Tuesday, September 1, 2009

CIA Witch-Hunt Begins With Barack's Blessing

Ralph Peters on the Obama-approved witch-hunt of the CIA.
And let's get real: Attorney General Eric Holder (whose top career achievement was finessing the presidential pardon of a criminal Clinton donor) is not acting independently.

Anyone who believes that Holder didn't pre-brief the president and get the nod prior to announcing his determination to crucify high-achieving CIA agents probably believes that government-run health care will balance the federal budget.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

And with the blessing of Alberto Gonzales who says it is NOT a witch hunt.

"Still, he expressed his confidence that Mr. Holder is concerned only about the "one percent of actors" who went beyond the guideline of Justice Department lawyers, not conducting a witch hunt."

"Former U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales on Tuesday defended the decision of his current successor, Eric H. Holder Jr., to investigate alleged prisoner abuse by CIA interrogators over President Obama's desire to look forward.

"As chief prosecutor of the United States, he should make the decision on his own, based on the facts, then inform the White House," said Mr. Gonzales, who was appointed to the post by President George W. Bush in 1995 and resigned in 2007.

Mr. Gonzales also said Bush administration lawyers clearly defined what interrogation techniques were legal and the few who went beyond the rules should be investigated, despite the so-called chilling effect it might have on future intelligence-gathering."

September 1, 2009 at 12:34 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Erick Holder, gee that name sounds familiar. Wasn't the same Erick Holder deputy attorney for the Clinton administration? The same Eric Holder who sent the storm troopers to Flordia to capture and deport that dangerous and violent kid, named Elian Gonzalez and appease our dear friend fidel Castro, from Cuba? Mr. Holders bravery will go down in history as the single most dangerous moment to face any deputy attorney general ever. isn't it strange, how brazen the likes of Eric Holder is, when he points his finger at others for wrong doing?

September 1, 2009 at 4:54 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First Janet Reno was the "villian" behind Elian, now it's Eric Holder?

The GOP was wrong on the law on this one (as usual). The boy's mother was dead. The boy's father was alive. The family in Florida had NO legal standing.

Besides, Elian was in the same category of "illegal immigrants" that the GOP wants to deport (or worse). Many of the of Hispanics the GOP complains about are the grown-up children who were brought here as babies.

The GOP just wanted to make noise against Castro, to get Cuban-American votes.

September 1, 2009 at 7:30 PM 
Anonymous Minky said...

Anonymous#3 You are absolutely right, the Clintons, Janet Reno and of course Eric Holder carried out the deed. If I remember right it was Elian's mother who gave up her life to see that her little boy was free from enslavement. I could be wrong but I thought that the democrats loved illegal immigrants but I suppose five year olds can't vote and besides there a drain on the economy

September 2, 2009 at 9:38 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It was Elian's mother who foolishly threw away her life and risked her son's. She kidnapped her child from the father without proper custody to do so.
Didn't 10 of the 12 people on that boat die? Their "slavery" ended too.
Since when is the GOP for illegal immigrants and against parental rights?
The bottom line was that the kid rightfully and legally belonged with his father. If his father came over to live in the US, he probably would still have separated the kid from that crazy Florida family anyway.

September 2, 2009 at 11:57 AM 
Anonymous Minky said...

Anonymous#3 & 5 I am having trouble trying to figure you out, I know that you are not a conservative thinker and of course you are no democrat because you would know by now that "mens" rights, world wide were cancelled back in the 1960s by the feminist even Cuban male's were included. So give me a hint what are you? Elian's father according to liberal thinkers is entitled to absolutly nothing!

September 2, 2009 at 3:40 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The US government had no legal basis to keep the child from his natural father. Period.
If the sexes had been reversed, the child would have gone back to Cuba as well.
Unless there had been sexual abuse, there was no legitimate reason to deny the father custody. (Cuban being communist is not a sufficient reason.)
Besides, I think Elian is being treated pretty well in Cuba.

September 3, 2009 at 10:36 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home