Thread: Holder doesn't read AZ law but says he might sue?

Holder doesn't read AZ law but says he might sue?

Eric Holder Needs To Be Removed

By News on the Net
Friday, May 14, 2010

Is ANYONE going to report this? Add this to his inability to identify the common religious association between a certain segment of bombers in the US, Holder is incompetent and needs to be removed.

Has anyone in Massachusetts read the AZ law? I see someone is speaking for the entire state in favor of boycott. They do not speak for me.

T. Echols
Manchester, MA

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/23214

I am just amazed at how many who are against this law have not even taken the time to read it. Just shows what ignorance there is on the other side. You might think our US Attorney might need to be a bit more informed before he goes off wasting taxpayers money fighting this case.

He has to sue...to find out whats in it!!!!!

There are a few basic things that they must do to keep our faith in government. But he cannot even do such a basic thing as read 10 pages?

OFF WITH HIS HEAD!

just joking . . . . . . . but really disgusting of him. He should have the honor to remove himself.

Eric Holder and his ilk are cartoon characters that would be funny if their destructiveness were not so real. Like the cartoon character Foghorn Leghorn (from another millennium) Holder says "Don't Bother Me With the Facts, Son...I've already made up my mind." Come to think of it, isn't that the attitude of President Obomba and Congress as well?

Glenn Beck and Holder...


GLENN: Here is our chief law enforcement officer from the DOJ talking about the Arizona bill yesterday in a hearing.

CONGRESSMAN POE: concepts that you haven't read the law. So can you help me out there a little bit, how you can make a judgment call on that but you haven't read the law and determined whether it's constitutional or not?

HOLDER: Well, what I've said is I've not made up my mine. I've only made the comments that I've made on the basis of things that I've been able to glean by reading newspaper accounts, obviously, television, talk to the people who are on the review panel.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

HOLDER: Or on the review team that are looking at the law. But I've not reached any conclusions as yet with regard to it. I've just expressed concerns on the basis of what I've heard about the law. But I'm not in a position to say at this point, not having read the law, not having had the chance to interact with the people who are doing the review exactly what my position is.

PAT: That is unbelievable.

GLENN: Yeah. You know how many pages it is?

PAT: The Arizona law? Yeah, 16. Pretty tough reading.

GLENN: I know. I don't know when I would find time to read 16 pages.

PAT: No, please.

GLENN: I would you know what? If I were the chief law enforcement officer of the United States of America, I would definitely not read 16 pages. I would read accounts from the newspapers and from the press. No, wait a minute, now I'm confused because the president told me not to do that because there's a lot of misinformation out there in the press. How do I know what's true and what's not? The president told me I couldn't know what was true, what was not. I should go to the original source. But then again, it's 16 whole pages. I should just make a statement.

PAT: And he did.

HOLDER: It's certainly one of the concerns that I have that you will end up in a situation where people are racially profiled and that could lead to a wedge drawn between certain communities and law enforcement.

PAT: It's going to lead to racial profiling. If he had read the bill, he would know it specifically prohibits racial profiling.

GLENN: No, but he doesn't have time to do that.

PAT: I know. It's 16 pages.

GLENN: He's right now, what he's doing right now, and I want to make it very, very clear because it sounds like that the Department of Justice would come out and they would — well, may I quote the president: I don't have any of the facts, but the police are acting stupidly. It sounds to me like we have somebody else in our government that has predisposed viewpoints on just about everything, and they don't need any more facts. They just know. And it sounds to me like he might be flippant, but that's not true. That's not true, and I want you to know that. He's busy. Right now he's busy hunting down those Islamic terrorists. Right now he's in court and he is fighting hard for no right to privacy in your e mails. But it's only for Islamic terrorists. It's not for you, America, just for Islamic terrorists. Sure, they can be American citizens. Sure, they can — they're fighting now for the tracking of your location, but not you. Islamic terrorists, those jihadists that are after us. He's so busy right now fighting to take away the Miranda rights of those jihadists, those Islamic terrorists. Not you, definitely not you. Definitely, definitely not you. Because he knows, he knows what we're up against. He knows what we're fighting against. He knows that there's a war on terror. "We don't call it a war on terror. It is a contingency..."

PAT: It's an Overseas Contingency Operation.

GLENN: Yes, but it's almost, it's this close to war because those jihadists that are coming after us. In fact, let me play this audio for you now from Eric Holder.

CONGRESSMAN POE: And in the case of all three attempts in the last year, the terrorist attempts, one of which was successful, those individuals have had ties to radical Islam. Do you feel that these individuals might have been incited to take the actions that they did because of radical Islam?

HOLDER: Because of?

CONGRESSMAN POE: Radical Islam?

HOLDER: There are a variety of reasons why I think people have taken these actions. It's — one, I think you have to look at each individual case. I mean, we are in the process now of talking to Mr. Shahzad to try to understand what it is that drove him to take the action.

CONGRESSMAN POE: But radical Islam could have been one of the reasons?

HOLDER: There are a variety of reasons why —

CONGRESSMAN POE: But is radical Islam one of them?

HOLDER: There are a variety of reasons why people do these things. Some of them are potentially religious —

CONGRESSMAN POE: I'm asking why you think among those variety of reasons radical Islam might have been one of the reasons that the individuals took the steps that they did.

HOLDER: Well, you say radical Islam. I mean, I think those people who espouse a version of Islam that...

PAT: Ah, oh. So not Islam, not radical Islam but people.

HOLDER: I don't want to say anything negative about a religion.

CONGRESSMAN POE: I'm not talking about a religion. I'm talking about radical Islam. I'm not talking about the general religion.

HOLDER: Right. And I'm saying that a person like Anwar Awlaki, for instance, who has a version of Islam that is not consistent with the teachings —

GLENN: Listen — stop for a second. Listen to how far these people will go.

PAT: Yep.

GLENN: To defend radical Islam. There's no even, there's no such thing as even radical Islam to him! There's not even anything that is radical Islam: No, no, no, no, no —

PAT: They are just radical tea party members.

GLENN: That's what they are. When you boil it down, they are just mad at the government, and it has nothing to do with anything. Look at how far. Yet these are the people that are already accusing tea partygoers of violence and being KKK members. So don't tell me — oh, boy. You know, I — Bill and I had it out last night. Bill O'Reilly and I had it out. You'll see it tonight. I can't believe. I love Bill O'Reilly, but I can't believe how naive this man is. I may have called him a pinhead. I may have. I may have called him a pinhead.

PAT: I've got to see that tonight.

GLENN: I can't believe how naive he is. He brought up the Miranda rights: Well, that's wrong because they are just, you know, they are just trying to get these — Glenn, there's these Islamic radicals that are trying to — are you out of your mind? You think that they are going after the Islamic radicals with all? Really? That's what they are doing all this for?

PAT: Listen to Holder. He tells you that's not what they are doing this for. They don't even — I mean, they are not even looking for radical Islamist terrorists.

GLENN: Now, may I tell you something, America, that is — I'm going to ask you to breathe deep. I'm going to tell you pieces of a story and each piece is going to make you more and more angry. I just want you to breathe deep. Piece Number 1: You know that ten years after the World Trade Center and we got nothing, right? We got nothing. Breathe deep. Ground Zero's just still — breathe deep. But right across the street from Ground Zero is a brand new 13 story mosque. Breathe deep. Breathe deep.

PAT: I don't need to because I heard from an imam yesterday.

GLENN: Yeah. So it's a 13 story mosque.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Okay?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And it opens 9/11/11, on the tenth anniversary of Ground Zero, a new mosque opens up right across the street of Ground Zero. Now, we'll get that imam's explanation here in a second, but I just, I just would like to point this out. Our kids are being expelled from school on a made up holiday, a holiday that's not even celebrated in Mexico. It's a made up holiday, a holiday that we celebrate, Cinco de Mayo, it was made up by Dos XX and Corona. Our children are being kicked out of school because they're insensitive for wearing an American flag on Cinco de Mayo on a T shirt, but nobody wants to talk about, oh, I don't know, how that might be a little insensitive to open and dedicate a 13 story mosque on the lip of the hole that is still there, the scar that is Ground Zero? You don't think it's a little insensitive to dedicate that mosque on 9/11 at Ground Zero?
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articl ... 198/40713/