Quantcast
Feeds: Email, RSS & Twitter

Get Our Videos By Email

 

8,300 Unique Visitors In The Past Day

 

Powered by Squarespace

 

Most Recent Comments
Cartoons & Photos
SEARCH
« Bush Attorney General: We Refused To Target The Media | Main | Video Of IRS Star Trek Parody That Cost Taxpayers $60,000 »
Wednesday
May152013

Eric Holder Comments On AP Investigation

NOTHING WRONG WITH SUBPOENA

Short clip from yesterday's press conference.

 

---

AP STORY

Govt obtains unprecedented AP phone records in probe

The Justice Department secretly obtained two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press in what the news cooperative's top executive called a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into how news organizations gather the news.

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (29)

Working now on clips from today's testimony.
May 15, 2013 at 4:11 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
Scandel #4: OBAMA'S DOJ WIRETAPPED CONGRESS CLOAKROOM - Political Jack

http://www.politicaljack.com/threads/51931-Scandel-4-OB...

7 hours ago ... Scandel #4: OBAMA'S DOJ WIRETAPPED CONGRESS CLOAKROOM. Now that HOPE/CHANGE has morphed into Nixon on steroids, GOP ...

BREAKING: OBAMA/HOLDER DOJ BUGGED CONGRESSIONAL CLOAKROOM


Eric Holder and Barack Obama have yet even more explaining to do. According to Congressman Devin Nunes (R-CA) the DOJ has been bugging and spying on the Congressional Cloakroom, a private room where Congress eats, naps and socializes during session

Will Susan Rice ever go AWAY?


Will anyone inside the beltway come to their senses and strenuously object, simply on common sense to this action?



Report: Susan Rice’s promotion to National Security Advisor ‘definitely happening’: ”

Benghazigate might have derailed Ambassador Susan Rice’s bid to be Secretary of State, but the ‘extraordinary’ Rice might have a promotion in her future after all. Foreign Policy reports today that Rice ‘has become the heir apparent to National Security Advisor Tom Donilon — a post at the epicenter of foreign-policy decision making and arguably more influential than secretary of state.’ Writer John Hudson quotes an unnamed source as saying ‘it’s definitely happening.’


Susan Rice National Security advisor? More farce from the Obama theater.—
Wisdom for Women (@wisdomforwomen) May 15, 2013


Incredible! Obama to Promote Incompetent Leftist Tool Liar Susan Rice to America’s Top National Security Positon @FP thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/05/…—
Chris Angelini, Cris (@ConserValidity) May 16, 2013


Susan rice is going to get promoted to NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR?! Right, cuz tilting your head & lying to the public qualifies you for that—
Maya Grim (@maya0830) May 15, 2013


Oh yeah #SusanRice has proven she can lie under pressure, give her a promotion tinyurl.com/b5qu52g #
May 16, 2013 at 7:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterBackgammon
The Obama staff needs to get it together, I think it is wrong to be checking phone records and anyone envovled should be fired anyone DOJ,CIA,HOLDER, whoever did it including the judge if their was one. I am a Obama supporter but this is trash. Bad judges is part the problem in America. The Homeland Security Department is a waste of tax money anyway. We got FBI,CIA ATF this should be enough. One thing for sure over use of power is not ok. Anything I want to say I say to anybody I don't care what rank they have. Phone tapping would not help because I don't mind doing it face to face.
May 19, 2013 at 12:33 PM | Unregistered Commenterchristian
Yeah, Yeah, and Barak was not "the person" involved in this scandal either ... blah, blah, blah!
Jul 15, 2013 at 10:01 AM | Unregistered CommenterMole Johnson
SKIN
July 12 deadline has passed! The industry was pushing for the usual “race to the bottom” approach,

We need to make sure that EVERY Goldman Guy has a spot at the top!
Jul 15, 2013 at 11:30 AM | Unregistered CommenterBackgammon
Jul 21, 2013 at 2:43 PM | Unregistered CommenterSKINFLINT
Sep 10, 2013 at 8:04 AM | Unregistered CommenterSKINFLINT
Really Skin, "What Difference Does it Make?

With the anniversary of the Crash on the 15, it would be nice to hae DB to discuss the current situation.

Charlie Gasparo says the banks have learned NOTHING. Lots of new rules but still lots of holes for the Crooksters.
Sep 10, 2013 at 8:18 AM | Unregistered CommenterBackgammon
A couple of things a about this. The WSJ has an article on this subject that would seem to indicate that wells had purchased from Freddie the mortgages that were fraudulent. With all this money flying around to settle law suits in regards the fraud, how do the banks take back ownership with the failed ownership trail that is now the MERS registration system? Obviously there is no claimed guilt, otherwise guys would be going to jail. http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=20426788&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.yahoo.com%2Fmobile%2Fs%3Frewrite%3D72%26.tsrc%3Dapple%26first%3D1%26p%3Dwells%2Bfargo%2Bsettles%26pintl%3Den%26fr%3Donesearch
Oct 1, 2013 at 7:54 AM | Unregistered CommenterSKINFLINT
Sharyl Attkisson, the former CBS investigative reporter whose $35 million hacking lawsuit against the Obama Administration is still pending, is scheduled to testify tomorrow (1/28/15) in the hearing on the confirmation of Loretta Lynch as Attorney General.

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/230795-ex-cbs-reporter-irs-targeted-group-leader-to-testify-on-new-ag

Lynch was the "prosecutor" of HSBC in the infamous money-laundering case in which no one was prosecuted despite the bank's flat-out admissions of criminal liability in December 2012.

Eric Holder claimed that prosecuting certain banks could destabilize the global financial system. When pressed for evidence, Holder said the DOJ relied on destabilization "experts," not one of whom was ever identified despite two congressional investigations into the experts' identities.

When asked by Congress who the experts were at a May 2013 hearing, the DOJ witness, Mythili Raman (who later left her 17-year DOJ career to join Lanny Breuer at Covington & Burling) repeatedly claimed that many banks--HSBC being one of them--were still under investigation, and thus that revealing the experts' names might interfere with these investigations (which of course are wholly nonexistent).

It turns out that the HSBC case settlement crafted by Loretta Lynch was pioneering in one regard. Up until then, the DOJ--when declining to prosecute--would either (1) not bring a case to begin with or (2) withdraw the case from the court's docket after filing by entering into a deferred- or non-prosecution agreement; either way the dismissal of the case would terminate any investigation.

Lynch changed that by keeping the case on the court's docket. Judge John Gleeson was puzzled by the maneuver, speculating that it might have been motivated by PR for the DOJ.

In fact, however, the maneuver is designed to conceal the names of the bankers (and their lawyers) who instruct the DOJ not to prosecute, using the rubric of "systemic risk" and "global destabilization" and assorted nonsense. By keeping the cases against criminal banks open, you see, the DOJ can refuse to identify its real bosses by claiming that they are experts participating in ongoing investigations.

Mythili Raman asserted this very shield of confidentiality at least a dozen times in a May 2013 hearing before the House. She was rewarded with a multimillion-dollar partnership at Covington.

For her own, much more significant part (having fooled a jurist of some stature, not a mere panel of inbred congressional nitwits), Loretta Lynch will be rewarded with the Attorney Generalship.

That's the reality.

The appearance of Sharyl Attkisson will probably make for good theater, but undeniably falls under the category of "Panem et Circensus."
Jan 27, 2015 at 1:25 AM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
I would be remiss if I did not point out the curious timing of Judge Gleeson's order entering the deferred prosecution agreement between the DOJ and HSBC: July 1, 2013.

http://www.wlrk.com/docs/HSBC.PDF

Gleeson's reluctance to keep the case open is apparent not only from plain language of the order itself, but also from the fact that it took him seven months to enter it.

You might wonder why, since he waited seven months, Gleeson didn't wait even longer or just refuse to enter the agreement at all. There's no way of knowing, of course, but it's worth noting that there was another player of note in the sordid HSBC affair: James Comey.

Comey had been a deputy DOJ prosecutor under boy Bush. He left for lucrative gigs at Lockheed and later Bridgewater Associates.

HSBC hired Comey in January 2013 to its Board of Directors, paying him around $230,000 per year for a sinecures. By sheer coincidence, Comey was nominated by Obama as FBI Director in May 2013.

Thus, not only was HSBC Board member and FBI Director-apparent Comey on a collision course with the FBI's own written conflicts policy...

http://www.oge.gov/OGE-Advisories/Legal-Advisories/Attachment-to-DO-97-015--Copy-of-Opinion-of-Office-of-Legal-Counsel-about-Employee-Service-on-Boards/ ("Section 208 of title 18 prohibits a government employee from serving on the board of directors of an outside organization in his or her official capacity")

...but even worse, Obama's chosen FBI Director was an active board member of an admittedly criminal enterprise THAT WAS A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT IN A PROSECUTION BY THE DOJ OF WHICH THE FBI IS A PART.

Incredibly, neither the Senate nor Comey seemed remotely aware of the FBI conflict rule that Comey was about to violate head-on. When asked at his confirmation hearing how he would handle an FBI case against HSBC AS BOTH FBI DIRECTOR AND AS AN HSBC BOARD MEMBER, Comey idiotically responded by saying he'd recuse himself!!!

Umm, that response is incorrect, to put it mildly. What's so astonishing is that it satisfied all concerned at the time. That's how saturated in fraud and corruption the U.S. has become.

In any event, that hearing was held on July 9, 2013, meaning it's very likely that Judge Gleeson received to a nudge to enter his order while most judges are on vacation. Comey didn't resign from HSBC until the end of July 2013.
Jan 27, 2015 at 2:18 AM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/01/who_is_killing_the_great_bankers_of_europe.html. Meanwhile, paupers insurance is about to kick in on another unfortunate soul.
Jan 27, 2015 at 10:34 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
In seven hours of testimony today, the heiress apparent to Wall Street's throne atop the Department of Justice was asked exactly one (1) question about HSBC and too-big-to-jail.

As usual, there was absolutely no follow-up, either on the completely inept question or the predictably vapid answer, in which we learned--contrary to the six years of uninterrupted failure by the DOJ to jail a single Wall Street executive for any of the 100,000 crimes that caused the global financial crisis--that "no one is too big to jail."

The entire congress and the executive branch from the cabinet up ought to be hauled out on the Mall and pilloried for a week while Gibbon's Decline and Fall blares from loudspeakers and passersby have access to an unlimited supply of free rotten eggs and broccoli.
Jan 28, 2015 at 10:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
Now that is something I would drive into DC for. I'd even stop and grab some day old donuts and some piping hot coffee and make a day of it. If anyone else is interested, I'd be happy to be a tour guide of sorts.
Jan 29, 2015 at 5:19 AM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
How about a trebuchet and lots of dog shit. I'd pay to see that one.
Jan 29, 2015 at 4:14 PM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
John, You wouldn't need to bring any with you, we could go right to the Anacostia River. That is a river of shit with a few corpses to boot. Or even the Potomac. Just sayin. We could hob nob around Georgetown, get our hair cut
At a nifty little shop on L Street where the rich and famous coif their hair. It'll cost a small fortune, but when shit starts flying, you wanna blend in.
Jan 29, 2015 at 7:05 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
Just wanted to say that today, on C Span radio Grassly tipped his hand on his decision. Just an embarrassing moment. On NPR with that incessant Harpie. Diane what's her name had a guest on there that absolutely hit the nail spot on. The guy, as a paneled guest in the AG debate kept on hammering away on the same issues that this site talks about. She cut him off a couple of times, but he knew he had to get this stuff out there. It was a good piece of radio.
Jan 29, 2015 at 7:11 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
Jan 29, 2015 at 7:15 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
Standard & Poor’s has agreed to pay $1.4 billion to settle charges related to its role in causing the financial crisis of 2008. It was due to S&P and the other rating agency’s complicity with the Wall Street banks that allowed the selling of fraudulent mortgage-backed securities throughout the world.

The ratings agency has now been fined, Wall Street has been fined, yet the victims of the crime (the buyers of fraudulently rated junk paper) have not been relieved of the loses incurred by the crime by the perpetrators...

Fines have been less than the actual theft, so chalk it all up to a tax, or just the cost of doing business.
Feb 4, 2015 at 12:01 PM | Unregistered CommenterS. Gompers
So, this 1.4 goes into the White House, Petty Cash?
Feb 4, 2015 at 6:22 PM | Unregistered CommenterBackgammon
Who was the .gov lead dog on this one? 1.4 Bil is all? Just Damnit all.
Feb 4, 2015 at 7:16 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
Jury Nullification: Why Every American Needs to Learn This Taboo Verdict

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/23929-jury-nullification-why-every-american-needs-to-learn-this-taboo-verdict

Did you know that, no matter the evidence, if a jury feels a law is unjust, it is permitted to “nullify” the law rather than finding someone guilty? Basically, jury nullification is a jury’s way of saying, “By the letter of the law, the defendant is guilty, but we also disagree with that law, so we vote to not punish the accused.” Ultimately, the verdict serves as an acquittal.

Haven’t heard of jury nullification? Don’t feel bad; you’re far from alone. If anything, your unfamiliarity is by design. Generally, defense lawyers are not allowed to even mention jury nullification as a possibility during a trial because judges prefer juries to follow the general protocols rather than delivering independent verdicts.

Surprisingly, the Supreme Court has routinely agreed that judges have no obligation to inform juries about jury nullification. Paradoxically, jury nullification is permitted to exist as an option to all juries, yet this option cannot be discussed in most courtrooms.

A few years ago, Julian Heicklen handed out pamphlets to passersby on jury nullification to people outside of a federal courthouse. While the former professor was merely attempting to educate people about how the jury system works, he was charged with jury tampering. The prosecution labeled Heicklen “a significant and important threat to our judicial system,” but the judge ultimately disagreed and dismissed the case. Nonetheless, the fact that this case went to court at all shows how those in the legal system are willing to intimidate those who vocalize this loophole.

Jury nullification is undoubtedly feared because of its ability to upset the system. A jury that considers drug laws to be outrageous can nullify. A jury that is aware of the mass inequality in incarceration rates and believes a defendant was targeted via racial profiling can nullify. A jury that believes a harmless defendant is a victim of the prison industrial complex rather than a perpetrator can nullify. This counter-verdict exists so that citizens can right the wrongs inherent in our supposed “justice” system.
Feb 5, 2015 at 12:37 PM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
Petty cash it is Backgammon, Lehman Brothers alone cost Ohioans 480 billion in exploding bags of pooh that was AAA "rated" sold into retirement accounts.

We exist to foam the runways of bad business and the politicians they buy.
Feb 5, 2015 at 12:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterS. Gompers
The Final Text of the Declaration of Independence July 4 1776


http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/documents/1776-1785/the-final-text-of-the-declaration-of-independence-july-4-1776.php


...He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:
For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing taxes on us without our consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:
For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:
For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:
For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:
For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

===========
Feb 5, 2015 at 1:01 PM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
Well John, Thank you for this huge piece of info. I mean just wow!
Feb 5, 2015 at 8:36 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
"We exist to foam the runways of bad business and the politicians they buy."

Sad but true Gompers, with crony capitalism for the national business model and plutocracy for the government, the American People have been effectively removed from directing the future of the nation.
Feb 7, 2015 at 3:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterSagebrush

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.