Posted on 04/11/2014 8:52:39 AM PDT by NOBO2012
“The best way to control opposition is to lead it ourselves.” – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
What Eric Holder actually said: (bold added)
“And since the day I became Attorney General in 2009, I have been proud to stand alongside you in supporting efforts to advance the cause of justice that has always been at the center of this Administration’s work.
I’m pleased to note that the last five years have been defined by significant strides and lasting reforms – even in the face of unprecedented, unwarranted ugly and divisive adversity. And if you don’t believe that, you look at the way …forget about me… forget about me , you look at the way the Attorney General of the United States was treated yesterday by a House committee. Had nothing to do with me what Attorney General has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment? What President has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment. Last summer, after a narrowly split but divided Supreme Court struck down a key part of the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965, my colleagues and I took action – by challenging specific laws, in North Carolina and Texas, that could disproportionately restrict access to the ballot box among some populations.”
And now, direct from the most transparent administration ever…(drum roll)
and the Department of Justice’s official website,
what Eric Holder’s DOJ said he said: (note: bolded section, above, missing h/t Weasel Zippers)
“And since the day I became Attorney General in 2009, I have been proud to stand alongside you in supporting efforts to advance the cause of justice that has always been at the center of this Administration’s work.
I’m pleased to note that the last five years have been defined by significant strides and lasting reforms – even in the face of unprecedented adversity. Last summer, after a narrowly split but divided Supreme Court struck down a key part of the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965, my colleagues and I took action – by challenging specific laws, in North Carolina and Texas, that could disproportionately restrict access to the ballot box among some populations.”
I guess they have no mechanism to update their “official” documents to reflect ad hoc remarks. Oh well, good enough for government work.
It could be my hypersensitive systems, butt does anyone else detect a whiff of déjà vu in the air?
Although this whiff smells less like “redaction” and more like old fashioned “revisionism,” no matter how you chose to define it:
REVISIONISM: attempts by amateur or professional historians to change the facts to fit their political ideology.
HISTORICAL REVISIONISM: a phrase that describes the process that attempts to rewrite history by minimizing, denying or simply ignoring essential facts.
That’s ridiculous. Who would “rewrite history by minimizing, denying or simply ignoring essential facts that don’t fit their political ideology?” Well, okay, maybe Stalin. And Stalin apologists. And Ahmadinejad and the Holocaust deniers. Oh, and Al Gore, Michael Mann, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi…and everybody else serving in “the most transparent administration in U.S. history.” If we have to rewrite history in order to save it, so be it.
Oh and by the way Ricky - can I call you that, or is that racist? For the record, regarding that “unprecedented, unwarranted ugly and divisive adversity” directed at “the Attorney General;” you’re kidding, right? I can think of a few of your predecessors who might agree with the “ugly, and divisive adversity” part based on their own contentious grilling by Congress. They would surely disagree on the “unprecedented” part however. John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales, and John Mitchell come immediately to mind, butt I seem to recall Janet Reno was charged with contempt of Congress. That was pretty harsh. I suspect that was all because she was a woman though. Not because she was a liar with “blood on her hands” like Condoleezza Rice, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush and every other Republican in “history.”
In other news: Lois Lerner was found in contempt of Congress yesterday. How DARE they do that to a white woman!? And Kathleen Sibelius announced her resignation, under duress, no doubt because she too is a white woman.
Anyway, here’s today’s extra credit assignment: in the redacted portion of Eric Holder’s remarks, above, why was he speaking about himself in the third person? (Hint: he may be writing an autobiography.)
Sorry kid, that’s already been done. By Bill Ayers.
Today’s Ministry of Truth has been brought to you by the Reverend Al Sharpton and his National Action Network – not to be confused with Organizing for Action.
Posted from: Michelle Obama’s Mirror
*
*
*
Louie should have said: “I’ll go where I want and say what I want. Whatever it takes to root out government corruption. And Mr. Holder, you’re being offended does not dissuade me in the least from doing my job for the people of my district and this country. We will expose that which needs to be exposed whether you like it or nor.”
But Obama's friends in the MSM will no less assist in the White House propaganda.
On Rush’s show, one caller said saying something like that could be seen as a threat.
Ask me something? Don’t go there.
Somehow the whole Clinton impeachment saga slipped his mind.
What about Benghazi and Fast and Furious? Chopped liver?
Recently "Fox & Friends" did a March Madness brackets contest with 64 Obama administration scandals. They didn't have much trouble finding 64 scandals...probably could have found a lot more if needed. The IRS scandal ended up as the champion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
