HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Some Dems may vote to hol...

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:33 AM

Some Dems may vote to hold Holder in contempt????

These Blue Dogs - if they do this - shouldn't get any help from the national party.



http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/26/nra-pressure-could-push-some-dems-to-vote-contempt-for-holder/?hpt=hp_t2

7 replies, 1038 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply Some Dems may vote to hold Holder in contempt???? (Original post)
jimlup Jun 2012 OP
MineralMan Jun 2012 #1
jimlup Jun 2012 #3
MineralMan Jun 2012 #5
jimlup Jun 2012 #6
MineralMan Jun 2012 #7
Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2012 #2
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #4

Response to jimlup (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 09:20 AM

1. Some DUers would also like to see Holder gone.

Those DUers couldn't be classed as Blue Dogs, I'm sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 09:37 AM

3. But in this context???

This Fast and Furious thing is a bogus attempt to pin a scandal on Holder that isn't even real. When this goes down it will only hurt democrats. A very bad decision to vote to hold Holder in contempt in this situation and a bad precedent for House Democrats. Actually an almost unspeakably bad president. I'm appalled that some Dems would break ranks to curry favor with an out of control NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimlup (Reply #3)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 09:49 AM

5. In whatever context you like.

My point is that Holder is unpopular with groups on both ends of the political spectrum. Personally, I'm in favor of leaving it all alone until after the Election. I disagree with those on DU who think Holder should be fired, and I disagree with those on the right that think he's a gun grabber. I also disagree with the entire Fast and Furious fiasco.

I'm used to disagreeing with what the federal government does. It happens a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 12:56 PM

6. But "Fast and Furious" is actually a program Holder put a stop to.

And I don't think that is why the Republicans want to embarrass him. Like Holder or not this is nothing but a witch hunt from their side and to let it succeed with some on our side singing their tune is disgusting to me and gives new life (as if it needs any) into the "democrats lack backbone" argument.

If we can't stand together against the reptilians on this one what can we stand together for?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimlup (Reply #6)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 12:59 PM

7. Yes. I know that.

I'm not attacking Holder. He is Obama's appointee. I may disagree with some of his decisions, but I don't disagree with him holding the position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimlup (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 09:35 AM

2. Isn't the contempt vote a moot point anyway?

Since President Obama has asserted EP? What is it that Issa wants to see so badly, anyway? What does he believe is being hidden?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 09:48 AM

4. Not necessarily

EP is only valid for national security issues and deliberations from immediate WH staff. EP cannot be used to supress evidence of criminal wrong-doing; which is what is being alleged (That's not MY estimation, jsut the allegation being leveled -- so don't flame me, please!). Case in point: Nixon suppressing tapes where he discusses covering-up the break-in.

And just like Nixon this will probably end up in court. As things go that probably means it won't be resolved until after the election. That means it becomes a campaign issue, so get ready for lots of back and forth on this. The nausea has only just begun.

If the contempt vote passes it becomes campaign commercials for Romney and his PACs at a minimum. Legally Boehner could order Holder arrested by the House Sergeant-at-Arms but that would be unprecedented and an overreach (a gift to Obama, really). He could demand a special prosecutor be appointed but one branch of government cannot order another branch of government on how to conduct their respective duties. That would then become a matter of political weight ass well. Boehner's third option is my first suggestion: it goes to court where it will sloth its way up to the USSC.

Me? I'm taking up watching pro-wrestling. It's more authentic and it has muscley, sweaty, grunting menz.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread