• 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!

Holder Hasn't Read AZ Law He Criticized

The Prof

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,828
Reaction score
1,808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Holder hasn't read Arizona law he criticized - Washington Times

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who has been critical of Arizona's new immigration law, said Thursday he hasn't yet read the law and is going by what he's read in newspapers or seen on television.

Mr. Holder is conducting a review of the law, at President Obama's request, to see if the federal government should challenge it in court. He said he expects he will read the law by the time his staff briefs him on their conclusions.

"I've just expressed concerns on the basis of what I've heard about the law. But I'm not in a position to say at this point, not having read the law, not having had the chance to interact with people are doing the review, exactly what my position is," Mr. Holder told the House Judiciary Committee.

This weekend Mr. Holder told NBC's "Meet the Press" program that the Arizona law "has the possibility of leading to racial profiling." He had earlier called the law's passage "unfortunate," and questioned whether the law was unconstitutional because it tried to assume powers that may be reserved for the federal government.
 
This guy has got to be the most incompetent AG in our nation's history.

He has been openly discussing taking legal action against a law he has never read.

You don't get any worse.
 
Some comments:

1. Unbelievable.

2. Completely incompetent.

3. Comprehensively unprepared.

4. Largely lacksadaisical, lazy and light headed.

4. When's enough gonna be enough?

5. He couldn't answer a simple who, when or where concerning Gitmo's closure.

6. Hence NINTEY SENATORS smacked him down.

7. He couldn't provide a pre-law-level PRECEDENT when it came to KSM's movement, since embarrassingly aborted, to Manhattan.

8. He STILL CAN'T SAY where or how the terrorists will be tried.

9. He PRECONVICTED the accused, rather crimping the purpose.

10. He PROMISED that KSM and his creepy kind would NEVER BE RELEASED.

11. He had to BACK DOWN on his immediate MIRANDIZING of the Mutallabs, precipitously pushing the PSE, public safety exception.

12. Now he admits he's completely IGNORANT of the entire TEN PAGES of law he RIPS on all the Sunday talks.

13. RACIAL PROFILING he lobs like a BOMB.

14. Shades of Gates vs Crowley.

15. Unconstitutional, he declares in the dark.

16. The administration ADMITS it has NO immigration policy.

17. There's "no appetite" this year, ad libs our impromptu prez.

18. Instead, cheap politicizations are all he proffers.

19. Reconditely REFUSING to enforce FEDERAL LAW on the border, he THROWS STONES at the PEOPLE OF ARIZONA for doing HIS job.

20. His TALKING POINTS are "comprehensive immigration reform."

21. Ok, but WHERE is it?

22. WHEN?

23. HOW?

24. SQUAT is his ANSWER.

25. The most incompetent administration in American history DOES IT AGAIN.

The Prof
 
Progressive ideologue, Holder....no different than our president, and Obama's latest nomination for SCOTUS

These folks have an agenda...and it requires the destruction of America to succeed.
 
Last edited:
Considering the fact pro-illegals and illegals have to resort to lies does anyone here actually believe Holder has not read the Arizona law he is criticizing? The only reason he says he hasn't read the law is because he doesn't plan on taking legal action against Arizona, taking legal action will result in him looking like a dumbass.
 
Considering the fact pro-illegals and illegals have to resort to lies does anyone here actually believe Holder has not read the Arizona law he is criticizing? The only reason he says he hasn't read the law is because he doesn't plan on taking legal action against Arizona, taking legal action will result in him looking like a dumbass.

Most folk realize he is a dumbass, in pretty much the same way as Obama, neither of them think before opening their mouths.

An old saying comes to mind for all these wanna be Politicians.

"Engage mind before engaging mouth'
 
Most folk realize he is a dumbass, in pretty much the same way as Obama, neither of them think before opening their mouths.

An old saying comes to mind for all these wanna be Politicians.

"Engage mind before engaging mouth'


The political filth, in general, rely on 'we the peoples' short memories.
 
I feel like a broken record:

They never read ANY bill - no matter WHAT. Bill reading is not in their repertoire. They have attendees and other staff who read portions, summarize, and then report.
 
You have two number fours. :rofl
 
He possibly could have read the law, deciding no legal basis for a court challenge. Making such remarks to save face within the party. Another possibility, waiting for someone else to file a challenge, then file a "Friend of the Court" brief.
 
Last edited:
This guy has got to be the most incompetent AG in our nation's history.

Based on what, the Washington Time spin on one statement...

You do realize he's not the only lawyer at the DOJ.


He has been openly discussing taking legal action against a law he has never read.

Incorrect. False. More b.s. spin... They are reviewing the law to see if it may violate federal laws...

Get your facts straight before you open your mouth... I think I've told you that before, do you ever plan on doing it?

You don't get any worse.

ah, you serve your masters well.... mindlessly repeating mindless talking points... Good, boy!:2wave:
 
Based on what, the Washington Time spin on one statement...

You do realize he's not the only lawyer at the DOJ.




Incorrect. False. More b.s. spin... They are reviewing the law to see if it may violate federal laws...

Get your facts straight before you open your mouth... I think I've told you that before, do you ever plan on doing it?



ah, you serve your masters well.... mindlessly repeating mindless talking points... Good, boy!:2wave:

Holder explicitly admitted not having read the law.

You are just an epic hack.
 
Holder explicitly admitted not having read the law.

You are just an epic hack.

and you, my friend, lack the ability to read a post and follow a thread...


guess what, he's busy. He has people doing this for him, writing a report. There was some political posturing right after the law passed, but no one knows for sure how it's going to be used.... so...

but the OP is just another stupid hit piece from the far-righties looking to pull down all things Obama.

I swear people that obsessed have to be bothered by something more than his policies... could it be skin color??:cool::cool:
 
and you, my friend, lack the ability to read a post and follow a thread...


guess what, he's busy. He has people doing this for him, writing a report. There was some political posturing right after the law passed, but no one knows for sure how it's going to be used.... so...

but the OP is just another stupid hit piece from the far-righties looking to pull down all things Obama.

I swear people that obsessed have to be bothered by something more than his policies... could it be skin color??:cool::cool:

The highest legal officer in the land is actively criticizing a law he's never read, and you're making excuses for him...

Epic hack.
 
lefties will excuse, obfuscate and blatantly lie to protect those having attained positions that forward their dangerous and fiscally unsustainable agenda
 
Last edited:
It's good to know that you guys have read in full every law that you've criticized on these forums. It's also good to know that all criticism from the posters in this thread of laws that Obama and the democratic Congress pass in the coming years will be coming from people who have read the bills or laws before posting. Having such thorough, non-hypocritical posters is a boon to this message board :)
 
he's busy, his people did it, not him, he's just posturing a little, no one knows for sure...

it's his skin color!

LOL!
 
It's good to know that you guys have read in full every law that you've criticized on these forums

i think a FORUMS MEMBER not reading a bill is not quite the same thing as the ATTORNEY GENERAL not reading it

especially after mr ag's gone out and spouted his uninformed piece about it on MEET THE PRESS

LOL!
 
It's good to know that you guys have read in full every law that you've criticized on these forums. It's also good to know that all criticism from the posters in this thread of laws that Obama and the democratic Congress pass in the coming years will be coming from people who have read the bills or laws before posting. Having such thorough, non-hypocritical posters is a boon to this message board :)

As for myself, I make it a point to read laws before forming any kind of opinion on them. One, I enjoy reading legal texts (strange, I know), and, two, I'm naturally meticulous; I like absorbing information.

Anyway, I'm not the Attorney General, whereas Eric Holder is, which would make your comparison kind of silly, no? Or is he held to the same standard as random people on the internet?
 
Based on what, the Washington Time spin on one statement...

You do realize he's not the only lawyer at the DOJ.

Yeah, he's just the AG. No authority at all

Incorrect. False. More b.s. spin... They are reviewing the law to see if it may violate federal laws...

Get your facts straight before you open your mouth... I think I've told you that before, do you ever plan on doing it?

Thanks for once again showing us your lack of gathering the facts before shooting your mouth off.

He ADMITTED he hasn't read the law.

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U4tI_qzyH0"]YouTube- C-SPAN Ted Poe questions Eric Holder Arizona Immigration Law[/nomedia]



Check out at 41 seconds in. He's asked the question "HAVE YOU READ THE LAW" He ADMITS he hasn't.

But no shock you didn't check your facts. Just business as usual for you.

Enjoy your utter and epic fail.

ah, you serve your masters well.... mindlessly repeating mindless talking points... Good, boy!:2wave:

I know how to watch a video. Its a shame you haven't learned to actually check your facts out before making moronic statements that are completely untrue.
 
Last edited:
It's good to know that you guys have read in full every law that you've criticized on these forums. It's also good to know that all criticism from the posters in this thread of laws that Obama and the democratic Congress pass in the coming years will be coming from people who have read the bills or laws before posting. Having such thorough, non-hypocritical posters is a boon to this message board :)

This isn't the health care bill.

Its 10 pages long. You'd think the AG of the United States wouldn't be this stupid.
 
He ADMITTED he hasn't read the law.

Is there an echo in here??:shock:

yes. I got it. We got it. We got that you think that means something....

Let me tell you a secret....

The managing partner of a big New York law firm doesn't read everything coming out of the San Jose office...

It's a STATE LAW. There MAY BE a federal issue. He has PEOPLE (other Lawyer) looking into it.



You know, it's difficult to have conversation with you as you don't really understand what an AJ does.... or a President....
 
It's good to know that you guys have read in full every law that you've criticized on these forums. It's also good to know that all criticism from the posters in this thread of laws that Obama and the democratic Congress pass in the coming years will be coming from people who have read the bills or laws before posting. Having such thorough, non-hypocritical posters is a boon to this message board :)

You might have a point,but we are not lawmakers(whose job it is to read the bills before voting for them) or AGs(who plans to sue over it) and besides that Arizona's HB 1070? Arizona's bill is a 11-12 page bill, so even someone with the shortest attention span can read it.
 
I don't have to slog through hundreds and hundreds of pages to know that the healthcare reform bill was crap. The contents of the controversial parts of the law are well known, and it is completely reasonable to form an opinion without sitting down and reading the text, as the portions that people feel strongly about are national news. Add in the fact that the uproar over the AZ law centered around a single phrase, which was widely printed, and I don't think it's wrong for Holder to criticize the bill without reading through the 9 1/2 pages of mundane, noncontroversial text that surrounded it.

Does his not having read the following paragraph really have an impact on the validity of his opinon?

11 A. An employer shall not knowingly employ an unauthorized alien. If,
12 in the case when an employer uses a contract, subcontract or other
13 independent contractor agreement to obtain the labor of an alien in this
14 state, the employer knowingly contracts with an unauthorized alien or with a
15 person who employs or contracts with an unauthorized alien to perform the
16 labor, the employer violates this subsection.

Is there any section of the law that you believe would have impacted his opinion had he read it? I'd love to see a quote
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom