President Obama Lauds Holder’s Work As Attorney General
On Thursday morning, the Justice Department confirmed that Attorney General Eric Holder would be resigning his post, and on Thursday afternoon, President Obama made the official announcement of Holder’s departure. Holder is currently the fourth-longest-serving AG in U.S. history, but since he’s going to stay on until a replacement is found, Holder has a shot at the third spot. He’d surpass Attorney General Homer Cummings for that spot in December.
Holder was the first black attorney general, and was the outspoken advocate for racial justice that many wished President Obama would be, at a time of renewed attacks on voting and other civil rights. He’s also been a popular target for conservatives, as a result. Opposition to government surveillance and counter-terrorism programs have also made Holder a flashpoint for the anti-Obama libertarian left.
In a statement from the State Dining Room of the White House, President Obama delivered warm remarks on Attorney General Holder’s resignation, revealing that the two discussed the possibility over the summer. and lauding Holder’s work at the Justice Department. He also revealed that Attorney General Holder will stay on until his successor is confirmed, which, depending on the outcome of the midterm elections, could take awhile. In an unprecedented move, as far back as I can remember, the event actually started almost two minutes earlier than scheduled:
An emotional Holder also delivered brief remarks, in which…READ MORE
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
16 responses to President Obama Lauds Holder’s Work As Attorney General
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
arc99 September 25th, 2014 at 18:56
The right wing shows its true “colors” as they condemn AG Holder for racial bias simply because he was enforcing the law. Here is a quick civics lesson for all of you Holder and Obama-haters. Please enlighten us as to exactly what Mr. Holder did that did not conform to the Constitution and the laws passed under the authority granted to Congress by said Constitution.
Amendment 15
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Wayout September 26th, 2014 at 07:17
So why did he drop the legal action against the voter intimidation in Philly by the New Black Panthers? Holder swung the other way completely, this time bending over backwards to protect black criminal action.
And the nation is still waiting for him to comply with documents asked by the people’s representatives in Congress concerning the “Fast and Furious” scandal.
OldLefty September 26th, 2014 at 07:42
So why did he drop the legal action against the voter intimidation in Philly by the New Black Panthers?
______
For the same reason the Bush administration dropped it?
For the same reason the Bush administration dropped the ACTUAL voter intimidation case against the Minute Men in AZ in 2006?
Because there was no voter intimidation, (unless you are claiming that the Black Panthers were working for the McCain campaign and were trying to intimidate Obama voters), it is yet another fiction meant to entertain the right wing base.
Fast and Furious????
Get back to us when you care as much about Al Qa Quaa.
Wayout September 26th, 2014 at 08:22
And I almost forgot, what about the 1st Amendment and Holder going after members of the press? My God, if a Republican had done this you liberals would have been marching in the streets in outrage.
The facts are clear, this man was the worst AG against the people’s constitutional rights in many, many years. He had a leftist anti-constitutional agenda and was the President’s point man against the political opposition.
While I’m at it, whatever happened to his “investigation” of the IRS’s political shenanigans?
OldLefty September 26th, 2014 at 08:35
And I almost forgot, what about the 1st Amendment and Holder going after members of the press?
_______
That did not happen to nearly the degree it did in the last administration.
The difference is that you guys either didn’t know or you didn’t care.
IRS????
Yet another example of projecting too much, Methinks.
Get back to us when you care half as much about REAL IRS scandals;
IRS targeted NAACP in 2004
By KELSEY SNELL | 5/13/13 4:51 PM EDT
In 2004, the NAACP was hit
with an audit over accusations of improper political activity for criticizing
the Bush administration.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/irs-targeted-naacp-in-2004-91284.html
IRS targeted Church in
2005;
In 2004, a preacher at All
Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, Calif., delivered an anti-war sermon. The
3,500-member church found itself under investigation, but was able to beat
back the agency after hiring high-powered Washington attorneys and
soliciting support from conservative and liberal religious groups.
http://articles.glendalenewspress.com/2006-02-17/news/gnp-pollandscape17_1_glassell-park-irs-surveys
In 2004, the Wall Street
Journal reported that the IRS audited Greenpeace at the request of Public
Interest Watch, a group that’s funded by Exxon-Mobil.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114291044305003774.html
The Bush IRS Collected
Political Affiliation Data on Taxpayers;
In 2006, a contractor
hired by the IRS collected party affiliation via a search of voter registration
rolls in a laundry list of states: Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut,
Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New
York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah
and Wisconsin. This begs the obvious question: why? Why would the IRS need
voter registration and party affiliation information?
http://www.sitnews.us/0106news/010606/010606_shns_irs_politics.html
Either you didn’t know or you didn’t care when a REAL scandal had an (R) attached to it.
arc99 September 25th, 2014 at 18:56
The right wing shows its true “colors” as they condemn AG Holder for racial bias simply because he was enforcing the law. Here is a quick civics lesson for all of you Holder and Obama-haters. Please enlighten us as to exactly what Mr. Holder did that did not conform to the Constitution and the laws passed under the authority granted to Congress by said Constitution.
Amendment 15
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Wayout September 26th, 2014 at 07:17
So why did he drop the legal action against the voter intimidation in Philly by the New Black Panthers? Holder swung the other way completely, this time bending over backwards to protect black criminal action.
And the nation is still waiting for him to comply with documents asked by the people’s representatives in Congress concerning the “Fast and Furious” scandal.
OldLefty September 26th, 2014 at 07:42
So why did he drop the legal action against the voter intimidation in Philly by the New Black Panthers?
______
For the same reason the Bush administration dropped it?
For the same reason the Bush administration dropped the ACTUAL voter intimidation case against the Minute Men in AZ in 2006?
Because there was no voter intimidation, (unless you are claiming that the Black Panthers were working for the McCain campaign and were trying to intimidate Obama voters), it is yet another fiction meant to entertain the right wing base.
Fast and Furious????
Get back to us when you care as much about Al Qa Quaa.
Wayout September 26th, 2014 at 08:22
And I almost forgot, what about the 1st Amendment and Holder going after members of the press? My God, if a Republican had done this you liberals would have been marching in the streets in outrage.
The facts are clear, this man was the worst AG against the people’s constitutional rights in many, many years. He had a leftist anti-constitutional agenda and was the President’s point man against the political opposition.
While I’m at it, whatever happened to his “investigation” of the IRS’s political shenanigans?
OldLefty September 26th, 2014 at 08:35
And I almost forgot, what about the 1st Amendment and Holder going after members of the press?
_______
That did not happen to nearly the degree it did in the last administration.
The difference is that you guys either didn’t know or you didn’t care.
IRS????
Yet another example of projecting too much, Methinks.
Get back to us when you care half as much about REAL IRS scandals;
IRS targeted NAACP in 2004
By KELSEY SNELL | 5/13/13 4:51 PM EDT
In 2004, the NAACP was hit
with an audit over accusations of improper political activity for criticizing
the Bush administration.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/irs-targeted-naacp-in-2004-91284.html
IRS targeted Church in
2005;
In 2004, a preacher at All
Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, Calif., delivered an anti-war sermon. The
3,500-member church found itself under investigation, but was able to beat
back the agency after hiring high-powered Washington attorneys and
soliciting support from conservative and liberal religious groups.
http://articles.glendalenewspress.com/2006-02-17/news/gnp-pollandscape17_1_glassell-park-irs-surveys
In 2004, the Wall Street
Journal reported that the IRS audited Greenpeace at the request of Public
Interest Watch, a group that’s funded by Exxon-Mobil.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114291044305003774.html
The Bush IRS Collected
Political Affiliation Data on Taxpayers;
In 2006, a contractor
hired by the IRS collected party affiliation via a search of voter registration
rolls in a laundry list of states: Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut,
Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New
York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah
and Wisconsin. This begs the obvious question: why? Why would the IRS need
voter registration and party affiliation information?
http://www.sitnews.us/0106news/010606/010606_shns_irs_politics.html
Either you didn’t know or you didn’t care when a REAL scandal had an (R) attached to it.
NW10 September 25th, 2014 at 19:31
If Republicans take the Senate, they have two options:
1) cave and confirm whomever President Obama nominates to replace AG Holder
2) block whomever President Obama nominates to replace AG Holder, and Holder stays.
Either way, President Obama wins.
(((NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ))) September 25th, 2014 at 19:31
If Republicans take the Senate, they have two options:
1) cave and confirm whomever President Obama nominates to replace AG Holder
2) block whomever President Obama nominates to replace AG Holder, and Holder stays.
Either way, President Obama wins.
juicyfruityyy September 25th, 2014 at 22:03
The Re-thugs shouldn’t celebrate too soon. It’s obvious, that President Obama and Holder are friends, and respect each other.
juicyfruityyy September 25th, 2014 at 22:03
The Re-thugs shouldn’t celebrate too soon. It’s obvious, that President Obama and Holder are friends, and respect each other.
Wayout September 26th, 2014 at 07:14
Did Bam Bam mention Holder out right lying before the Congress? Oh but wait, wait, he did then revise his remarks at a later time. Sorry, but he still knowingly lied.
Wayout September 26th, 2014 at 07:14
Did Bam Bam mention Holder out right lying before the Congress? Oh but wait, wait, he did then revise his remarks at a later time. Sorry, but he still knowingly lied.