Eric "Mother-f*c# i @g" Holder

 

I’ve spent months chronicling the confluence of incompetence, deceit, and political opportunism that is Eric "Mother #ucki*g" Holder’s Justice Department, whether it takes the form of the Fast and Furious scandal or the administration’s transparently partisan staffing of the department’s Civil Rights Division.

Now, without a coherent counterargument, the Attorney General is essentially pulling the fire alarm with his request for "Executive Privilege".

 Is Attorney General Eric “Mother F*c@i$g” Holder telling the truth about "Operation Fast and Furious"? Does anyone have an answer different from "Hell No"?

While the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives were spending a year and a half supplying weapons to Mexican drug cartels, did he really have no idea what was going on? My guess would have to be "He knew everything".

Although documentary evidence strongly indicates that Holder’s Department of Justice has engaged in a cover-up of “Fast and Furious” in order to protect Holder/Obama appointees, is Holder actually innocent? Ah, let me think; "NO!"

Any time you have to judge a person’s veracity, it is important to take into account that person’s prior record of honesty or dishonesty. That a person has often lied in the past does not necessarily mean he is lying today. But considering Eric “Mother F#ck*ng” Holder’s established record of dishonesty and dissimulation, there is absolutely no reason to take him at his word on “Fast and Furious” or anything else he says.

Holder has recently claimed that racism is one reason he is being criticized for “Operation Fast and Furious.” While there is no evidence to support his claim, there is plentiful evidence that Holder himself perverts law enforcement for racist and other purposes.

Watch Eric Yaverbaum Discusses Eric Holder’s Racism Claims on Fox News Live in News  |  View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com

Prior to serving as attorney general for President Barack Obama, Holder served as deputy attorney general for President Bill Clinton and Attorney General Janet Reno. In that capacity, he helped lead what the White House called its “all-out offensive on guns” in 2000.

Marc Rich

He had other duties as well, among them responsibility for making recommendations for presidential pardons. Among the most notorious was for the fugitive plutocrat Marc Rich.

Beginning in the 1980s, the U.S. Department of Justice began 15 years of attempting to dismantle Marc Rich’s criminal empire. Among Rich’s crimes was illegally violating the U.S. embargo against Iran, funneling money to the Iranian tyrants while they were holding Americans hostage.

In 1983, Rich was indicted for violating the Iran embargo and for $48 million in tax evasion. At the time it was the biggest federal tax fraud indictment ever. He was in Switzerland at the time, and refused to return to the United States to face charges. He promptly earned a spot on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted list.

In 1995, Holder was the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, in charge of all federal civil and criminal cases being brought in the District. Holder sueda company, Clarendon Ltd., whose previous name had been “Marc Rich & Company International.” Being controlled by a fugitive, the company was ineligible for government contracts, but Rich’s involvement was concealed so that Clarendon could win federal contracts to provide metal to the U.S. Mint.

After being sued by Holder’s office, Clarendon agreed in April 1995 to pay the government $1.2 million. The company admitted that it should have disclosed “Rich’s substantial indirect ownership.”

Holder’s office immediately sent out press releases bragging about Holder’s big victory against Marc Rich. As reported in the Wall Street Journal on April 13, 1995, “U.S. Attorney Eric "Mother Fuc*in#"  Holder said the agreement ends an investigation into the company’s contracts to supply $45 million in coinage metal to the U.S. Mint.”

Denise Rich

In the meantime, while Marc Rich was living in Europe as a fugitive from justice, his ex-wife, Denise Rich, was donating lavishly to the Clinton presidential library, the Hillary Clinton Senate campaign and to other Democrats.

Denise Rich made the brilliant move of hiring Jack Quinn to lobby for Marc Rich. Quinn, formerly Clinton’s White House counsel, happened to be very close to Vice President Al Gore. It was also common knowledge that Holder wanted to be attorney general if Gore won the 2000 election.

Jack Quinn Testifies in Marc Rich Pardon    

So in 1999, Quinn approached Holder on behalf of Rich. Two years later, when Congress made Holder testify under oath about the Rich pardon, Holder said that when Quinn asked Holder to help Rich, “Mr. Rich’s name was unfamiliar to me.”

Of course, those words are very hard to believe in light of Holder’s efforts a few years before in touting himself for his lawsuit that exposed Rich’s secret control of Clarendon.

Supposedly not knowing anything about Marc Rich, Deputy Attorney General Holder contacted the U.S. Attorney’s Office in New York City and attempted to get them to settle their criminal case against Rich for a deal that would involve no prison time. The New York office refused.

The next approach was to try to get a presidential pardon for Rich. Normally, a pardon for Rich would have been impossible. The U.S. Department of Justice has a long-established rule that it will not consider pardon requests for fugitives.

Normally, when a convict requests a pardon, the Department of Justice headquarters in D.C. solicits input from the U.S. Attorney’s Office that handled the prosecution. In the Rich criminal case, that was the Office for the Southern District of New York. The New York office was fiercely opposed to a pardon for Rich, and could have provided the D.C. headquarters with a thorough explanation of the scope and magnitude of Rich’s misdeeds.

Telling Quinn that the New York prosecutors would “howl” if they found out that Rich was seeking a pardon, Holder told Quinn to submit the pardon request directly to the White House, thereby keeping the New York prosecutors unaware. As a House committee later found, Holder was a “willing participant in the plan to keep the Justice Department from knowing about and opposing” the pardon.

President Clinton

Holder’s written memo to President Clinton about the Rich pardon was based almost entirely on information provided by Rich’s own lawyer.

President Clinton waited until his last day in office to announce all his pardons. The Rich pardon immediately became a public controversy, and so in February 2011 the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee conducted an investigative hearing. The House Government Operations Committee also called Holder to testify under oath.

As with Holder’s 2010-2011 testimony on “Fast and Furious,” the core of his defense was that he had little, if any, idea what was going on?

He told Congress that at the time when he pushed the pardon, and circumvented the New York prosecutors, he had “gained only a passing familiarity with the underlying facts of the Rich case.”

The U.S. House Government Operations Committee presumed that Holder was telling the truth under oath. Thus, the committee reported that the “sum total” of Holder’s “knowledge about Rich came from a page of talking points provided to him by Jack Quinn in 2000.” The committee declared Holder’s conduct “unconscionable.”

It is clear he has not been honest about the extent of his involvement with the failed Fast and Furious program and should not be entrusted with managing the Department of Justice.  Eric “Mother Fu*ki@g” Holder cannot avoid responsibility for his involvement with a government program that directly led to the tragic death of a decorated U.S. Border Patrol agent. As our nation’s top enforcer of the principles of law and justice, Mr. Eric "Mother F&%king" Holder has now lost all credibility and should step down immediately. The question now for Mr. Eric "Mother Fu#ki!g" Holder is whether he is only protecting himself or whether he is also protecting others - perhaps all the way to the top of the administration.

Despite the fact that Congress has subpoenaed documents from Eric “Mother Fuc@i*g” Holder, Holder has refused to provide a congressional committee while Obama short circuited the whole process by asserting "executive privilege" over the documents in question has all the earmarks of a cover up. The administration has already been embarrassed by certain revelations already produced by the investigation into "Fast and Furious." The documents Congress wants would probably make that embarrassment more acute, if not actually produce evidence that officials at the Justice Department may have lied during the course of the investigation. The use of "executive privilege" to prevent Congress from getting its hands on the documents in question makes it  look a lot like the administration is stonewalling.

Executive privilege is legitimate when properly invoked. But even then, the Supreme Court has maintained that it is not absolute. The Department of Justice must provide a compelling rationale for each assertion. Shielding wrongdoing has never been a qualifying rationale.The Supreme Court in United States v. Nixon (1974) held that executive privilege cannot be invoked at all if the purpose is to shield wrongdoing. The courts held that President Nixon’s purported invocation of executive privilege was illegitimate, in part, for that reason. There is reason to suspect that this might be the case in the Fast and Furious cover-up and stonewalling effort. Congress needs to get to the bottom of that question to prevent an illegal invocation of executive privilege and further abuses of power. That will require an index of the withheld documents and an explanation of why each of them is covered by executive privilege.

It is now up to Congress to ascertain the specific reasoning for executive privilege with every withheld document. Even in the unlikely case it is determined that this was a proper invocation of executive privilege, the administration is still not off the hook to inform Congress of what they know.

President Obama now owns the Fast and Furious scandal. It is entirely up to him whether he wants to live up to the transparency promises he made four years ago, or further develop a shroud of secrecy that would make President Richard Nixon blush. If the stonewalling continues, and the privilege is not waived, it will be up to the American people and the media to demand the reasoning for the cover-up.

It is also time for the media to begin responsibly covering this scandal. For more than 16 months, only a handful of reporters have appropriately researched the facts and sought answers. Most members of the national media would not even acknowledge the existence of the scandal. 

Liberals will try and pretend this operation that began in mid-2009 is connected to former President George W. Bush's administration. The media should challenge this false assertion. Operation Wide Receiver in 2006 did not remotely resemble Fast and Furious.Mexico helped coordinate it, and there was traceable controlled delivery. Even Holder admitted in testimony that you cannot "equate the two."

We will also hear that this is "election-year politics." The problem with that refrain is that this investigation has been ongoing since early 2011, well before campaign season started. It has been Attorney General Holder's evasiveness that has dragged this process closer to Election Day.

If it were not for conservative media outlets, bloggers, a few dogged reporters and the steadfastness of House Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA), this troubling scandal would have been buried long ago. 

Darrell Issa

We will also hear that this is "election-year politics." The problem with that refrain is that this investigation has been ongoing since early 2011, well before campaign season started. It has been Attorney General Eric "Mother Fu#k@n%" Holder's evasiveness that has dragged this process closer to Election Day.

If it were not for conservative media outlets, bloggers, a few dogged reporters and the steadfastness of House Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA), this troubling scandal would have been buried long ago. Here's an excellent example of the duplicity of  that is Eric "Mother *uc*infg" Holder. 

Mr. Issa contends that, “The contempt hearing is not about this investigation, it’s about a narrow subset of documents that this committee must ultimately receive.” In April, Issa gave an interview at the National Rifle Association convention in St. Louis, in which he gave credence to suspicions held by many conservatives and gun owners about the program’s true intent. 

"Could it be that what they really were thinking of was in fact to use this walking of guns in order to promote an assault weapons ban? Or, was this an attempt to subvert the second amendment of the constitution?" Rep. Issa said. “Many think so, and the administration hasn’t come up with an explanation that would cause anyone not to agree.”Loosely based on two similar operations that took place during the Bush administration, Fast and Furious began in 2009, shortly after administration officials, including Obama, several times cited in public a contested estimate that 90 percent of guns used in Mexican violence came from the US, a situation they said was wreaking havoc in Mexico and injuring relations between the two continental powers.

Around that time, the administration says, ATF agents in Phoenix, under pressure to stem the flow, began allowing straw purchasers to “walk” assault weapons into Mexico, in order to track the guns and build criminal cases against not just low-level drug operators, but cartel bosses.                        

But in the process, ATF lost track of 1,400 guns, some of which have been recovered at murder scenes in Mexico and two of which were found at the scene in Arizona where Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was gunned down by suspected drug smugglers.

To be sure, Holder, who has testified nine times about the program, has made some slips, including the fact that he told Congress he didn’t know about the program until after the death of Agent Terry, though it now seems clear that some of his direct reports may have had rudimentary knowledge of the program 10 months earlier.

Another event that piqued Republican interest came last year when Holder had to retract a letter sent to Congress on Feb. 4, 2011, which stated flatly that the ATF wasn’t allowing guns to walk. DOJ said it was relying on inaccurate field reports when it wrote that letter, and filled Congress in six months later when they could confirm and nail down the truth.

In the aftermath, both Holder and the President have acknowledged the gambit was a terrible idea, shouldn’t have happened, and won’t happen again. Though he contends he was never directly involved, Holder, as Obama’s top cop, has taken responsibility and apologized to the family of Agent Terry for his death. Meanwhile, half a dozen involved agents and officials have lost their jobs or been reassigned.

DOJ Documents

While tens of thousands of documents are in play, Congress say it wants to look specifically at a set of 1,300 documents, mostly emails, that investigators hope will shed light on who at Justice and the White House were directly involved. Holder has maintained that releasing some of the documents Congress wants could put cases and field agents in jeopardy.

At the least, the contents of the documents could fall short of conspiracy but still yield politically embarrassing information about how the administration crafted its response to the scandal, giving rise to charges that Republicans are on an irrational “fishing expedition” for political dirt.

“Though it’s not clear exactly what these documents may involve, it seems likely they consist of the Department of Justice’s reaction to the backlash against Fast and Furious, and quite possibly documents signed by Obama himself.

Given that most Americans “hold Congress in contempt,” the President has portrayed the constitutional showdown as part of a running battle with obstinate Republicans, a situation he certainly elevated by stepping in to block the Congressional subpoena with executive privilege.

"The Republicans are succeeding in a strategy that they laid out for all of you at the beginning of last year,". "They vowed to use their investigative powers to score political points against the administration and to further obstruct the President's legislative agenda."

Democrats on the Oversight Committee on Saturday filed a “minority view” to be included in next week’s scheduled contempt vote, noting specifically that, “The Committee’s investigation of ATF gunwalking operations has been characterized by a series of unfortunate and unsubstantiated allegations against the Obama Administration that turned out to be inaccurate.”

But while the political lines around Fast and Furious are thus clearly drawn, allusions to Watergate-sized conspiracy theories do, at the very least, also help bolster Issa’s central point: If only to quell such theories, Americans deserve to know whether it was really a hapless bureaucratic blunder or whether administration officials lied about the extent of their involvement in what became a deadly scandal.