Eric Holder, Liberals and the CIA

Eric Holder, either runs the country or just does Obama's bidding while operating under the guise of pretending to be in direct conflict of what his boss, President Barrack Hussein Obama, says to do. However, to absolve himself from any responsibility and being able to claim bi-partisanship, Holder cleverly appoints a 'Special Prosecutor' to oversee the investigation into crimes (independent investigations only turned up 1 in 2004 and he was convicted) committed by the CIA interrogators. So Obama says not to investigate and lets 'look forward and not behind us' but Holder on his own (?) presses forward with the case but then turns it over to someone else? Sounds like pure partisan politics to me. Isn't there an astounding reverberation of hypocrisy here considering the Liberals, the CIA and Valerie Plame. Lest you forget:

"Once upon a time, Valerie Plame Wilson was a hero to liberals everywhere, a covert CIA operative whose cover was blown by a vindictive Bush administration out to ruin its critics. Today, liberals within government and without are betraying covert CIA operatives as if it were the very essence of virtue. Consistency, principled or foolish, has never been a hobgoblin of the liberal mind." (Bret Stephens writing in the WSJ)

"There is nothing more important than protecting the identities of CIA officers. So I need everybody to be clear: We will protect your identities and your security as you vigorously pursue your missions."

—Barack Obama at CIA headquarters, April 2009.

So now that Pelosi has called the CIA liars, despite myriad documents totally dispelling that statement, and Obama said that the identities of the interrogators and legality of what they did during EIT's would not be made public nor see prosecution, why is that Holder who works FOR OBAMA decides to overrule his boss and maybe seek criminal prosecution? Liberals will tell you that the Justice Department works completely independently of the White House. Yet, doesn't the White House nominate the AG? Liberals respond, 'well, the president also nominates supreme court justices.' True, but those are LIFETIME appointees. In politics there is a very large difference between term and lifetime appointments.

Also, why won't the White House or Justice Department now release the memo's that show the plethora of attacks that were in planning stages or imminent that were thwarted by these EIT's so that we can see for ourselves how many lives were saved by such techniques? The 'holier than thou' crowd (Pelosi included) likes to stress that laws were broken and the constitution shredded by EIT's. What laws? And the last thing that liberals need to be doing now is speaking of how Bush shredded the constitution. Look in the Obama transparent mirror before you throw stones. When highly regarded legal teams are assembled and interpret the law as it is written and Justice Dept, CIA and Congress signs off on them as what should be done 'to save American lives' then why Monday morning quarterback only when its politically expedient for you to do so? Liberals didn't seem to have a problem in 2004 or even in 2006 when these cases were brought up and discussed. In fact, these same instances that Holder has chosen to investigate (AGAIN) have already been vetted and it turned up one criminal act and that person was punished and sentenced to a jail term. Is Panetta really standing up for his operatives? Do you really think this strengthens America's security?

Eric Holder is playing Obama's politics deflecting attention away from Obamacare. Liberals are making themselves look like asses when they blame everything on Bush and call the CIA liars. In fact, water boarding was not voted on as 'illegal' in the House and Senate until early 2008. Bush vetoed it and the House did not have the 2/3 vote to override the veto. This means that waterboarding along with other EIT's were never considered 'illegal' and so therefore how can you prosecute something that is not 'illegal'? Now, the CIA interrogators, whether under republican or democratic president, when asked to interrogate a prisoner will do so with major concern as to whether or not the techniques they use will be second guessed when 'politics of the day' sweep in on a 'mandate' of 'change'. This weakens our nation, lowers our defenses and puts our people at risk. But hell, as long as the terrorists aren't touched but instead are subjected to simple, pointed questions, then what do we have to fear, right? I am sure they will buckle under the pressure. Can we show them a naked picture of Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton? That is sure to make them buckle...but then, that is real torture to a Muslim!

A hypothetical question (liberals love to do it on so many issues so lets have some fun playing their game). To save your family from certain death, an interrogator places a drill beside a kidnapper and murderer's head, pulls the trigger, and pretends that he is going to push it through the man's eyeball (but never does); meanwhile the man begins to cry like a baby about the details of where your family is and who has them (even giving up other acts he has partaken in during his past). Now, once your family is found safe and you have hugged and kissed your wife and your kids is it wise to ask that the interrogator be investigated as to whether he broke the law? Let me then ask, if he is found innocent the first time, is it wise to ask again even if it's a liberal democrat now asking?

As everyone with half a brain knows, the New York Times (losing tons of subscribers) does the liberals and ACLU/Moveon.org's of the worlds bidding by pushing the liberal agenda. It's clear why they would release the names of CIA interrogators but not captured journalists abroad, right? They claim 'privacy rights' for captured journalists but with CIA interrogators the 'public has a right to know.' Interesting that those out gathering news should be kept secret but those keeping America safe from attackers hell bent on killing us should be exposed. Identifying an interrogator, against the wishes of himself and the CIA, is worse than identifying a journalist already in captivity. But to the Times, it lent credibility to their story. Yeah, right!

As Americans awaken to the fact that 'change' never happened, partisan politics are even more out of control now than before and we are finally paying attention to what is going on in DC is it any wonder that America seems to have moved center right? The evidence is in the following: 1) the nations liberal newspapers are losing scores of subscribers while the Wall Street Journal (generally conservative with great Op-Ed pieces) was the only top 20 of nations newspapers to actually gain subscribers, 2) the evening cable prime-time news slots are dominated by Fox news (sometimes winning against all others combined) while MSNBC, CNN and CNBC are losing viewership in droves, 3) liberal talk radio ratings are so low that even Al Franken, who could win a US senator seat but couldn't carry enough audience to stay on the air with his progressive left wing rants, and 4) the scores of 'grassroots' protesters showing up at town hall meetings that still carry larger numbers than the Moveon.org and liberal funded proponents of Obamacare. Liberals have played their trump cards and fortunately for the rest of the rational and logical common sense American thinkers, it appears their hand should have been folded a long time ago. An old wiseman, Kenny Rogers, once said, "You gotta know when to hold em, know when to fold em, know when to walk away, and know when to run. You never count your money when your sitting it the table. There will be time enough for counting when the dealing's done."

It seems the democrats just don't know how to play a stacked hand. They control the house, the senate and the presidency. Yet playing politics with the American people will be their downfall. The liberal madness in DC just proves one major point that both party's are guilty of but should again learn. If you are drunk on power it will turn into your kryptonite. Liberals didn't fold when they could have, they should have known to walk away and they counted their money too soon. Instead, they are left to hold their sucker bet hands and when the dealings done they won't have any money left to count and the people of America will run them out of town. Keep it up, good card players love to play at a table with suckers. It's "Easy Money!"