In a jaw droppingly sycophantic NYT’s piece, originally titled, “Under Partisan Fire, Holder Soldiers On”, the Obama administration’s #1 lapdog, Charlie Savage reported that a defiant Eric Holder has no intention of stepping down. Lashing out at his and Obama’s critics, Holder whipped out the all too familiar race card:
Mr. Holder contended that many of his other critics — not only elected Republicans but also a broader universe of conservative commentators and bloggers — were instead playing “Washington gotcha” games, portraying them as frequently “conflating things, conveniently leaving some stuff out, construing things to make it seem not quite what it was” to paint him and other department figures in the worst possible light.
Of that group of critics, Mr. Holder said he believed that a few — the “more extreme segment” — were motivated by animus against Mr. Obama and that he served as a stand-in for him. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he said, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”
Bob Owens writes, scathingly; A pathetic Eric Holder labels his critics racists:
This accusation of racism – levied against federal law enforcement officers, Congressional investigators, bloggers, and the media – is stunning. It is a page-one racist claim in it’s own right, deserving outrage and scrutiny. And yet, Pulitzer-winning Charlie Savage of the New York Times accepts it without challenge and merely jots down the incredible claim as if it was another item on a shopping list.
Savage lied in his article as well.
In a New York Times interview with Attorney General Eric Holder, published Sunday, author Charlie Savage made use of a factual inaccuracy in what was — in effect — a defense of Holder from his chorus of critics.
Savage wrote that there are no “documents or testimony” to support allegations that Holder knew of the “gunwalking” tactics employed in Operation Fast and Furious.
“Mr. Holder has denounced the tactics used in the operation, known as ‘gunwalking,’ but said he did not know about them or sanction their use,” Savage wrote. “No documents or testimony have shown otherwise, but Republicans have pummeled him at oversight hearings and in news media appearances.”
Savage made these statements without attribution.
Despite those assertions, Holder’s office was provided with multiple briefings and memos about Operation Fast and Furious by top Justice Department officials. The memos contained intimate details of how Holder’s DOJ allowed guns to walk.
Another place where he boldly lied:
Fast and Furious was an operation in which agents for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, investigating an arms-trafficking network working for a Mexican drug cartel, sometimes did not move quickly to arrest low-level suspected “straw buyers” and seize their guns because the agents were seeking to build a bigger case. They lost track of hundreds of weapons; two guns linked to a suspect in the case were found near the site where a Border Patrol agent was killed.
“…sometimes did not move quickly to arrest low-level suspected “straw buyers”? What the hell? How about every time. Straw buyers were purposefully permitted to cross the border into Mexico with guns. There was never any attempt to interdict them. It was quite the opposite: Fast and Furious Supervisor David Voth repeatedly stopped field agents from interdicting weapons headed to the border, according to congressional testimony.
And “They lost track of hundreds of weapons”? Uh – make that thousands of weapons, chief.
What an unbelievable load of BS this guy is shoveling.
It’s almost too much to take according to Mary Chastain at Big Journalism, who points out the NYT’s hypocrisy in defending Holder after their relentless attacks on Bush’s Attorney General Alberto Gonzales:
Charlie Savage’s newest piece at The New York Times is, as my friend Sean Arthur on Twitter says, a shameless PR drivel and allows Mr. Holder to make ludicrous statements without challenge and pulls the race card. The New York Times and Charlie Savage are really going to do this after all the articles they published during Attorney General Alberto Gonzales scandals? Give me a break.
The hypocrisy at The New York Times is too much to take. I’ve read The New York Times articles on Mr. Gonzales over and over. I never once saw an article that was sympathetic to Mr. Gonzales. My favorite piece is an editorial titled, “Why This Scandal Matters.” What a great title! The Times covered every single detail in the Gonzales “scandal” someone had to write an editorial to justify it.
This “scandal” involved the firing of eight US Attorneys. No one died. Not a single person. Three hundred-plus Mexicans have died because of Operation Fast and Furious. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered with a gun from the operation on American soil. I wonder if The New York Times and Mr. Savage could explain to me why Mr. Gonzales’s scandal mattered and Fast and Furious does not?
It’s no secret that the New York Times is the Pied Piper of Obama sycophancy. What the Obama administration is telling us through it’s #1 lapdog, Charlie Savage is that it plans to brazen it’s way through this scandal, (and all of the other scandals) Why? Because they believe they can.
Mike Vanderboegh calls it’s a classic Catch 22 situation: “Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can’t stop them from doing.”
And today, the New York Times ran a Charlie Savage interview with Eric Holder entitled “A Partisan Lightning Rod Is Undeterred”. It is a piece of work. It is a declaration of war with Darrell Issa, Charles Grassley, the GOP and the American people. In the context of what has happened in the Gunwalker Scandal prior to today, it is as close as one can come to expressing Catch 22 in modern political terms. Obama, through the mouth of Eric Holder, has just declared “We can do anything you can’t stop us from doing.”
…the first time I read it, I said aloud, “Why the sonofabitch is declaring Catch 22.” I’m not the only one who thinks so. Readers will recall a source I occasionally refer to as “Alvin Wombat.” That nom de guerre conceals the identity of a long-time government employee, a fellow who has watched scandals large and small come and go. When he read the Savage interview with Holder, he was appalled.
After reading the Charlie Savage article in today’s New York Times in which he deifies Attorney General Holder and dismisses Fast & Furious and related issues . . . I have concluded that
(1) President Obama is either behind and/or has consented to the Fast & Furious activities, and
(2) President Obama has utterly NO intentions of changing ANYTHING. That is, what’s coming down here is President Obama directly signaling F–K YOU, and that the future is only going to get a lot worse, because that’s exactly what he wants. The New York Times is nothing but an uncritical syncophantic beacon for the Obama Administration.
It has long been clear that President Obama and Attorney General Holder understand perfectly the motivations behind and what happened regarding Fast & Furious, and the (continuing) breakdown in top ATF leadership. It isn’t though there has been any lack of information in that regard, or in their abilities to obtain whatever other information they want. To suggest otherwise is a joke. The only thing left to conclude is that President Obama WANTS this sort of disruption, and that it is only a prelude to whatever else he’s got on his agenda. Whatever that is, isn’t good.
“(This) is a political agenda, and can at this point only be interpreted to represent how things are going to (continue) to go down politically in the future. That means even further breaches of and trashing of civil liberties, and a continuation of the march down the road to liberal fascism (how’s that for being oxymoronic?). We’ll see if the Congress has the balls to intercede.”
Catch 22 indeed.
When I read Savage’s piece, yesterday, I was appalled almost to the point of nausea that these miscreants have no intention of giving an inch. They intend to stonewall and whitewash right up until the 2012 election, as the DOJ facilitates election fraud on a historically massive scale. What will happen should Obama win, as Vanderboegh’s source notes, “isn’t good”.
How tenacious is Darrell Issa?
The Daily Caller: Justice Dept silent as Holder charges critics with racism
The White House hasn’t returned requests for comment on whether President Barack Obama agrees with his top law enforcement officer’s allegations of racial motivations.
Holder’s accusations come as resignation calls mount from a growing list of 60 congressmen, two senators, every major Republican presidential candidate and two sitting governors, spurred on by the congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious.
Additionally, seventy-five congressmen have signed onto a House resolution for a vote of “no confidence” in Holder as attorney general. Between the two lists, there are 86 total in the House who no longer trust Holder to head the Department of Justice.
Allen West On Eric Holder Playing The Race Card: “They Want To Make White People Afraid Of Being Seen As Racist”…
(Daily Caller) — Florida Republican Rep. Allen West told The Daily Caller on Monday that Attorney General Eric Holder’s use of the race card as a way to attack those who are criticizing him is “reprehensible.”
“I think this is absolutely the last card in the deck, and that shows how weak their ground is,” West said in a phone interview. “But, what that means is they want to make white individuals afraid of continuing to put the pressure on Eric Holder because they don’t want to be seen as racist, and that is something that we have got to move beyond.”
Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!