Complaint seeks to have Holder disbarred after contempt vote

[katsung47]

Will Holder leave it alone again?

Quote, "Complaint seeks to have Holder disbarred after contempt vote


By Laura Prabucki Published July 12, 2012
FoxNews.com

Fallout from the Operation Fast and Furious scandal continues to spread, as Attorney General Eric Holder faces a new call to be disbarred or penalized after he was found in contempt of Congress.

A formal complaint was filed last week with the Washington, D.C., Office of Bar Counsel -- of which Holder is a member. The letter was submitted by gun-rights advocates and bloggers David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh, who have reported extensively on Operation Fast and Furious.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz20ugRajm8

[Catta]

I thought everyone was in contempt of congress...

*badum tssssh*

[Sunseeker]

I thought everyone was in contempt of congress...

*badum tssssh*

Given the chance I'd hold the whole lot of them(with maybe a couple exceptions) in contempt of America and try them all for treason.

[Drakain]

This is actually an interesting question. At least for a lawyer.

Here's the thing: normally that would be kind of frivolous complaint, but Holder did some surprisingly stupid things that might bite him in the ass.

You're absolutely allowed to withhold information you believe is privileged as long as you assert that privilege in good faith. But he's turned around and disclosed to the public some documents that he refused to produce to Congress based on the fact it was privileged. The thing is when discovery occurs you don't get to withhold everything merely because some requests are objectionable. If there's no privilege or no objection, you have to produce the documents.

Holder didn't do that. Shockingly he actually disclosed some of the document he claimed were privileged to the public rather than produce them to Congress. This might be a politically savvy move (though I don't see how), but legally it's incredibly stupid because the document he disclosed to the public can't be privileged. It's a frivolous assertion of an non-existent legal right. It's a big deal.

That said, I don't know precisely how it works when Congress sub poena's documents, so he may have an out, procedurally, but what he did was just stupid. He should not have disclosed anything to the public because that seriously weakens any claim to privilege. I'm frequently flabbergasted what Holder does, though, so that's not new though.

[katsung47]

729. A.G.'s contempt of Congress (7/23/2012)

Now more information revealed that "Operation Fast and Furious" was a senseless mission. It didn't use tracking device on weapons. Local agents were ordered not to tracking straw purchasers. Mexico government was not notified the grogram. Until the operation ended none were arrested. So what the result of the whole operation was? Nothing except the mass killing that caused two hundred deaths in Mexico and death of US agent.

This was an intentional weapon proliferation in Mexico. The purpose was to turn Mexico into a killing field to prevent Kat Sung to enter Mexico. Kat Sung was denied to enter Canada in October 2009, (see detail at "611. Restricted in US (10/17/09)". "Fast and Furious" was initiated in November 2009. The two events were tightly connected.

Nobody was accountable for that big scandal so far. The BATF officer only changed his post to the head quarter because the real mastermind were high ranking D.O.J. from the FBI and DEA., I allege. That's why A.G. Eric Holder has been stonewalling congressional attempts to get to the bottom of Fast and Furious. Obama also asserted executive privilege over the documents in question. The House, has to hold A.G. Eric Holder in contempt of Congress.

Border Patrol group calls for Holder’s resignation

By Jerry Seper

The Washington Times Monday, June 18, 2012

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...s-resignation/

“Jun 2, 2012 – 129 House members now demanding Eric Holder's resignation
dailycaller.com “

Why does Eric Holder clings to his post and refuse to resign when it's a common practice in a big scandal?

He is waiting for a big case. When the FBI, DEA in Department of Justice commit a crime – killing people in a framed case, he’ll step down to take the responsibility. For the Feds, that framed drug case is much important than anything else. Remember, "Operation Fast and Furious" was also a sub project created to serve that main one.

http://katsung47.yuku.com/forums/66

[Faloestin]

729. A.G.'s contempt of Congress (7/23/2012)

Now more information revealed that "Operation Fast and Furious" was a senseless mission. It didn't use tracking device on weapons. Local agents were ordered not to tracking straw purchasers. Mexico government was not notified the grogram. Until the operation ended none were arrested. So what the result of the whole operation was? Nothing except the mass killing that caused two hundred deaths in Mexico and death of US agent.

This was an intentional weapon proliferation in Mexico. The purpose was to turn Mexico into a killing field to prevent Kat Sung to enter Mexico. Kat Sung was denied to enter Canada in October 2009, (see detail at "611. Restricted in US (10/17/09)". "Fast and Furious" was initiated in November 2009. The two events were tightly connected.

Nobody was accountable for that big scandal so far. The BATF officer only changed his post to the head quarter because the real mastermind were high ranking D.O.J. from the FBI and DEA., I allege. That's why A.G. Eric Holder has been stonewalling congressional attempts to get to the bottom of Fast and Furious. Obama also asserted executive privilege over the documents in question. The House, has to hold A.G. Eric Holder in contempt of Congress.

Why does Eric Holder clings to his post and refuse to resign when it's a common practice in a big scandal?

He is waiting for a big case. When the FBI, DEA in Department of Justice commit a crime – killing people in a framed case, he’ll step down to take the responsibility. For the Feds, that framed drug case is much important than anything else. Remember, "Operation Fast and Furious" was also a sub project created to serve that main one.

http://katsung47.yuku.com/forums/66

Dude, get some help. By which I mean medical counseling, not assistance overcoming the criminal conspiracy currently targeting you.

---------- Post added 2012-08-02 at 04:24 PM ----------

This is actually an interesting question. At least for a lawyer.

Here's the thing: normally that would be kind of frivolous complaint, but Holder did some surprisingly stupid things that might bite him in the ass.

You're absolutely allowed to withhold information you believe is privileged as long as you assert that privilege in good faith. But he's turned around and disclosed to the public some documents that he refused to produce to Congress based on the fact it was privileged. The thing is when discovery occurs you don't get to withhold everything merely because some requests are objectionable. If there's no privilege or no objection, you have to produce the documents.

Holder didn't do that. Shockingly he actually disclosed some of the document he claimed were privileged to the public rather than produce them to Congress. This might be a politically savvy move (though I don't see how), but legally it's incredibly stupid because the document he disclosed to the public can't be privileged. It's a frivolous assertion of an non-existent legal right. It's a big deal.

That said, I don't know precisely how it works when Congress sub poena's documents, so he may have an out, procedurally, but what he did was just stupid. He should not have disclosed anything to the public because that seriously weakens any claim to privilege. I'm frequently flabbergasted what Holder does, though, so that's not new though.

The Congressional Research Service put out a paper on this topic a couple of months ago that you may be interested in. Boiled down, it says it's tough to see how Congress can actually enforce their subpoena. Since Congress is not a court and this doesn't happen all that often (although curiously more often when Republicans control the House in a Democratic administration), all the privilege rules you recite would have to be litigated out. All that is presumably why they're going after Holder's Bar license. The DC Bar has rules about professional conduct, but given the partisan overtones to this dispute, it's tough to imagine the DC Bar doing much other than sitting on the complaint.