DOWNLOADS: (251)

PLAYS: (2669)

Embed

Following President Obama's big speech this Thursday on national security and counterterrorism, The Daily Show's Jon Stewart took the opportunity to go after the Obama administration and the DOJ for their willingness to go after whistleblowers, journalists, potheads, hackers and even people who just lied on their mortgage applications, while refusing to prosecute a single Wall Street banker.

While I agree with Stewart on majority of his criticisms here, I'd use the term "journalist" lightly when it comes to anyone from Fox and as Tommy Christopher over at Mediaite pointed out, James Rosen was not just simply reporting that North Korea wanted to do more nuclear tests to draw the government scrutiny he did, as Stewart asserted here.

I'd also like to hear more about that AP story and what was going on there before rushing to judgement as well, although I think the bigger argument ought to be over all of our privacy rights and just how much of that has been thrown out the window.

In an age following the hysteria right after 9-11 and the Patriot Act and with the NSA pretty well out of control along with most corporations who aren't kept in check with protecting our private information, I'm glad to see there is at long at last some attention being drawn to the subject.

It's pitiful that it took some members of our corporate media finally being subjected to what sadly is potentially perfectly legal overreach for them to care at all about what's been happening to a whole bunch of our citizens for years on end now, and well before Barack Obama was elected president. Maybe they could do something constructive like calling for members of Congress and President Obama to roll back some of the horrid legislation that was passed during the Bush administration. But then, who am I kidding... right? They'd rather just use this as an excuse to pile on with the scandal-mongering we've seen over the last half a year or so.

But back to The Daily Show segment above, when it comes to criticism about these Wall Street bankers run amok and the fact that not a one of them has ever gone to jail, while they're aggressively going after things like medical marijuana dispensaries, or someone who lied about their income on their mortgage papers, or whistleblowers who are actually trying to uncover government malfeasance, and not the Benghazi/IRS Tourette syndrome scandal-mongering we've been subjected to -- by all means, have at them Jon Stewart.

DOWNLOADS: (325)

PLAYS: (4399)

Embed

Stephen Colbert got to the bottom (the very bottom) of 'Asparagusgate' last night, the dust-up between Attorney-General Eric Holder and Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX).

“How dare you cast aspersion on that man’s asparagus! What is next, sir? Libeling his lettuce? Questioning his quinoa? Arguing with his arugula? Repudiating his rutabaga?! Vilifying his vinaigrette before drizzling it on his scandal salad?”

Edit: As noted below, "Gohmert" is listed in Urban Dictionary as

Gohmert

verb: to say something that is obviously and patently untrue to the point of stupidity, then when called upon to provide concrete evidence of the assertion, to flounder about angrily while shouting about the integrity of the questioner.

The Congressman Gohmerted for 5 minutes when called upon by Anderson Cooper to provide evidence that terror babies are being sneaked across the border.

DOWNLOADS: (78)

PLAYS: (440)

Embed

Our corporate media has been trotting these Bushies back out for years on end now, so it's no surprise that we'd eventually see Alberto Gonzales take his turn. I guess the producers of Morning Joe thought there was no one better for their audience to hear from when it comes to Department of Justice scandals than Gonzo.

It does seem his memory has improved slightly since 2007, when he couldn't recall much of anything when testifying before Congress.

Steve Benen summed up his appearance this Wednesday quite nicely. After first explaining why it's likely Gonzales has kept such a low profile since leaving office and the fact that he went through quite a bit of trouble finding a job, he reminded us why he has absolutely no credibility to be commenting on the DOJ and journalists: Alberto Gonzales returns from obscurity:

The former A.G. nevertheless appeared on MSNBC this morning, apparently ready to address some of ongoing controversies. He seemed inclined to give the Obama administration the benefit of the doubt when it came to subpoenaing Associated Press phone logs, but this nevertheless stood out for me.

Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales recalled on Wednesday a time when he was confronted with a "very serious leak investigation" similar to the one that has embroiled the Obama administration this week. But, he said, he went a very different route and decided against subpoenaing a reporter's notes.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (234)

PLAYS: (3835)

Embed

Things got heated and a bit insane, as they usually do, when Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) got miffed when Attorney General Eric Holder rather politely told Gohmert he didn't know what he was talking about, and that he should refrain some stating as fact what were only Gohmert's conjectures on what may or may not have occurred. The confontation happened during a House Judiciary hearing into the Boston Bombing. Gohmert was disparaging the FBI's handling of the case.

ERIC HOLDER: “You don’t know what the FBI did. You don’t know what the FBI’s interaction was with the Russians. You don’t know what questions were put to the Russians, whether those questions were responded to. You simply do not know that. And you have characterized the FBI as being not thorough, or taken exception to my characterization of them as being thorough. I know what the FBI did. You cannot know what I know. That is all.”

Gohmert took exception to the fact that his wild allegations would not be taken seriously as facts, and called for a point of personal privilege to defend his honor. Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) noted Gohmert's time had expired but had Holder state again why he considered what Gohmert had said was untrue, which he did, much to the consternation of Gohmert.

A visibly flustered Gohmert then tried for another point of personal privilege, but was rebuked as his time had expired. Gohmert then shouted over the Chairman one of the best lines of the year:

LOUIE GOHMERT: "I cannot have a witness challenge my character! The attorney general will not cast aspersions on my asparagus!"

The British use this as a joking expression ("cast asparagus" on something) but somehow I don't think Gohmert was joking at all. He really is this dumb.

DOWNLOADS: (190)

PLAYS: (3171)

Embed

From this Wednesday's House Judiciary Committee hearing, Darrell Issa wasn't the only one who had a contentious back and forth with Attorney General Eric Holder: Holder smacks down Gohmert over Boston bombings–’You cannot know what I know’:

An already-ugly House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday turned even nastier when Texas Republican Louie Gohmert took the wheel on questions related to last month’s Boston Marathon bombing–specifically, about what the FBI did and did not do after receiving information from Russian intelligence that suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev had been radicalized.

Attorney General Eric Holder had already faced a heavy grilling on both the AP and IRS scandals plaguing the Obama administration this week when Gohmert began pelting him with accusations that the FBI shirked a thorough examination of Tsarnaev because of “political correctness.”

“On the one hand, we go after Christian groups like Billy Graham’s group, we go after Franklin Graham’s group, but then we’re hands off when it comes to possibly offending someone who has been radicalized as a terrorist,” said Gohmert.

The Texas lawmaker added that though he “appreciated” the concern of racial profiling, he believes “there were a lot more people in America concerned about being blown up by terrorists.”

Holder fired back that Gohmert was speaking “as a matter of fact” about information not fully available to him.

“Unless somebody’s done something inappropriate, you don’t have access to the FBI files,” said Holder. “You don’t know what the FBI did. You don’t know what the FBI’s interaction was with the Russians. You don’t know what questions were put to the Russians, whether those questions were responded to. You simply do not know that…I know what the FBI did. You cannot know what I know.”

Yeah, old "terror babies" Gohmert is back at it again, fearmongering as usual.

DOWNLOADS: (249)

PLAYS: (3469)

Embed

Frustrations boiled over at a House hearing on Wednesday when Attorney General Eric Holder let Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) know exactly how he felt about the "shameful" way the lawmaker was conducting himself as a member of Congress.

During a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Issa suggested that the Department of Justice had violated the Federal Records Act during discussions with Labor Secretary nominee Tom Perez, and that President Barack Obama's administration was covering up the crime.

But as Holder tried to reply to Issa, he was interrupted by the California Republican.

"No, no, that's what you typically do," the attorney general shot back. "No, I'm not going to stop talking now."

"Mr. Chairman, would you inform the witness as to the rules of the committee," Issa said.

"It is inappropriate and too consistent with the way in which you conduct yourself as a member of Congress," Holder insisted, shaking his finger at Issa.

"It is unacceptable and it's shameful."

DOWNLOADS: (134)

PLAYS: (800)

Embed

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) says that if his Imaginary Family were victims of disasters like Hurricane Katrina, they would need to have military-style AR-15 assault rifles to protect themselves against "armed gangs roaming around neighborhoods."

During a hearing Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday, the South Carolina Republican pressed Attorney General Eric Holder about his support for a proposed assault weapons ban.

"Can you imagine a circumstance where an AR-15 would be a better defense tool than, say, a double-barrel shotgun?" Graham asked. "Let me give you an example, that you have an lawless environment, where you have an natural disaster or some catastrophic event -- and those things unfortunately do happen, and law and order breaks down because the police can't travel, there's no communication. And there are armed gangs roaming around neighborhoods. Can you imagine a situation where your home happens to be in the crosshairs of this group that a better self-defense weapon may be a semiautomatic AR-15 vs. a double-barrel shotgun?"

Holder pointed out that the senator was "dealing with a hypothetical in a world that doesn't exist."

(Obviously, Eric Holder doesn't get it. That's where all wingnuts live!)

"I'm afraid that world does exist," Graham insisted. "It existed in New Orleans, to some extent up in Long Island [after Hurricane Sandy], it could exist tomorrow if there's a cyber attack against country and the power grid goes down and the dams are released and chemical plants are -- discharges."

(Lindsey really likes to think about --discharges.)

"I don't think that New Orleans would have been better served having people with AR-15s in a post-Katrina environment," Holder replied.

"What I'm saying is if my (imaginary) family was in the crosshairs of gangs that were roaming around neighborhoods in New Orleans or or any other location, the deterrent effect of an AR-15 to protect my family, I think, is greater than a double-barrel shotgun."

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, there were reports of armed vigilantes with assault weapons shooting African-Americans.

"Facing an influx of refugees, the residents of Algiers Point could have pulled together food, water and medical supplies for the flood victims," ProPublica's A.C. Thompson wrote in 2008. "Instead, a group of white residents, convinced that crime would arrive with the human exodus, sought to seal off the area, blocking the roads in and out of the neighborhood by dragging lumber and downed trees into the streets. They stockpiled handguns, assault rifles, shotguns and at least one Uzi and began patrolling the streets in pickup trucks and SUVs. The newly formed militia, a loose band of about 15 to 30 residents, most of them men, all of them white, was looking for thieves, outlaws or, as one member put it, anyone who simply 'didn't belong.'"

Thompson found that at least 11 African-American men ended up being shot near the Algiers Point neighborhood by a militia of men who were apparently all white.

(h/t: Think Progress)

DOWNLOADS: (107)

PLAYS: (346)

Embed

The Obama administration has been criticized for their inaction on gun control during their first term in office. In fact, one of the earliest efforts by Attorney-General Eric Holder back in early 2009 was rebuffed by then White House Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel. In the wake of Newtown he's now calling for "meaningful action".

(CBS News) As the country is still reeling from the elementary school massacre in Newtown, Conn., Chicago Mayor and former chief of staff to President Obama, Rahm Emanuel, defended the president's position on guns, saying he has always been "very, very clear" on the issue.

"President Obama always stood for getting something done," Emanuel said on "CBS This Morning."

Co-host Norah O'Donnell, however, pointed out that the pro-gun control organization, the Brady Campaign, rated the president with an F grade during his first year in office for allowing guns in national parks and on Amtrak. She also pointed to a book by Danny Kleinmann called Kill or Capture that quoted Emanuel as being extremely angry when Attorney General Eric Holder said that the president backed a ban on assault weapons.

Here's her rather direct question to Emanuel and you'll hear his rather evasive reply.

NORAH O'DONNELL: "I want to ask you about what led us to this point. The assault weapons ban expired in 2004. You were President Obama’s Chief of Staff and in 2009, according to the book Killer Catcher, you were furious with Attorney General Holder who held a press conference in February of 2009 saying that the Obama administration was going to reinstitute, push the assault weapons ban, and that you sent word to Justice that Holder needed to “shut the [fuck] up on guns."

DOWNLOADS: (217)

PLAYS: (1417)

Embed

Former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) on Wednesday criticized his successor, Gov. Rick Scott (R), and other Republicans for using "shameless" tactics that suppress voting rights, including requiring photo IDs, preventing felons from voting and purging voter rolls.

"The concern really is on sort of a closing the door on democracy," Crist told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell. "For example, they've already changed the policy as it relates to former, non-violent felons. We had established a policy where they would have their rights automatically restored, give them the opportunity to vote once they had served their time and paid their debt to society. ... That has now been changed under the new administration."

"In addition, they've also said that early voting -- which is a great tradition is Florida -- has been reduced from a 14-day period before the elections to eight days before, making it again more difficult for legal citizens to have their right to vote be heard."

Mitchell noted that Attorney General Eric Holder had recently compared voter photo ID requirements to Jim Crow laws, telling the NAACP that they were the equivalent of "poll taxes."

"He's on the right track," the former governor agreed. "Anytime that you put more impediments into a citizen's right -- a legal citizen's right to vote and make that more difficult, you impede the natural right of democracy and a citizen's right to have their voice heard in important elections."

"It's just plain wrong," he added.

(h/t: Talking Points Memo)

DOWNLOADS: (80)

PLAYS: (336)

Embed

A Fox News guest on Tuesday asserted that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) had "become a hate group in America."

Fox News host Sean Hannity asked New York Civil Rights Coalition Executive Director Michael Meyers if President Barack Obama even deserved the votes of black Americans after he sent Vice President Joe Biden and Attorney General Eric Holder to speak at the 2012 NAACP convention instead of appearing personally.

"Something has happened to the black American population," Meyers explained. "They've become racialized, they've become what they've been preaching against. They will vote for Barack Obama because Barack Obama is black."

Meyers, who once accused the president of "ghetto behavior," said that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney was also wasting his time speaking to the NAACP because they were "not relevant to the black masses."

"The NAACP has become a hate group in America," he insisted. "They hate anybody who disagrees with them. And, therefore, conservatives and Republicans who don't agree with their agenda, they hate them! Oh, they hate them!"

Meyers then offered Romney some advice about what he should tell the NAACP: "Just because people want to secure the borders, don't make you a racist. Just because people want photo IDs to vote, it doesn't make it the equivalent of the poll tax. Just because people want justice and equality and limited government -- just because people want limited government, doesn't make them a racist. And, therefore, he should tell them the tea party is not racist, standardized tests are not racists."

"He should tell the NAACP the truth. But he won't do that."

When Romney did take the stage at the convention on Wednesday, he found himself being loudly booed after he vowed to eliminate the president's health care reform law.