I’ve always been of the opinion that former special counsel to ex-president ‘BJ’ Clinton, Lanny Davis, was more than just a bit of a crackpot, and his infatuation with the Clintons, especially Hitlery, seemed just this side of creepy. But I must admit that I really had no idea he had such a man-crush on Eric Holder, our racist degenerate of an Attorney General. But his recent claim that Holder has been "one of the great attorneys general in this country’s history," would seem to now make that pretty clear.
While Holder has been roundly criticized by a large number of Republicans regarding a variety of issues, Lanny, and very proudly so, stands by his man. Even with Holder being found in contempt of Congress for failing to provide information in the Fast and Furious gun running investigation, the Justice Department’s mishandling of the IRS scandal in which conservative groups were targeted and the decision to prosecute terror cases in civilian courts, to name only a few, Lanny still sees Holder as being one of the all-time greats.
Davis proves himself to be Holder’s butt-buddy, when he maintains that Holder worked diligently to carry out the policies "consistent with the person who appointed him." So I guess I’m not sure what it is it that Lanny is really saying here. Is he saying that no matter how un-Constitutional certain policies may be, Holder, as Attorney General, was duty bound to not only abide by them to actively enforce them because they were policies dreamt up by the creep who appointed him? Who thinks like this, other that an imbecilic liberal like Davis?
And also, according to Lanny, Congressional allegations against Holder in the Fast and Furious scandal "have been proven factually wrong." Lanny puts forward the claim that the inspector general found that Holder had no knowledge of the program until after Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed by one of the guns allowed to travel into Mexico. And it’s also according to this ninny, that Holder ended the program once he learned of it. I’m thinking this effort of his to defend the indefensible is actually more about semantics than the guilt or innocence of Holder.
And Lanny said that since terrorists were tried in U.S. criminal courts and still managed to get convicted, that would seem to vindicate Holder’s decision to go that route. Davis also maintained that Holder’s record on enforcement of civil rights is, to use his word, exemplary. Lanny said, "The Justice Department is currently enforcing 12 agreements with law enforcement agencies for abusive police practices, including seven consent decrees, the largest number in the history of the department." I guess I’m missing Lanny’s logic on this one.
Davis brags a bit regarding the fact that it was under Holder that the Justice Department stopped a section of the Defense of Marriage Act barring the federal government from recognizing state-approved same-sex marriages. And Davis, always one of the more vocal opponents of voter ID laws, made the patently dishonest claim that Holder also "sought to enforce the Voting Rights Act against states where legislatures passed laws impeding or suppressing the right to vote for non-fact-based and apparently political reasons." That’s simply a lie!
Davis notes a speech Holder delivered earlier this year to a Human Rights Campaign audience where he said "the Justice Department’s role in confronting discrimination must be as aggressive today as it was in Robert Kennedy’s time. As attorney general, I will never let this department be simply a bystander during this important moment in history. We will act." And that’s fine, I would expect him to act if in fact there were people actually being denied the right to vote. But what Holder wants to do is to make sure that the dead can continue to vote!
According to Lanny, "These words are reminiscent of the famous passage from RFK’s anti-apartheid speech in 1966 in Cape Town, South Africa, which eloquently described the impact of a single principled individual who stands up for justice: "It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped." So is he really trying to convince us that Holder is in any way a principled individual who stands up for justice? Is that really how he expects us to view this rabid ideologue, Holder. If so he’s nuttier than even I thought he was.
Davis said, "Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance." He went on to say, "Whatever one’s opinion of Holder’s policies, no one should doubt his deeply felt belief in Robert F. Kennedy’s words as an inspiration for his leadership as attorney general." Now that was the same Robert Kennedy who had wiretaps placed on Dr. Martin Luther King, right?
So at the end of the day, what must it be like to live in Lanny’s world? I can only imagine that it must be akin to living in ‘The Twilight Zone." I’d be curious to know if Lanny would be such steadfast defender of this racist, if he happened to be white and also happened to be appointed by a white conservative. Somehow I rather doubt it! But then that’s the way all these hypocritical libs are, it’s their guys who are always the ones out to protect the people, when we all know that it’s just the opposite. I find such people thoroughly disgusting.
No comments:
Post a Comment