Patterico's Pontifications

5/15/2013

Eric Holder Doesn’t Know

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:01 pm



He really just doesn’t know.

Popehat is on fire on Twitter:

While I am quoting Twitter folks, how about this one from Jan Crawford:

Odd, as in completely predictable, I think she means. (Really!)

71 Responses to “Eric Holder Doesn’t Know”

  1. How long can all this keep up?

    Patterico (9c670f)

  2. Houses of cards always fall.

    Unfortunately, a city is not as significant as a nation.

    Ag80 (c81f80)

  3. probably about as long as whorenanke keeps print print printing

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  4. He doesn’t know who he delegated the subpoena approval to either.

    MM both supported Holder and MMFA stood with the 52 media organizations that oppose Holder’s actions.

    JD (ee8414)

  5. I bet a thousand dollars on Orb to win the Kentucky Derby a couple weeks ago.
    Only I forgot to place the bet !

    Elephant Stone (e319ad)

  6. #1… do you really want to know, Patterico?

    Colonel Haiku (747414)

  7. How long can all this keep up?
    Forever, with Issa leading the way.

    mg (31009b)

  8. Painted Jaguar: Please read my comment on the other thread about what mr. Holder doesn’t say what he doesn’t know except when he knows it and says he doesn’t say it anyway.
    It’s getting late, I can’t keep it straight myself, and my mummy says it is time for bed (it is the dark of winter down here in the Southern hemisphere, you know).

    Painted Jaguar (a sockpuppet) (3d3f72)

  9. Susan “LambChop” Rice
    Shari Lewis spins in grave
    Clinton cleans her nails

    Colonel Haiku (747414)

  10. Painted Jaguar: MD says that saying “I don’t know” all of the time doesn’t get you far in med school, and it gets you even less far in the middle of surgery.

    I guess we can be thankful Mr. Holder isn’t a surgeon.

    Painted Jaguar (a sockpuppet) (3d3f72)

  11. No matter what the scandal, nor how heinous the crime, the default position is always the same: Good and decent people are always to blame.

    I watch my lefty friends continually post justification for actions based on Media Matters and Kos and Think Progress: None ever investigated by the IRS.

    I’m getting a bit sick and tired of being sick and tired.

    Is anyone else fed up with this?

    Ag80 (c81f80)

  12. I would appreciate it if some of the lawyers who read/contribute to this blog would comment on who or what organizations (if any) might possibly be able to sue and be be sued for the IRS harassment and leaks of their tax returns (such as is now being reported in several places).

    Austan Goolsbee in 2010 had referenced to reportrs information on privately owned Koch Industries, for instance, which supposedly could only have been obtained illegally or leaked by the IRS.

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/05/flashback-top-obama-official-illegally-revealed-conservative-groups-tax-disclosures-in-2010/

    elissa (33fa31)

  13. One of the benefits of leading a cult is never being short of willing human sacrifices. It will keep up until the lemmings start refusing to fall on their swords.

    Ghost (2d8874)

  14. He is just using the Hillary Whitewater Playbook. It worked then and with the help of the NYTs, Brian Williams, Wa Po, NPR, etc., it will work again.

    Ipso Fatso (1e3278)

  15. I know only one thing, that I know nothing. — Socrates

    For we know in part and we prophesy in part. — 1 Corinthians

    I Know a Girl and Ruby Is Her Name. — Dion & The Belmonts

    I know nothing. — Sgt. Schultz

    What is knowledge?

    nk (875f57)

  16. My guess is that we are just scratching the surface of IRS malfeasance and criminality. It is beginning to appear that information that is legally confidential has been released for crass political purposes.

    This case screams for an independent counsel.

    Calfed (5b899d)

  17. Sorry, meant to post this on the IRS thread…

    Calfed (5b899d)

  18. There is one positive element in all this. There is no way the Dems can blame the whole thing on the Repubs. The (R)’s aren’t smart enought engineer anything approaching a meltdown like this.

    glenn (647d76)

  19. I think all the “I don’t knows” call for a mashup on Autotune!

    Patricia (be0117)

  20. Just to be clear, everyone knows that this has been going on for a long, long time, right?

    Hint: Mark Levin.

    I’m not going to do your work for you. Not because I’m mean or lazy, just because it’s what old people do.

    Ag80 (c81f80)

  21. Is anyone else fed up with this?

    The situation is so pathetic that even Jon Stewart poking fun at himself for not being able to treat the religion of liberalism like a sacred cow — and admits to a few mea culpas along the way — is like observing a do-gooder naif (or fool) walking down a narco-gang-infested street in Mexico and getting gunned down.

    Ugh.

    Mark (9ba6f2)

  22. it’s definitely the IRS thing what’s killing them even among their own

    one vindictive out-of-control IRS equals a hundred benghazis I think

    and it’s gonna show up in the data really quickly i think

    that’s no excuse for feckless boehnerdouche not to empanel a special commission for benghazi though

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  23. I would appreciate it if some of the lawyers who read/contribute to this blog would comment on who or what organizations (if any) might possibly be able to sue and be be sued for the IRS harassment and leaks of their tax returns (such as is now being reported in several places).

    Not many. And not for much. The only allowable defendant is the United States. The IRS or individual employees are not proper parties defendant. It can only be for compensatory damages, not punitive damages, and the plaintiffs would have to overcome qualified immunity. See Westfall, Case and Act.

    nk (875f57)

  24. I tell you, it’s all Bush’s fault!

    htom (412a17)

  25. I don’t know. That seems to be the new rallying cry for the left.

    “Why were you late for work today?”

    I don’t know.

    Is that your scissors in the back of the dead man?

    “I don’t know.”

    Have you ever had sex with that woman?

    “I don’t know.”

    You, as the chief law enforcement official in the nation, did you know that your department eavesdropped on an independent news organization?

    “I don’t know.”

    Did you, as Commander in Chief of the military and President of the Unites States, know that terrorists might attack a State Department facility on Sept. 11, 2012, in an North African country inhabited by radical Islamists?

    “I don’t know.”

    Do you know, as the Secretary of State, with American assets on the ground, that an attack upon a U.S. facility may be attacked by armed Islamist radicals on Sept. 11, 2012, might be possible?

    “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?”

    What difference does it make?

    I just don’t know.

    Ag80 (c81f80)

  26. THis is the tip of the iceberg. The attacks and audits on administration critics is even worse.

    JD (b63a52)

  27. Perhaps the lawyers can answer this; at a certain point when someone who heads an organization claims not to know something they should have known, isn’t that evidence that they must have in fact known and worked overtime at looking away.

    I recall reading something along those lines when we had that spate of CEOs claiming they didn’t know about the financial wrongdoing going on in their companies. And in fact there was no direct evidence they did, but they were convicted anyway because the feds argued it was their job to know. I recall reading references to the DoJ’s prosecution manuals regarding when “I don’t know” stops being a defense. But I can’t find that now.

    As an aside, I bet Holder didn’t know that the DoJ was doing the exact same thing to the House of Representatives as his department was doing to the AP. Seizing phone records to find out who they were talking to. Rep. Nunes (R-Kali) was on Dennis Miller’s show earlier and said the DoJ was spying on Congress.

    There’s a post up at HotAir about it because Rep. Nunes was on Hugh Hewit’s show making the same charge apparently. They’ve got the transcript of that conversation.

    I’ve got to tell you I always thought it was just a matter of time before the Obama administration would go after Congress. Or rather, the Republicans in Congress.

    Steve57 (9b1cdb)

  28. Eric Holder doesn’t know…

    his ass from page 8?

    oh, thought it was a complete the sentence contest. Sorry.

    Velcro (83a683)

  29. And heeere’s the Mixtape of the Week, brought to you by Patterico’s Top 40!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY7bROROMs0

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6cn0mLJVZY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ2ZNCip9YM

    qdpsteve (e4fc78)

  30. Not many. And not for much. The only allowable defendant is the United States. The IRS or individual employees are not proper parties defendant. It can only be for compensatory damages, not punitive damages, and the plaintiffs would have to overcome qualified immunity. See Westfall, Case and Act.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 5/15/2013 @ 8:49 pm

    I’m not sure about this.

    Many Federal agents carry personal liability insurance as protection against a Bivens action.

    If the actions by IRS officials amounted to a constitutional violation (…possible), then they could be sued individually and personally in a Bivens action and the plaintiff would be entitled to a jury trail and punitive damages if they prevailed.

    Calfed (5b899d)

  31. i heart that tracey ullman album more than beans

    here’s her cover of life is a rock

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORZutckKlGU

    she’s one of my favorite british people

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  32. If the actions by IRS officials amounted to a constitutional violation (…possible), then they could be sued individually and personally in a Bivens action…

    The IRS agents acted alone. They were “lone wolves.” They were individually radicalized.

    Just like the Tsarnaev brothers, the underwear bomber, MAJ Hassan, blah, blah, blah, …

    Steve57 (9b1cdb)

  33. Just so you know, Calfed, the contempt implied that does in fact exist in my previous post was directed toward the Obama administration. Not you.

    Steve57 (9b1cdb)

  34. In light of what is now coming out, the following observations about the recent speech from Obama, and how his words say a lot about what makes him tick, illustrate a truly sickening irony about the guy:

    americanthinker.com, May 10, 2013, Janice Crouse:

    As a presidential speech writer for the first Bush White House, I am always very interested in what presidents say in their formal speeches. They know, of course, that their remarks will be widely covered by the press, studied by analysts, and influential in contemporary political debates… That’s why President Barack Obama’s speech at Ohio State University’s 2013 Commencement should trouble all Americans…

    Mr. Obama…chose to be, once again, very political; he delivered a speech that stands out as uniquely partisan with the “us-against-them” rhetoric that has become all too predictable. And, true to form, this speech was appallingly un-presidential (even using the phrases “fight like heck” and assuring the graduates that they will “screw up” — this from a president of the United States in a formal address?), even among numerous other Obama presidential addresses that have been un-presidential in both tone and content.

    The bottom line of the Ohio State speech was that, according to President Obama, being a good American boils down to hating those who dislike his policies. He blatantly asked the students to “reject those voices” of his opponents, whom he repeatedly caricatured with phrases describing them as people who view government as a “separate, sinister entity” who are “doing their best to gum up the works.”

    He distilled conservative views down to caricatures: “tyranny is always lurking just around the corner” and calling conservative views a “sham” that “can’t be trusted.”

    [H]e played to the lower natures of the electorate — sympathizing with the students over “all the times you’ve been let down” and identifying with their frustration “at the hand that you’ve been dealt.”

    He…couldn’t pass up the opportunity to accuse the “institutions of our society” that have “betrayed your trust.” Nor, in spite of his promise to not be partisan, could he neglect criticism of Wall Street or blaming the GOP by implying that it is their fault that “democracy isn’t working as well as we know it can.”

    He also joked that the students should actively participate in democracy by “voting, eagerly and often.” And, he got in the obligatory bow to the homosexual activists: urging the students to work to “secure our God-given rights . . . regardless . . . of who [sic] they love” and included “gay rights” among the great causes for which people have fought. And, of course, he got in his digs about gun control and climate change.

    As someone with a doctorate in communication theory who spent years analyzing presidential speeches and studying political rhetoric, I’ve never seen a presidential speech that was more repulsively self-centered and insidiously self-serving; nor has a previous president operated in campaign mode so unrelentingly throughout his presidency, regardless of the occasion or circumstances.

    Could such a demagogue nurture an unhinged Attorney General, an unhinged Justice Department, an unhinged IRS, etc? Nah, no way, not possible.

    Mark (9ba6f2)

  35. “fight like heck” is appallingly unpresidential?

    who are these people

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  36. I may have it backwards. This is not my area of expertise.

    nk (875f57)

  37. I have no problem with your comment. In fact I appreciate it, Calfed.

    Steve57 (9b1cdb)

  38. This case screams for an independent counsel.

    Comment by Calfed (5b899d) — 5/15/2013 @ 8:35 pm

    These numerous cases scream for a long drop at the end of a short rope! Nothing less, nothing more.

    peedoffamerican (ee1de0)

  39. these cases also call for the rejection of shady fast-tracked immigration deals hustled by backroom gangs

    you can’t trust these ruling class people

    that’s the takeaway

    the rot goes deep unto ubiquity I think

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  40. I should have added “unhinged EPA” in my previous post:

    washingtonexaminer.com, May 14: Conservative groups seeking information from the Environmental Protection Agency have been routinely hindered by fees normally waived for media and watchdog groups, while fees for more than 90 percent of requests from green groups were waived, according to requests reviewed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

    CEI reviewed Freedom of Information Act requests sent between January 2012 and this spring from several environmental groups friendly to the EPA’s mission, and several conservative groups, to see how equally the agency applies its fee waiver policy for media and watchdog groups. Government agencies are supposed to waive fees for groups disseminating information for public benefit.

    For 92 percent of requests from green groups, the EPA cooperated by waiving fees for the information. Those requests came from the Natural Resources Defense Council, EarthJustice, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, The Waterkeeper Alliance, Greenpeace, Southern Environmental Law Center and the Center for Biological Diversity.

    CEI, on the other hand, had its requests denied 93 percent of the time. One request was denied because CEI failed to express its intent to disseminate the information to the general public. The rest were denied because the agency said CEI “failed to demonstrate that the release of the information requested significantly increases the public understanding of government operations or activities.”

    Similarly, requests from conservative groups Judicial Watch and National Center for Public Policy Research were approved half the time, and all requests from Franklin Center and the Institute for Energy Research were denied.

    “Their practice is to take care of their friends and impose ridiculous obstacles to deny problematic parties’ requests for information,” said Horner.

    Mark (9ba6f2)

  41. I figure they probably should have asked Eric Holder about the link between liberalism, bisexuality, and charitable giving.

    I mean, if they wanted to get at TRUTH.

    Leviticus (17b7a5)

  42. ‘“fight like heck” is appallingly unpresidential?’

    – happyfeet

    I was gonna say. Of course you beat me to the punch…

    Next thing you know we’re gonna hear some dumba** reference to “Marquis of Queensbury Rules.”

    Leviticus (17b7a5)

  43. When “Bush Lied, People Died” becomes the mantra when Bush claims a lack of knowledge of finer elements of things that he nominally is expected to know, how is it that the actions of underlings at all levels of this admin seems to get a pass on the same thing with this administration…?

    Oh, wait, don’t tell me… it has to do with the letter in parenthesis after Bush vs the same with this admin…

    Right? Right?

    Smock Puppet, 10th Dan Snark Master and Gender Bïgǒt (e69dc9)

  44. Can you say A.G. Deval Patrick.

    mg (31009b)

  45. I’m not talented enough to do it, but too bad someone can’t do a remix of this song with Holder’s testimony:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Vyj1C8ogtE

    It would be especially sweet because it’s Matt Damon, the Obama lover, doing a cameo in this film!

    DaleinAtlanta (431984)

  46. “…yea, verily, for they did not know their holes from an ass upon the ground.”

    mojo (8096f2)

  47. Just sayin’, if a doctor in a malpractice case tries to say he/she did something, even though it is not written down in the medical record, the lawyer opinion of that is, “If it wasn’t written down, it didn’t happen”.

    It seems to me totally unacceptable, unbelievable, or incompetant or some combination of these for him to actually recuse himself without documenting it and why.
    Any (responsible) lawyer person want to try to defend this claim?
    I heard the point made that even if Holder’s answers are true, had he wanted to actually cooperate he would have brought his deputy and/or others who could have answered.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  48. All this time we were railing against Washington, when in reality the government is run from Cleveland!

    Amphipolis (d3e04f)

  49. I figure they probably should have asked Eric Holder about the link between liberalism, bisexuality, and charitable giving.

    Hmm, speaking of how ideology correlates with other facets of a person…

    dailymail.co.uk: Men who are physically strong are more likely to take a right wing political stance, while weaker men are inclined to support the welfare state, according to a new study.

    Researchers discovered political motivations may have evolutionary links to physical strength.

    Men’s upper-body strength predicts their political opinions on economic redistribution, according to the research. Men who are physically strong are more likely to take a right wing political stance, while weaker men are inclined to support the welfare state, according to a new study. Researchers discovered political motivations may have evolutionary links to physical strength.

    The principal investigators – psychological scientists Michael Bang Petersen, of Aarhus University in Denmark, and Daniel Sznycer, of the University of California in the U.S., believe that the link may reflect psychological traits that evolved in response to our early ancestral environments and continue to influence behaviour today.

    Quite seriously, I don’t know why researchers haven’t done a study on the correlation between a high percentage of homosexuals and bisexuals also being of the left, or the ironic twist behind the fact that many liberals apparently have personal traits — including those of generosity, tolerance and compassion — that are just the opposite of what they fancy about themselves.

    To me another “a-ha!” moment was learning a few weeks ago that one of the icons of the Democrat Party and liberalism, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, apparently said that Jews were partly to blame for the disdain cast upon them back during the reign of Hitler’s Germany/Europe, that he was proud to initiate quotas against them in places like colleges, and that Asian blood shouldn’t mix with white blood.

    Mark (9ba6f2)

  50. I predict every person appointed to fill the chair of a disgraced bureaucrat in the next year will be AFrican American. Then O will use any objection to play the race card in time for 2014.

    He never gives up, does he?

    Patricia (be0117)

  51. “Fight like a lefty” would mean following the Marquis of Queen’s rules…

    Colonel Haiku (61a8ce)

  52. Patricia@51–I agree with you and it makes me very sad to be witnessing such a manipulative and cynical presidency. Did you see the comments Julian Bond was just filmed saying about the tea party and how and why they “deserved it”?

    elissa (04d91b)

  53. Holder knows he told himself he was recusing himself from the AP phone probe and that should be good enough. It was “need to know” information.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  54. Hope and change means that Hillary used “I don’t recall” as her main response to Whitewater questions in the 90’s and now friend Holder is using “I don’t know” in hope that the change will result in the same beneficial outcome …

    bobathome (c0c2b5)

  55. This is the left wing mindset;

    Mitt Romney is responsible for the cancer death of a spouse of a factory worker who might have been layed-off by the factory closure facillitated by Bain that took place years after Romney was no longer the CEO, but Eric Holder and Barack Obama are not responsible for their underlings using government power to illegally violate the rights of the President’s publicly-acknowledged political adversaries.

    And we wonder why left wingers can’t do basic math !

    Elephant Stone (65a34b)

  56. Elephant Stone – Obama 2012. The buck won’t stop until 2017 or later!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  57. Mr. Rocks,

    You’re right, the buck won’t stop until he’s out of office.
    In fact, the bucks keep coming and coming, courtesy of the Ben Bernanke Printing Press !

    Elephant Stone (65a34b)

  58. Just so you know, Calfed, the contempt implied that does in fact exist in my previous post was directed toward the Obama administration. Not you.

    Comment by Steve57 (9b1cdb) — 5/15/2013 @ 10:16 pm

    No sweat, Steve. Holder was confirmed as AG in February of 2009. I retired in April of 2009 after 30 years. I could have stayed for a few more years…57 is the mandatory retirement age…but had no desire to work for Holder.

    I’ve detested the man since 2001 when he gamed the pardon of Marc Rich.

    Calfed (5b899d)

  59. Should Holder, in his future testimony on The Hill, be required to wear the uniform of a Sergeant in the Wehrmacht?
    He might be more credible.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  60. Here’s an idea to encourage some accountability within the ranks of the Senior Executive Service – and above:

    Upon conviction of a crime involving use of your office, not only are you subject to “hard time”, but also the loss of all pay and benefits (seems to work very well for those subject to the UCMJ).

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  61. BTW, since the National Security Advisor is not subject to confirmation, my suggestion would be that the Congress embargo all funds for that office if Susan Rice is appointed to it.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  62. 59. …I’ve detested the man since 2001 when he gamed the pardon of Marc Rich.

    Comment by Calfed (5b899d) — 5/16/2013 @ 10:28 am

    I win the interwebs. I’ve detested him since the ’90s. “No controlling legal authority.” Al Gore didn’t come up with that s*** on his own.

    Steve57 (9b1cdb)

  63. I did, elissa. Shameful.

    Patricia (be0117)

  64. He is the Affirmative Action president. From the day he left Hawaii (probably as Barry Soetero, Indoneisan exchange student, through Harvard Law School) he has played the race card to his advantage at every turn. Holder, much the same.Obama managed to clear the field uder the table very election, Holder was th perfect polite hack for legal work. Neither has accomplished much other than having a polite Dinkins-like non-threatening demeanor, a good grasp of hackocracy and the ability to make white liberals feel good about themselves by advancing them. And when people give you stuff for really nothing you almost certainly start to believe you not only deserve it but also you really earned it.

    Bugg (b32862)

  65. Bugg, Holder is not a “polite hack”, he’s a bag man.

    SPQR (768505)

  66. Instead of “I don’t know” all the darn time, they could at least vary their response occasionally by adopting Happyfeet’s “nobody tells me anything”.

    elissa (04d91b)

  67. Eric Holder may not know whate Justice Department acted so strangely and went overboard on this leak case, but the reason is pretty obvious:

    Prince Bandar bin Sultan, head of Saudi intelligence, insisted on it.

    This leak investigation concerns an plot by Al qaeda in Yemen. The big secret is the whole thing was a sting operation, which, however, Prince Bandar does not want is to think is a sting operation. The purpose of the sting operation was to earn the gratitude of the United States.

    The AP story sort of revealed it was a sting operation – a plot created entirely by Saudi intelligence, or at least that’s what some people might come to realize.

    The US was going to announce it but omit the key details that would have enabled people to understand it was a sting operation, and not a plot that Al Qaeda organzied on its own. They were not capable of designing or building such a bomb…

    Attorney General Eric Holder said the security of United States might depend on thsi case. the new York Daily News in an editorial thought he was talking about the idea that having a leaker in a high poisition was dangerous, but I think what he hinting at, bit couldn’t say , was that Prince Banmdar had threatened to cut off co-operation with the United States if the leaker wasn’t found.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  68. The reason Eric Holder is still Attorney General is that a replacement would have an extremely difficult time getting confirmed, and wouldn’t without the Obama Administration being forced to answer a lot of questions.

    Eric Holder is stuck in place. He can’t earn a lot of money for a few years.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  69. Prince Bandar has entirely too much influence in the United States.

    He probably got away with murdering Vincent Foster, he got Jonathan Pollard a life sentence in violation of a plea bargain, and kkeeps him in prison, he persuaaded Caspoer Weinberger to donate false “contemporaneous” notes to the Library of Congress that had Ronald rteagan approving the sale of arms to Iran on January 6, 1986 – when he only did so on January 17, 1986 – notes which further attributed the idea to the state of Israel – he has gotten the United States to kill the wrong people going back all the way to the reagan Administration, and recently he proibably engineered the assassination of Ambassador Chris Stevens in Benghazi and probably supplied the faulty intelligence that said the whole attack was concocted on the spur of the moment as a result of a protest in Cairo.

    And if we don’t watch out, he’ll become King Bandar.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  70. “Eric Holder may not know whate Justice Department acted so strangely and went overboard on this leak case, but the reason is pretty obvious:”

    He’s just another vindictive Obama thug.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1155 secs.