The new law should not be read as directing or authorizing HUD to breach a pre-existing binding contractual obligation to make payments to Acorn or its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations where doing so would give rise to contractual liability, Mr. Barron wrote.
Un-fricken believable.
Delete 'ACORN' and insert 'Company X'. Then assume what the response would be from the DoJ if 'Company X' was caught red-handed advising and/or facilitating; FRAUD, TAX EVASION,PROSTITUTION, CHILD ABUSE, or any criminal activity. Also assume that 'Company X' did not aide and/or assist in Barry O'Bama (sic) being elected POTUS, and as such, Eric Holder being appointed as US Attorney General .
Now maybe it's just me, but I'd 'assume' that the DoJ would say every existing 'Binding' contract is now Null and Void and not one penny more should be paid to 'Company X, its affiliates, subsidiaries or allied organizations'.
Before Holder was confirmed I said he was a 'quasi-criminal' for his actions under Billy Jeff and the pardons. Well IMO, Holder has crossed the line, he isn't 'quasi' any more. When the Republicans take the House back in 2010, Job #1 is launching a criminal investigation into Eric Holder.
