More Briefs From AG Holder That He "Forgot"!

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by IntheNet, Mar 12, 2010.

  1. IntheNet macrumors regular


    Oct 6, 2009
    Friday afternoon document drop! Note the advocacy for Padilla the AG conveniently forgot!!!

    More Holder briefs acknowledged
    By KASIE HUNT | 3/12/10 4:02 PM EST
    Attorney General Eric Holder didn’t tell the Senate Judiciary Committee about seven Supreme Court amicus briefs he prepared or supported, his office acknowledged in a letter Friday, including two urging the court to reject the Bush administration’s attempt to try Jose Padilla as an enemy combatant.

    Atty. Gen. Holder failed to disclose legal briefs to senators
    Los Angeles Times
    By David G. Savage
    His inaction regarding a handful of briefs to the Supreme Court prior to his confirmation is raising criticism from Republicans. The attorney general says it was an oversight. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, called it an "extremely serious matter" that would trigger sharp criticism when Holder is due to be questioned March 23. "The attorney general, as with all nominees, has a duty of candor. . . . It is simply unacceptable that briefs in such significant cases were not provided to the committee so they could be discussed during his confirmation hearing," Sessions said.

    Michelle Malkin:
    Corruptocrat AG Eric Holder’s “forgetfulness” strikes again

  2. mcrain macrumors 68000


    Feb 8, 2002

    Do you have any actual information about the briefs? The briefs that he prepared or supported? What does it mean to "support" a brief? Not to mention, were the positions advocated in the briefs positions of Mr. Holden or his client? If it was his client, then as long as he disclosed the client, it would have been easy to know exactly the types of issues Mr. Holden would have had to represent the client on, and to be able to effectively question him regarding those issues.

    As for the two briefs about Padilla, were they wrong? I'm pretty sure reasonable people could disagree about that issue.

    Oh wait, the Republicans are trying to paint the Democrats as soft on terrorism and national security because of the recent polls that just came out. Ahhhh, playing politics with national security.



    More proof that the radical right would be dancing in the streets if there were a terrorist attack on our country.
  3. macfan881 macrumors 68020

    Feb 22, 2006
    More typicall Trolling from In the Net as usual:rolleyes:.

Share This Page