet deals". I have learned over the years that no matter what something appears to be on the surface.....if and when details are revealed it's a totally different situation. Ethics and morals are out the door on both sides of the aisle. Everyone is for sale and many are buying. Pres. Obama can only wish, hope, pray and sign bills. He might veto one now and then but it will be overridden IF it's what congress wants. He'll be nothing but the spokesman for congress....not the people.
 

badaxemoo

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
I am a Christian, but that doesn't prevent one from calling it like you see it

Ah, once again, the oxymoron that is Liberal logic. I've called your male chosen one a "snaky btard" several times, but as soon as I call a woman a derogatory term, them I'm a sexist. I've mentioned that I greatly respect Clarence Thomas in several posts, but as soon as I point out that race was the biggest reason Obama is where he is, you call me a racist. I suggest you do some deep knee bends in an asparagus patch.

So, how about Holder being the "top cop" in the country?

First leanin H' calls me a "butt-lifting device" in another thread and now you suggest anal kinkiness with vegetables?

Do some of you wingnuts have unresolved potty training issues?

Are you struggling to tamp down those secret urges and losing the battle?

Just find the male posterior an unresistable conversation piece?

Anyway, I think you need to take a basic course in logic. Here are the examples you give:

Sandhusker calls Obama a "snakey btard". No one says anything to defend the oppressed men in our culture. + Sandhusker calls Hillary Clinton a c*nt. Several posters complain = Liberals are hypocrites

And let's try one more:

Sandhusker like Clarence Thomas + Sandhusker posts racist diatribes against African-Americans = Sandhusker isn't a racist because he likes Clarence Thomas (I'm waiting for the "I have black friends....line").

What wingnut correspondence course did you get your logic certification from?
 
Top