Any skeptics of the Obama administration have to be asking themselves the above question. I know I have. To reasonable people it makes no sense at all. Why on earth did Eric Holder and Obama’s Department of Justice decide to drop the charges against Black Panthers weilding knight sticks at a polling place? Why did the DOJ drop charges against Bill Richardson?
What is Holder – and by extension his boss Obama - interested in? It’s really disturbing, at least if you hear what Andrew McCarthy has to say. He spoke to Mike Church on Friday (I heard the re-run on Sunday) about the way the left and Obama believe that we should be subject to some sort of world body when it comes to the rule of law. With this gang, so much for national sovereignty.
Dick Cheney (the one they most likely want to go after) had this to say about the decision to go after the CIA:
What do you think of that decision?
CHENEY: I think it’s a terrible decision. President Obama made the announcement some weeks ago that this would not happen, that his administration would not go back and look at or try to prosecute CIA personnel. And the effort now is based upon the inspector general’s report that was sent to the Justice Department five years ago, was completely reviewed by the Justice Department in years past.
They made decisions about whether or not there was any prosecutable offense there. They found one. It did not involve CIA personnel, it involved contract personnel. That individual was sentenced and is doing time. The matter’s been dealt with the way you would expect it to be dealt with by professionals.
Now we’ve got a political appointee coming back, and supposedly without the approval of the president, going to do a complete review, or another complete investigation, possible prosecution of CIA personnel. We could talk the whole program about the negative consequences of that, about the terrible precedent it sets, to have agents involved, CIA personnel involved, in a difficult program that’s approved by the Justice Department, approved by the National Security Council, and the Bush administration, and then when a new administration comes in, it becomes political.
They may find themselves dragged up before a grand jury, have to hire attorneys on their own because the Justice Department won’t provide them with counsel.
It’s a terrible, terrible precedent.
It sure is a terrible precedent. One I’m sure the Obama administration will use to their advantage every chance they get. Lucky for them most major newspapers bury terrorism stories, and those two wars we’re still fighting, deep within the pages of their publications.
It’s too bad the press is no longer completely paying attention to, or heck, even covering events. (I wonder why – Did Obama give them a big summer bonus?)











nobama passed on letting Lockerbie terrorist release. Would this shock anyone if true ? my first reaction is that this story supports what I thought all along. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2009/08/31/scarborough-obama-admin-must-have-signed-lockerbie-terrorist-relea
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Nobody with 10% of a functioning brain would have thought that this guy and his gang of America-haters gave a rat’s rear end about our security from terrorists. It looks like he wants to make Rush Limbaugh’s words come true, that if Al Qaida wants to wreck this country, they better hurry to do it before Obama does it first.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
When is the security force now in place (ie: CIA, National Guard, Army, FBI….) going to protect us from Barry? They are just as much at risk.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
It’s all a charade. Look past the right/left paradigm and see our government for what it is, corrupt.
Like or Dislike:
0
0