Posted on 09/30/2014 5:13:37 AM PDT by Kaslin
After 5 1/2 bumpy years of controversial service, the besieged but bolstered attorney general, Eric Holder, resigned. But is this close friend and confidant of President Barack Obama's really stepping down for some benign reason at a critical time for our country, or is there a sinister and strategic plan behind it all?
First, it's far more than a coincidence that the United States' chief lawyer is leaving office with more unanswered questions about crucial life-and-death national dilemmas than any previous attorney general. Though most have been accused of sitting on issues, none has been so assailed as Holder for personally stonewalling investigations, covering up government involvement and refusing to deal with politically explosive controversies. Holder has not prosecuted such monumental and rights-infringing crimes as the Fast and Furious debacle; the Benghazi, Libya, tragedy; National Security Agency wiretappings; press infringements; drone attacks on U.S. citizens; and the Internal Revenue Service scandal.
The Bronx, New York-born 63-year-old Holder proudly boasted that he had "taken steps to protect the environment," taken swift action in Ferguson, Missouri, and even opened a broad probe into the police department in Ferguson. However, he -- like our president and even Secretary of State John Kerry -- hasn't said a single word over the past six months about Marine reservist Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi's being wrongly imprisoned in Mexico.
Sadly, it has been recently reported that Tahmooressi, who suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder, is "highly despondent" because of the drastic deterioration of his mental health. And still, Holder refuses to speak up on behalf of this suffering, imprisoned American patriot.
Can you say resignation of denial and avoidance?
If Obama invoked executive privilege when Holder sat before Congress to protect him from his role in Fast and Furious, who's to say he isn't protecting him again -- or vice versa -- through Holder's resignation? What better way to avoid the line of fire than to move completely out of the way? And what if Obama and Holder are not only protecting themselves from some past public sin through his resignation but also prepping Holder for some future position by his absence from the public stage?
That's exactly what Rush Limbaugh proposed this past week. He explained the scary scenario this way:
"After you perform your six years of government service, you then retire to the private sector and get paid off for it. People hire you who are grateful for what you did, or you go back to your law firm, where you are a rainmaker, don't even have to do any work.
"They put your name on the letterhead, on the door, and you attract clients and get a percentage of what walks in the door. There is any number of ways this can happen. But there's also another possibility regarding Eric Holder. I just want you to prepare yourself. It may happen. We still have two years to go.
"There may be a Supreme Court vacancy, and I can see Barack Obama nominating Eric Holder to fill it, and it would be much easier for Eric Holder to make the jump from private-sector law firm rainmaker after six years at (the Department of Justice) to the Supreme Court than from DOJ straight to the Supreme Court. I don't know how much that would matter, but don't rule any of that out. I don't think there's any scandal. I don't think it's Fast and Furious. I don't think he's worried about the Republicans investigating anything if they win the Senate."
It is worth noting that Rahm Emanuel resigned as Obama's chief of staff two years before the end of the president's first term in order to attain the post of mayor of Chicago -- a resignation that Obama labeled as "bittersweet," which he also did with Holder's.
Hillary Clinton was next, with her resignation as secretary of state, which most people think was in order to run for president in 2016.
Now, two years before the end of the president's second term, could Obama and Holder's scope be set on SCOTUS? Given they are the kings of corrupt calculated chess moves, I believe the odds are incredibly high.
Having finished their insider dirty work, this trinity of terror (Emanuel, Clinton and Holder) is being sent out like apostles onto the mission field to infuse Obama's Cabinet's secular progressive agenda into the deepest roots of the land.
Liberal legacy and progressive perpetuity is the name of their game and their master plan.
Next week, I will give even more evidence of this master plan and explain exactly how and when a SCOTUS seat replacement would occur.
And not one mention of Ginsberg’s latest quote about, “not stepping down at this point in time”.
What, about 3 weeks ago?
I’m betting that’s what is going on...They want him loose for a USSC nominee. Kinda like Obama’s what’s his face buddy who runs Chicago.
I wrote yesterday or the day before that the USSC was the plan.
Eric Holder has zero chance of making it through Senate confirmation if he was appointed to the Supreme Court. There aren’t 60 Senators who would vote to close debate (ending a filibuster, which still exists for Supreme Court appointees). If the GOP wins the Senate, beginning in January he wouldn’t even get a floor vote. Holder has made a lot of enemies in the GOP. He would be a toxic nomination that would backfire on Obama if he was dumb enough to make it.
He was appointed USAG, but Holder thought of himself as “The Great White Hunter”-— unfortunately he had the judicial power to bag lotsa trophies.
I don’t know....I think the confirmation process/exposure would be worth it. He is not going to rule and different than anyone else they throw up there.
The buzz is Holder quit b/c he's going in for bowel surgery. Seems that everytime Holder had to enforce a law, he got constipated---so much so he got addicted to Metamucil.
Now his system is shot to hell---he's getting a pacemaker implanted in his sphincter muscle.
If the Democrats hold on to the Senate it will only take 50 votes (plus Biden as the tiebreaker) to pass any of Obama’s appointments.
If the Republicans take back the Senate in November we can expect Reid to push through a flood of far left wing appointments during the lame duck session.
And justice-wise, that is his best case scenario.
Historically, the penalty for treason is death.
One would hope that not even Obama could be that stupid. It’ll happen after 2016 if the Democrats win the presidency and the Senate again.
Well, the somewhat less than good news here is the clown is approaching 70 and by some press accounts not in the best of health. Besides, anyone Obola appoints would be a disaster, I’d rather he put in someone aged then one who is not.
Meanwhile, anyone who believes this coming election is not important or that we dont want another RINO in better reconsider that thought. I don’t care whom runs at this point, we had our shot and could not get in the mix those we wanted so now is not the time to sit on our hands, it is time to show up and vote out the commies, even if we need put in a semi commie. Addition by subtraction is not a winning senario. We did that last election and look what we got.
LOL, yes Obama would choose the most controversial nominee he could when there are dozens of others just as a liberal as Holder that would be much much easier to confirm, makes sense.
The only reason that the filibuster still exists for Supreme Court nominees is that no seats have come open since Reid decided to unilaterally change the rules whenever he wants.
The next time a seat comes open if Reid cannot line up 60 votes to prevent a filibuster of Obama’s far left wing nominee then Reid will eliminate the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees as well.
When you make all the rules you don’t have to worry about being subject to them.
He is only 63. However that probably makes him too old unless Ginsbug suddenly resigns and Obama can push his appointment through before the end of the year.
Obama wants to fill any Supreme Court vacancies with far left wing radicals in their early 50s who van legislate from the bench for the next 30 years.
Obama will give Holder any of the currently open appellate court seats if he wants one. Reid can push confirmation through the Senate during the lame duck session without a single Republican vote and even lose as many as 6 democrat votes and still get him confirmed.
I think we need to put all Pubbie Senators on notice that a vote to confirm Holder is a vote to have us all sit at home the next time they’re up for re-election.
Not that that would stop them from confirming him. I was just wondering.
I agree if the GOP wins in November the floodgates will open with regard to liberal appointments. This really doesn’t affect the Supreme Court though because there is no opening at this time. It’s frankly unlikely to happen. Resignations generally come at the end of the Court’s term (June 30th). No one on the Court, so far as we know, is in poor enough health that their death is imminent.
Ginsburg has been under a lot of pressure from liberals to resign so that Obama can fill her seat. So far she has refused. Fortunately, she is putting herself over her ideology.
If the Republicans take the Senate in the November election, then she will come under a whole lot more pressure to quickly resign so that Obama can fill her seat with a young liberal and Reid can push her confirmation through in the lame duck session. I just hope that she keeps putting herself over her ideology.
If the Republicans do retake the Senate, then any Obama Supreme Court appointments after January will have to get at least 60 votes in the Senate. Unfortunately, it has never been difficult for Democrats to get Republican Senators to vote for far left wing Democrat appointments. That is why we have 4 far left wing liberals on the Court today.
On the other hand, if the Republicans do not retake the Senate, then Obama will have two more years to pack the courts with every far left wing liberal that he wants and there will be nothing that any Republican can do to stop it. We can then look forward to far left control over the federal judiciary for the next 30 years.
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.