Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) confronts Attorney General Eric Holder about his decision to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other terrorist detainees in a Manhattan criminal court:
Is anyone else sick and tired of how these BHO appointees never seem to be able to give a simple and straight forward answer about ANYTHING?
AG Holder was given numerous opportunities to state his case clearly and, instead, stuttered or hemmed and hawed his way though the entire video. This whole sordid episode had better sink his political career faster than the Titanic.
the most dismaying, discouraging, and appalling (apply whatever other adjectives come to mind, Zenster -- sloppy, irresponsible, etc)realization here is that these people do NOT know what they're doing. Any half-way competent attorney (never mind the senior AG in America) would have been prepared for that question. We might not have liked his answer, but at least we'd have a statement of intent and a coherent, over-arching philosophy re captured prisoners of war. It might be nothing but boilerplate, but it would certainly be comprehensible.
Ah....bub..buh...let me check on that...buh, uh...er...
This is not a competent performance.
You know what? I don't think they care enough to perform due diligence here and they don't care if the world knows it. That was brazen.
If your whole point is to get Bush, then who cares what some Senator from Podunk has to say? This federal trial will be a trial of George Bush. That is its whole intent and purpose: to make the intelligence details public and to ruin anyone connected to this Before Obama.
They just showed their hand with this video. Can you feel his thumb in your eye? I sure can feel the one he put in mine.
I do not like these people. They do not wish our country and its people well AT ALL.
Dymphna: We might not have liked his answer, but at least we'd have a statement of intent and a coherent, over-arching philosophy re: captured prisoners of war.
I agree entirely. The entire reason American presidents have a four year term is so that they can implement their own vision, even if it is not entirely popular. Otherwise, the executive office would spend more time thrashing about in a quest for concensus and get far less done, if that is even possible to say in the case of BHO.
I don't think they care enough to perform due diligence here and they don't care if the world knows it.
A lawyer who does not perform due diligence is guilty of malpractice and should be disbarred. A nation's Attorney General who does not have ready answers to easily anticipated questions that are to be expected from his political opposition is incompetent at best.
This entire treatment of Islamic terrorism as a merely criminal enterprise is malfeasance writ large. Holder's inability to provide swift and concise responses with respect to any possible apprehension of bin Laden was beneath contempt. To act as though there is no well-formed plan of action regarding the detention of America's Public Enemy Number One™ is as preposterous as it is offensive to the average United States citizen.
As I wrote when this first surfaced, this is BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) writ large. Birthers look like calm and rational people (which they are), compared to the way this current administration is willing to compromise the most critical aspects of our national security interests in a quest to discredit an unpopluar predecessor.
The mere notion of revealing America's most difficult-to-obtain intelligence against its most rabid and well-financed enemy goes beyond all boundaries of rationality or propriety.
"A nation's Attorney General who does not have ready answers to easily anticipated questions that are to be expected from his political opposition is incompetent at best."
The fact that he was unprepared is evidence of the BHO office mentality. It is dismissive of any opposition in its entirety and merely perfunctory when required to give an account for itself. Holder couldn't possibly be embarrassed at his lack of professionalism. Why should he prepare when he holds America in utter contempt?
Regarding Lindsey Graham, I am a bit relieved he grew a spine on this occasion to confront the clod in front of him. I am unsure as to which audience Graham is playing. I am hardly comforted for his asking the right questions of Holder when in his real life he is just a RINO... Graham would't know "conservative" even if a large capital "C" fell from the sky and hit him on the head.
Guess the RINO credentials explain the foolish words "you are a fine man" addressed to Holder along with some obvious folderol about his wanting to keep the country safe.
If he DIDN'T want to keep the country safe, how would his actions differ?
That said, when even a RINO who's mostly left of center understands that giving the piece of filth who masterminded 9/11 the rights of an American citizen will compromise American safety, it shows how crazy Holder's decision actually is, off the board left.
And here's a legacy of the Obama buffoon presidency. For the third time in a few brief months, I looked at a black person in high office and felt certain that he was an incompetent affirmative action hire who would never never in a million years have been given the position if he were white (Obama himself and his Harvard professor of whining Gates were the first two who inspired those thoughts).
9 comments:
Is anyone else sick and tired of how these BHO appointees never seem to be able to give a simple and straight forward answer about ANYTHING?
AG Holder was given numerous opportunities to state his case clearly and, instead, stuttered or hemmed and hawed his way though the entire video. This whole sordid episode had better sink his political career faster than the Titanic.
the most dismaying, discouraging, and appalling (apply whatever other adjectives come to mind, Zenster -- sloppy, irresponsible, etc)realization here is that these people do NOT know what they're doing. Any half-way competent attorney (never mind the senior AG in America) would have been prepared for that question. We might not have liked his answer, but at least we'd have a statement of intent and a coherent, over-arching philosophy re captured prisoners of war. It might be nothing but boilerplate, but it would certainly be comprehensible.
Ah....bub..buh...let me check on that...buh, uh...er...
This is not a competent performance.
You know what? I don't think they care enough to perform due diligence here and they don't care if the world knows it. That was brazen.
If your whole point is to get Bush, then who cares what some Senator from Podunk has to say? This federal trial will be a trial of George Bush. That is its whole intent and purpose: to make the intelligence details public and to ruin anyone connected to this Before Obama.
They just showed their hand with this video. Can you feel his thumb in your eye? I sure can feel the one he put in mine.
I do not like these people. They do not wish our country and its people well AT ALL.
I loved watching this on the news reels. What a putz.
Dymphna: We might not have liked his answer, but at least we'd have a statement of intent and a coherent, over-arching philosophy re: captured prisoners of war.
I agree entirely. The entire reason American presidents have a four year term is so that they can implement their own vision, even if it is not entirely popular. Otherwise, the executive office would spend more time thrashing about in a quest for concensus and get far less done, if that is even possible to say in the case of BHO.
I don't think they care enough to perform due diligence here and they don't care if the world knows it.
A lawyer who does not perform due diligence is guilty of malpractice and should be disbarred. A nation's Attorney General who does not have ready answers to easily anticipated questions that are to be expected from his political opposition is incompetent at best.
This entire treatment of Islamic terrorism as a merely criminal enterprise is malfeasance writ large. Holder's inability to provide swift and concise responses with respect to any possible apprehension of bin Laden was beneath contempt. To act as though there is no well-formed plan of action regarding the detention of America's Public Enemy Number One™ is as preposterous as it is offensive to the average United States citizen.
As I wrote when this first surfaced, this is BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) writ large. Birthers look like calm and rational people (which they are), compared to the way this current administration is willing to compromise the most critical aspects of our national security interests in a quest to discredit an unpopluar predecessor.
The mere notion of revealing America's most difficult-to-obtain intelligence against its most rabid and well-financed enemy goes beyond all boundaries of rationality or propriety.
IT IS TREASON.
There's no England anymore. Thus, there can be no treason. Welcome to post-American America.
Dymphna...you said
"A nation's Attorney General who does not have ready answers to easily anticipated questions that are to be expected from his political opposition is incompetent at best."
The fact that he was unprepared is evidence of the BHO office mentality. It is dismissive of any opposition in its entirety and merely perfunctory when required to give an account for itself. Holder couldn't possibly be embarrassed at his lack of professionalism. Why should he prepare when he holds America in utter contempt?
Regarding Lindsey Graham, I am a bit relieved he grew a spine on this occasion to confront the clod in front of him. I am unsure as to which audience Graham is playing. I am hardly comforted for his asking the right questions of Holder when in his real life he is just a RINO... Graham would't know "conservative" even if a large capital "C" fell from the sky and hit him on the head.
Guess the RINO credentials explain the foolish words "you are a fine man" addressed to Holder along with some obvious folderol about his wanting to keep the country safe.
If he DIDN'T want to keep the country safe, how would his actions differ?
That said, when even a RINO who's mostly left of center understands that giving the piece of filth who masterminded 9/11 the rights of an American citizen will compromise American safety, it shows how crazy Holder's decision actually is, off the board left.
And here's a legacy of the Obama buffoon presidency. For the third time in a few brief months, I looked at a black person in high office and felt certain that he was an incompetent affirmative action hire who would never never in a million years have been given the position if he were white (Obama himself and his Harvard professor of whining Gates were the first two who inspired those thoughts).
I meant to call Gates "Obama's friend, the Harvard professor of whining", not imply that he had ever taught zero as a student.
laine said... "If he DIDN'T want to keep the country safe, how would his actions differ?"
Great line... can I use it next time the Obots screech on about their actions being justified for love of country?
Post a Comment