1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Final push against Eric Holder for AG

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Kelly J, Jan 14, 2009.

  1. Kelly J

    Kelly J Well-Known Member

    Final Push Against Holder!
    Written by Jeff Knox, on 01-10-2009 14:26


    Hearings on Holder Confirmation just days away – Action Needed!

    Today is the 10th of January. The Judiciary Committee hearing on Holder's confirmation is set for next Thursday, the 15th. Opposition to Holder’s confirmation continues to grow and we need it to reach a crescendo next week. The Firearms Coalition has received confirmation from Gun Owners of America that they are sending out an alert urging their members to get involved and they are actively seeking to testify at the hearing. Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has also spoken out against Holder’s confirmation. The Heritage Foundation has illuminated some additional skeletons in Mr. Holder’s closet and numerous grassroots Second Amendment, privacy rights, and other liberty focused organizations have joined in the call for Barack Obama to withdraw Holder’s name from consideration or for the Senate to reject the nomination.

    Beginning Monday we need to flood the Senate Judiciary Committee members with calls and e-mails. We want to generate a wave of objection which hits the committee members before the hearing so here is what we’re asking you to do:


    1. Whether you have already done so or not, write e-mail messages to every member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and to your two senators and send those messages at least once Every Day from now until the hearing on Thursday. It can be the same or a different message each day, that doesn't really matter, but be sure to make your position clear in the "Subject" line; something like "No Holder," "Reject Holder," or "Oppose Holder" should be in the subject line of every e-mail because it is likely to be all that the staffer stuck on e-mail duty will read before jotting a hash-mark in the "Opposed" column of a tally-sheet and moving to the next message. Messages themselves should be short and clear, something like: “Dear Senator, Reject the nomination of Eric Holder for Attorney General. He has demonstrated a serious lack of understanding of, and respect for the Constitution of the US and is an exceedingly poor choice for the office.”
    2. Place phone calls to all of the committee members and your two senators on Tuesday during your lunch period. If your time is limited, prioritize; call the Republicans on the committee first, then the Democrats, then your own two senators. If you run out of time, you run out of time, but make as many calls as you can. (Set the alarm in your cell phone to remind you. Go ahead set it now; I'll wait.)

    3. Copy this call to action and re-post it on every blog, forum, and bulletin board you can find.

    Contact information for the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee can be found here:


    or go through the comittee web site at:


    Senators use web forms rather than e-mail and writing to them is notnearly as easy as it should be, but it is notreally all that difficult either. Some Senators make it even more difficult by blocking direct links into their web forms and not putting their contact information in a prominent place on their web site. Please persevere and make sure that they get your message.

    While it is extremely unlikely that we can muster enough votes to block this appointment in a straight up or down vote, we should definitely be able to generate enough support to stage a long filibuster and draw attention to Mr. Holder’s shortcomings. Once Holder’s record is before the public and his credibility put in question, it is likely that he will withdraw from consideration (at the quiet request of Mr. Obama) and another name will be offered.

  2. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Wish that were true.

    He's a shoe in I suspect.
  3. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Well-Known Member

    Isnt this really a waste of time? Its not like Obama is going to appoint anyone remotely pro-2A for the job. If its not Holder, it will be someone equally bad.
  4. USAFNoDAk

    USAFNoDAk Well-Known Member

    It looks as though they'll approve of the guy for Treasury Secretary, who didn't pay his payroll taxes, even after being audited by the IRS, until he was nominated for the job. He paid some back taxes after the audit, but neglected (or refused) to pay other back taxes he owed for other years beyond the audit. Once he was nominated, he paid the back taxes, with no penalties I might add. How convenient. The sums were over $40K if IIRC. That would amount to a felony, would it not? I think they put Al Capone in prison for failure to pay taxes.

    So, what are the chances they'll drop Holder because he supported bans on guns? There's no law against that support, even though the constitution and now the USSC say there should be no bans. I'm guessing he'll sail through with pats on the back for taking such a moral stand against gun violence in our cities and on our streets.

    We've become a nation run by bliss ninnies who care about their power and money, not the country, our freedom, and defending our constitution (unless it suits their agenda to do so).

    And the wheel in the sky keeps on turning.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2009
  5. Kelly J

    Kelly J Well-Known Member

    I agree 100% and just as a bit of information I got this Video in e-mail that I thought was very informative, you may have already watched it. Share it with all you know if you wat to.

  6. pbearperry

    pbearperry Well-Known Member

    Mr. Holder is just another Joker that is being picked to stack the deck against lawful gun owners.That is the master plan.What a shame that 80 million gun owners are incapable of joining forces to stop these kinds of things.
  7. ServiceSoon

    ServiceSoon Well-Known Member

    Want to watch video later.
  8. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Well it's going on right now. The Republicans are grilling him but it mostly seems to be about the Marc Rich pardon.

    He basically just said "Oops, my bad. Won't do that again" regarding that whole mess.

    Not a word about guns so far, not surprisingly.
  9. benEzra

    benEzra Moderator Emeritus

    It appears that an AG nominee's views on individuals a sitting president chooses to pardon are considered more important than the AG nominee's views on the Bill of Rights.

    That's a sad commentary on the state of politics, methinks...
  10. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Well nobody asked Gonzales about the 4th Amendment until after he was in. It is hard to imagine a worse AG then Gonzales but Holder might fit the bill. I guess we will see.
  11. MT GUNNY

    MT GUNNY Well-Known Member

    I watched him on C-SPAN, Right at the End, He Dodge very Direct 2amend Questions. Totally Botched the Answers When all he had to do is say Yes or No. He was given excuses to answer in our Favor and still Dodged the Question.
    His agenda Is Clear!!
  12. DukeNukem

    DukeNukem Well-Known Member

  13. roscoe

    roscoe Well-Known Member

    At the confirmation hearing, he acknowledged that Heller makes gun control legislation more difficult to enact. I didnt get the sense he was dodging:

    "HOLDER: Well, I think that post-Heller, the options that we have in terms of regulating the possession of firearms has been narrowed. I don't think that it has been eliminated. And I think that reasonable restrictions are still possible.

    But any time that we think about interfering with what the Supreme Court has said is a personal right. That has to be factored in now with the Heller decision and the Supreme Court's view of the Second Amendment.

    I don't think that that means that we should turn away from the efforts that we have made to make this nation more safe, to be responsible about guns and who has them, how they are used. I mean, our effort, for instance, to go after felons in possession of weapons, I mean, should be as strong now as it was pre-Heller.

    But I think that there is certainly -- we're in a different world. I think we operated for a good many years with the assumption that the Second Amendment referred to a collective right. We now know that that is not the case.

    And so, we are still, I think, going to have to grapple with that and understand what that means. But I think it is a huge factor. It's a major difference."


Share This Page