Skip to main content

View Diary: Should Eric Holder Be Impeached For His Refusal To Prosecute Wall Street? (49 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Even the GOP doesn't want to impeach Holder (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fe Bongolan, aargh, FG

    Impeachment starts in the House and the Speaker isn't willing to spend one penny of political capital starting an impeachment investigation of Eric Holder. There is nothing but trouble for Boehner starting a process to remove the AG as it would be viewed as highly partisan and make dealing with the President nearly impossible.

    Even if the Speaker allowed a vote in the House regarding an investigation I don't think you could find 50 votes total to begin the process to impeach the Attorney General.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 12:06:33 PM PDT

    •  I don't think it'd be viewed as highly partisan (0+ / 0-)

      common sensical is more like it.

      I don't think Boehner care much about dealnigs with the President.  I do think Boehner, like Obama, approves of Holder's excuses for not prosecuting Wall St.

    •  Here's another reason Boehner won't do it: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Thomas Twinnings, dfarrah

      It wouldn't just be about his dereliction of duty with the banks, but with the GOP war criminals.  Of course, that wouldn't be part of the case that the House would bring against him (the diarist is right that it would be about bogus shit like fast and furious) but that would become part of the national discussion should his impeachment become likely.  No, they're not going to do it because they are just as crave and corrupt as he is.

      My opinion is that impeaching Holder (on legitimate counts rather than Limbaugh talking points) would be the ideal way to correct not only the failure of Pelosi to impeach the Cheney cabal when she had the votes (her feckless statement in my sig line notwithstanding), but of Obama's failure to demand of his DoJ that the laws of the nation be upheld.

      Ain't gonna happen.  Not enough principled Dems in the house that would get behind such a move even if it were miraculously to be proposed by Boehner's gang.

      Oh, and the fact that he would probably, like Clinton, be found not guilty by the Senate doesn't give any credence to Pelosi's cowardlhy comment below: an impeachment in and of itself is an indictment.  If the court of the Senate were to fail to convict Holder on the ample evidence of his malfeasance and rank cowardice (as opposed to the ridiculous case that the House Managers brought against Clinton), the onus would be on the Senate for that failure, not on the House for calling him to account.

      Partisan politics is why we're in this mess.  The US two party system is broken beyond repair.  Only a massive rejiggering (which a Holder impeachment would create) can right this capsized vessel.  The fact that it isn't going to happen is merely a further indictment (on top of Pelosi's failure) of our political system: we now harbor war criminals and larcenists of the grandest scale in the highest chambers of our government.  

      I'm rec'ing this diary.  This is a conversation this site needs to have.

      "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you succeed." - Nancy Pelosi // Question: "succeed" at what?

      by nailbender on Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 12:27:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Let me be clear... (0+ / 0-)

      I don't think the House will do it.

      I have no illusions of Republicans not being in Wall Street's pocket.

    •  Politely disagree. (0+ / 0-)

      Boner's main objective has been to delay and stall so nothing gets done.
      This is a perfect opportunity to continue that while getting support from teh tea partiers and know that it would never be approved in the Senate.  So he accomplishes three of his objectives, support from the right, obstruction which will drag out more time to not do anything and Wall Street never gets touched.

      Holder knows of specific high level crimes and refuses to prosecute.  That is either collusion and/or malfeasance in office.  It is an obscenity perpetrated on the American electorate.  Holder belongs in prison.

      Don't believe everything you think.

      by BrianParker14 on Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 01:45:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Brian - The Speaker has no interest initiating (0+ / 0-)

        a fight with the administration on an impeachment inquiry. Your analysis is wrong.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 05:16:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Vclib your analysis of my comments (0+ / 0-)

          are "wrong".   You, nor I have any insight into what boners "interests" are.  I was just tossing out a suggested thought as to what he might consider.  Not an analysis and certainly not an insight into his self interested thinking. To say it's "wrong" implies there is no valid perspective.  Please explain why each of those three objectives are not reasonable, given boner's history as a Speaker who has repeatedly carried out each of those three objectives.  You may not agree that Holder should be impeached but that doesn't hold that my perspective is wrong.  It may, by your thought process, be not practical, but that doesn't mean it's a "wrong" perspective. "Wrong" implies I have proposed a definitive answer. I, like most comments, are just stating a considered opinion.  There is no right or "wrong" to it. Just a thought.

          Don't believe everything you think.

          by BrianParker14 on Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 06:43:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree my answer was harsh and hasty (0+ / 0-)

            My apology. Your analysis of the Speakers motives and recent interests is spot on. However, I do not believe that he would choose to advance them using an impeachment inquiry as his vehicle.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 11:14:02 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site