142 House Democrats Join Republicans In Vote to Keep Holder’s DOJ Honest

After an impassioned speech by Utah Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz demanding accountability from the Justice Dept, 142 House Democrats backed an amendment which prevents the Department of Justice from using taxpayer funds to lie to Congress. The vote reflects bipartisan frustration with Attorney General Eric Holder.

Matthew Boyle of the Daily Caller reported:

Chaffetz pitched House Democrats in a feisty House floor speech before the vote to join him in demanding accountability. He argued that Attorney General Eric Holder’s failure to comply with the Fast and Furious congressional subpoena is anything but a partisan political fight. He said it’s an issue of separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches, and that all Americans “should be embarrassed by what’s happening in Fast and Furious.”

“If we get stonewalling on the other side of the aisle, without your support, we will do a disservice to this country, we will do a disservice to this body and we will not get to the truth,” Chaffetz said on the House floor on Wednesday. “I promise you, when that becomes a Republican president, I will stand with you and demand the openness and transparency that this body deserves. I’ve done it; I’ve challenged my own party, *I have the guts, I have the fortitude to do the right thing.”

Chaffetz challenged the House Democrats to come forward and help him, House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa and others: “This is the test of principle, this is the test of integrity, and when you can’t stand up and take on your own party, that’s a lack of guts,” Chaffetz said. “This Congress has got to stand up for itself and demand that these documents be released.”

In a promising sign that Dems are breaking ranks,  Chaffetz got his bipartisan support.

*Correction in the transcript:
Chaffetz said Have the guts, have the fortitude to do the right thing,” not “I have the guts” – etc…
Indiana’s new Republican candidate Richard Mourdock — who just defeated six-term Sen. Richard Lugar in the GOP primary — told The Daily Caller that he thinks Attorney General Eric Holder “should have been fired a long time ago” for Operation Fast and Furious.

“I mean, I’d accept his resignation, but he should have been fired,” Mourdock said during a conference call on Thursday evening. “The tracks of it [Fast and Furious] run so deep through the Department of Justice, somebody has to be held responsible. There’s just no accountability within the administration.”

Update II:
Congressman Trey Gowdy in the NY Post: Eric Holder’s ‘furious’ folly:

Congress’ investigation has gone on for more than a year and a half, yet Justice has only complied with 12 of our 22 subpoena requests for documents. The American people deserve answers; Congress deserves the information we asked for.

As a former prosecutor, I take no joy in moving to cut appropriations for Justice, but it’s about respect for the rule of law and holding those in power to the same standard as those not in power.

What would happen to you if you ignored a jury summons, failed to comply with a grand-jury subpoena or ignored a lawful demand for documents from a congressional committee? You’d be sanctioned, held in contempt, and likely jailed.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!


Agreeing 100% With Michelle Malkin – Stop Saying Obama Is A “Nice Guy”

When we all know he ain’t.

This has been a point of contention for me, too…Does the Republican establishment think that the American people can’t handle the truth? Why do they insist on raising the white flag in the battle for hearts and minds, by ceding to the left one of their weakest propaganda points?

It’s so easy to point out all of the things that make Obama a not-so-nice bully, yet the establishment doesn’t even try.

There is a reflexive desire among a certain species of moderate Republicans to be perceived as “civil” by liberal opponents who believe that the mere existence of free-market, limited-government conservatism is an indecent affront to humankind. All aboard the U.S.S. Lost Cause.

This disastrous, bend-over bipartisanship is a hard habit to break. In 2008, Arizona Sen. John McCain rode the “Barack Obama is a nice guy, but vote for me” wave to crashing defeat. In 2012, McCain’s endorsee, Mitt Romney, has made “Barack Obama is a nice guy but in over his head” a standard stump-speech talking point.

Conservatives of good will who’ve watched President Obama brutalize his enemies have one question for the nice-guy niceties: Why, GOP, why?

Romney’s smarter-than-thou strategists explain that he can’t scare off independents and Democrats with straight talk about Obama’s thuggery. But he’s turning off the conservative base, on whom his hold is tenuous. More importantly, Romney’s McCain-lite impersonation is also writing off independents and Democrats who’ve come to realize what the myriad targets of White House bullying have learned the hard way over the past four years: Barack Obama is not a “nice guy.”

Ask Gerald Walpin, the former AmeriCorps inspector general who was pushed out of his job by the Obamas after exposing fraud and corruption perpetrated by Democratic mayor of Sacramento and Obama friend Kevin Johnson. Walpin was unceremoniously fired and smeared by Team Obama. The White House baselessly questioned the veteran watchdog’s mental health and never apologized for slandering him.

Ask the family, friends and co-workers of murdered Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. They have been forced to sue the Obama administration to combat the Operation Fast and Furious cover-up of deadly policy decisions that led to their hero’s death. “I think they are liars, and I would tell them that,” Terry’s father, Kent, said of Obama’s henchmen.

As Townhall editor Katie Pavlich makes clear in her devastating new book, “Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and Its Shameless Cover-Up,” the president, his corrupt attorney general, Eric Holder, and their minions weren’t “in over their heads.” They knew exactly what they were doing and have obstructed investigations into the bloody consequences of their policies ever since.

That’s not “nice.” It’s rotten to the core.

Keep reading –Michelle’s not done by a long-shot – she has a long memory (and so do I) which is why we cringe every time we see this lame-o tactic employed by the “gentleman’s rules” Repubs.

They’re happy to allow Mitt to be portrayed as a stiff, insincere, elitist jerk, while, Obama is gushed over as a “cool”, messianic “nice guy”? Give me a freakin’ break.

They guy who fought tooth and nail to stop the IL version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act? The guy who is willing to tell Catholics they have to violate their consciences, or else? The guy who actually invoked JESUS to justify same sex marriage?!

I utterly reject this pusillanimous thinking –  the American people can handle the truth — if they’re told the truth.

As Michelle Malkin correctly notes; “Romney’s surrogates insist that conservatives should “stick to the issues.” But Obama’s by-any-means-necessary ruthlessness is an issue.”


Via Bob Belvedere: The Spot on Quote of the Day, Aaron Goldstein: The American Spectator:

…back in December 2011, O’Reilly asked Romney if he thought President Obama was a socialist. To which Romney replied, “I consider him a big government liberal Democrat.” LBJ was a big government liberal Democrat. Calling Obama a mere liberal doesn’t accurately reflect the extent of his radicalism. Aside from killing bin Laden, Obama’s main selling point is that he nationalized GM. It doesn’t get more socialist than that.

Unfortunately, Romney is too cautious to accurately describe Obama as a socialist. I’m not saying Romney can’t beat Obama. But by not properly defining Obama, Romney makes an already challenging task that much more difficult for himself.


And Willard buys into the Leftist Narrative. They would like nothing more than to see Obama classified as a Liberal, which is more acceptable to the Mushy Middle than the word ‘Socialist’.

Along with Romney repeatedly stating that Obama is a ‘good, but misguided man’, this avoidance of the truth shows that he has, so far, not given us any evidence that he understands what he is up against and that he still thinks the old, mythic rules of political behavior apply. Such thinking is the thinking of a Loser.

Wake up before it’s too late, RINOs.


Apparently Mitt Romney is an unrepentant bully, unfit for command because of something he did to the class sissy in high school.

But Moe Lane has found an example of bullying from Obama’s school days – and his victim was a little girl.


The latest example of  Obama’s  ruthless political maneuverings:

WSJ: Trolling for Dirt on the President’s List:

Here’s what happens when the president of the United States publicly targets a private citizen for the crime of supporting his opponent.

Frank VanderSloot is the CEO of Melaleuca Inc. The 63-year-old has run that wellness-products company for 26 years out of tiny Idaho Falls, Idaho. Last August, Mr. VanderSloot gave $1 million to Restore Our Future, the Super PAC that supports Mitt Romney.

Three weeks ago, an Obama campaign website, “Keeping GOP Honest,” took the extraordinary step of publicly naming and assailing eight private citizens backing Mr. Romney. Titled “Behind the curtain: a brief history of Romney’s donors,” the post accused the eight of being “wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records.” Mr. VanderSloot was one of the eight, smeared particularly as being “litigious, combative and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

Keep reading…

Linked by Legal Insurrection, thanks!