• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Att'y general failed to give legal briefs to Senate

j-mac

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
(Reuters) - Attorney General Eric Holder failed to tell the Senate about seven legal briefs he signed when lawmakers considered his nomination to his current job, according to a letter released on Friday.

Two of the briefs involved appeals to the Supreme Court for Jose Padilla, who sought release from a military prison in South Carolina where he was being held after then-President George W. Bush designated him an "enemy combatant."

Padilla was held in a military brig for three years before his case was moved to a criminal court in Miami, where he was convicted on charges of offering his services to militants.

The Justice Department sent the Senate Judiciary Committee, which vets presidential nominees, a list of briefs that were omitted on Friday. "We regret the omission," Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich said in a letter to the panel.

Att'y general failed to give legal briefs to Senate | Reuters
Click to expand...


Man! The more that this corrupt Obama organization is checked into, the more they operate like a criminal enterprise. I say we need Special Prosecutors for the whole bunch.


j-mac
 
On the one hand, it's not like these were some secret documents that nobody could have otherwise obtained and which contained information about policy positions that he didn't otherwise endorse.

On the other hand, it's hard to believe that when someone is asked to turn over copies of all of the briefs he's submitted to the Supreme Court in his career, he forgets seven of the twelve. You don't really tend to forget your SC amicus briefs.

Not sure what motivation he would have to hide these things, but also not sure how on earth he overlooked this.
 
One of two possible reasons come to mind.
1) He is an idiot.
2) He is forgetful.

What I personally find strange is how this streak of forgetfulness seems to run rampant through Democratic appointees.
 
jujuman13 said:
One of two possible reasons come to mind.
1) He is an idiot.
2) He is forgetful.

What I personally find strange is how this streak of forgetfulness seems to run rampant through Democratic appointees.
Click to expand...

Well, it could actually be both - long shot... but possible.
 
thank you for posting this, an important story

again, that which was concealed from the public always runs so strongly in one direction

like the misrepresented "stimulus" numbers misreported on recovery.gov

never do the oversights and riddled arithmetic end up painting the numbers-challenged admin in a WORSE LIGHT

like the gao's audit yesterday of usaspending.gov, once more, a bunch of numbers fudged oddly unrandomly, all tending one way

here, holder hides his soft-on-suspects views which he misrepresented in testimony before senate

the story was made public when dana perino, bush's press secty and a rising star on the right, called out holder for filing an amicus brief in the case of jose padilla, whom holder back then argued could conceivably go free if tried before civil venue

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34233.html

in repeated testimony since, he has stated the opposite about accused terrorists

holder's a disaster

his testimony before lindsey graham was a joke, he couldn't answer the simple pre-law question of precedent

youtube made a hit video out of the extremely entertaining exchange

holder can only be held repsonsible for the failure to close gitmo

once more, NINETY senators repulsed his and his bumbling boss' bid because they couldn't provide a single how, when or where

holder is totally the man in the middle of the move-ksm-to-manhattan messup, a huge humiliation for this white house

the mirandizing of mutallab independent even of a CONSULTATION with the security team

the irony is that the 7 doj employees who'd worked on behalf of accused terrorists, whose names mr holder refused to provide senator grassley, is really 8

and includes the answerless ag himself

holder did the marc rich pardons, he's a sellout

holder did the faln pardons, he's a radical

he's a huge political liability, and that aint spin

so is rahm, sorry

have a nice weekend
 
Last edited:
the silence from the left is deafening in here.


j-mac
 
This man is neither and idiot or forgetful and the intentional withholding of these facts was to keep his and Obama's pro Islamic views from the publick as long as possible.

No attorney in this life time could ever forget arguing a case before the high court unless he was either being intentionally deceitful.

It's just another example of the Chicago style Government we face until WE THE PEOPLE say enough to this bunch of crooks and liars.
 
the ag's egregious oversight is an unambiguous exhibition of his and obama's intentional withholding of their pro islamic views

it's just one more example of the comprehensive chicago-ization of the federal govt under this big shouldered, mafiosa leadership

it won't hold much longer

the silence in here on the part of the left is deafening

indeed, absolutely
 
j-mac said:
the silence from the left is deafening in here.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Most of the left doesn't care about non stories. :shrug:
 
moving ksm to manhattan and then back to gitmo

mirandizing mutallab without even a phone call to security

planning to turn iran over a cup of coffee

prosecuting (or not) the cia for "torture"

eric holder's incompetence and rather extreme views concerning terrorism

non stories

LOL!
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Most of the left doesn't care about non stories. :shrug:
Click to expand...

So true. And how quickly the right forgets the errors of the last administration that really were criminal and could fill volumes. :roll:
 
Hatuey said:
Most of the left doesn't care about non stories. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Did you even read the article? 2 briefs were on Jose Padilla.

Remember who he was? Not exactly a small fish.

But no shock you would dismiss it since it involves liberals in breaches of ethics.
 
jujuman13 said:
One of two possible reasons come to mind.
1) He is an idiot.
2) He is forgetful.

What I personally find strange is how this streak of forgetfulness seems to run rampant through Democratic appointees.
Click to expand...

3) They make him look bad so they deliberately withheld them so the Senate could not ask about them during his confirmation.
 
Hatuey said:
Most of the left doesn't care about non stories. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I'm not saying its a smoking gun, but this is by no means a non-story.

If John Roberts had failed to mention two briefs that he had written arguing that Roe should have been overturned and that accused terrorists should have no rights, you don't think that we'd be in the middle of two weeks of hearings right now?
 
jujuman13 said:
One of two possible reasons come to mind.
1) He is an idiot.
2) He is forgetful.

What I personally find strange is how this streak of forgetfulness seems to run rampant through Democratic appointees.
Click to expand...

Wow. How quickly you forget General Alberto Gonzales who couldn't quite remember anything much about just anything important!

You, sir, should look to the log in your eye!

General Holder signed one additional brief about Jose Padilla than was disclosed during the nomination process. The other six of the seven undisclosed briefs signed by him “related to issues such as race discrimination and a challenge to a prison sentence.”†

While the oversight is regrettable, does anybody believe any of these seven briefs would have altered the Senate advice and consent process? No. I didn't think so.
 
this situation speaks to the AG being half assed at best, if not dishonest

do those who lean to the republican side believe that the disclosure of these briefs would have resulted in a different confirmation decision? if so, why?
 
j-mac said:
the silence from the left is deafening in here.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Exactly. And the silence will continue until it's time to discuss the missing John Yoo emails.
 
Chappy said:
While the oversight is regrettable, does anybody believe any of these seven briefs would have altered the Senate advice and consent process? No. I didn't think so.
Click to expand...

Might we have taken this precedence and asked him what he was going to do with Gitmo detainees? Should he have stated then that he planned on offering them lawyers and civilian courts....would that have affected the process?
 
RightinNYC said:
I'm not saying its a smoking gun, but this is by no means a non-story.

If John Roberts had failed to mention two briefs that he had written arguing that Roe should have been overturned and that accused terrorists should have no rights, you don't think that we'd be in the middle of two weeks of hearings right now?
Click to expand...

Roberts was being confirmed for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Holder: Attorney General. Slight diff.

The six briefs to the Supreme Court were not Holder's work alone. In every instance, he was one of a group of prominent lawyers or ex-judges who signed a friend-of-the-court brief.
Click to expand...

Contrary to the right's desire, not every mistake is a conspiracy. I don't think he actually argued any of these before SCOTUS. He signed a brief. Who knows how those were collected to be handed over before his confirmation. He could have been assured they would be in the pile and then a secretary didn't put one pile on top of the other.

I see he gets no credit for coming forward with the mistake.

It may not be a non-story but, it's pretty close. Would you believe a simple explanation? Or would you want to :beatdeadhorse ?
 
his secretary put it in the wrong pile?

LOL!

he gets credit for dana perino ratting him out and forcing him to come clean?

LOLOL!
 
The Prof said:
his secretary put it in the wrong pile?
Click to expand...

You don't think that's a possibility?

he gets credit for dana perino ratting him out and forcing him to come clean?

LOLOL!
Click to expand...

Whoops! I hadn't seen that. :3oops: That does make it a tad worse but, only a tad. I'm sure the rightees can't wait to tie him to the stake but, let's wait to see if he comes out with a reason before you light the fire.
 
ADK_Forever said:
You don't think that's a possibility?



Whoops! I hadn't seen that. :3oops: That does make it a tad worse but, only a tad. I'm sure the rightees can't wait to tie him to the stake but, let's wait to see if he comes out with a reason before you light the fire.
Click to expand...

have we lost confidence in him because of his incompetence or his dishonesty?

does that really matter - we have lost confidence in him. or if you have not, please indicate why you would still believe someone so negligent should remain as our senior law enforcement official
 
ADK_Forever said:
Contrary to the right's desire, not every mistake is a conspiracy.
Click to expand...

What about an Attorney General filling the department of justice with a stable full of terrorist-defending attorneys?

Does that pass your smell test?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom