It’s a favorable sign. But I’m afraid that it doesn’t matter who orders Holder to do something. He just ignores the order. Then, what will the judge do next? Hold him in contempt? He’ll ignore that, too.
It’s difficult when you have an Attorney General who despises the law. We saw that under Clinton. If the entire press jumped on board, that might alter the case. But so far, they’ve simply ignored the significance of Fast & Furious.
Well, in any case, it’s nice to have an honest judge for a change.
And she was appointed by—wait for it—Barack Obama.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Berman_Jackson
.........uh, true, I’m just an ordinary ole Joe, but I can tell you that I know from 3 days in jail that violating a judges order can have SWIFT consequences. For yours and other Freepers convenience, please note below the asterisk line what Senator Grassley had to say.
***********************************************************
.....I still contend that the House of Representatives needs to exercise their right to find Eric Holder guilty of ‘inherent contempt.’ By so doing, they would bypass the U.S. Senate and the U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C. They would have the right to issue punishment commensurate to the charges which would include sending him to jail. The last time the House used the inherent contempt charge was in 1934 in which they sent William P. MacCracken Jr. to jail for 10 days. The actions were upheld by a federal judge who deemed it was within the powers of the House under an inherent contempt charge.
Under an inherent contempt charge, they could set Holder’s butt down in a jail cell for a couple of months until he finally complies with the congressional subpoenas or until his boss is voted out of office and Holder is replaced with someone who will actually uphold the laws of the land. I bet you there’s a whole lot of Americans who would love to see Holder in jail until he’s unemployed.
Was/is that common practice among all newly elected POTUS's?
Frankly I do not know.
Can anyone clarify?