But banks are are too big to be prosecuted. Nice racket Holder has going.

Holder was a lawyer for the banks involved in the fraud that caused the mortgage crisis.

Perfectly consistent with the hypothesis that the operative principle of the ruling class is that real citizens have means, and residents who don’t are mere pretenders. Yay Athenian democracy…

I always take that argument seriously and it is undoubtedly true. But this case is interesting in that regard.

Swartz, due to reddit, had means and was well positioned in the establishment (Harvard fellow) and still got bulldozed. That’s why people are hearing about this case. Contrast that to Hammond or Brown etc.

So it’s an exception to the rule and proving to be demonstrative.

Shorter DOJ: Arbitrary and capricious is not just a slogan, it’s our profession.

I would like to see Attorney General Holder be on the receiving end of some good ‘ole fashioned prosecutorial discretion.

Like say, offer him life in prison instead of the death penalty for his treason and war crimes.

Holder is doing well upholding Abu’s legacy.

Obama has chosen the worst possible people for his administration. Can’t think of a single one who has just common sense, a real feeling for Americans, and who isn’t already rich. He has surrounded himself with people who make him feel important. And Holder is terrible AG.

Taking out Swartz is part of the attack on the internet they have in store for us. Larger than life, Swartz stood in the way too much. Compared to him, Manning/Assange are small potatoes.

Obama has chosen exactly who will carry out Obama’s wishes. Obama’s wishes are consistent with the Bush Crime Syndicate’s wishes, along with those wishes of the majority of the 1%.

From Obama’s perspective, those he has chosen for various powerful position are doing “heckuva jobs!!! well done!!! way to go!!! atta boy!!!”

because it would be embarrassing.

Losing a case and FACE is embarrassing but corpses aren’t ???? WTF eric ! Who’s the clown in les miserables, though having honor, none the less spends his life chasing people down like rats. Shame .

That about sums up this whole sordid administration, wouldn’t you say ? Bodies strewn behind they a they strive towards the future.

Does Holder also have photos showing that Swartz was hiding WMD’s he got from Saddam? What creepy people inhabit the Beltway these days.

True, but unlike Schwartz’s fellow ‘Vard alum, Mark the Suckerberg, Scwartz didn’t give his all to the CIA. Hence, Schwartz was the IDEAL sacrificial lamb. You don’t play footsie with the PTB??? Well, then, we don’t give a shit what your background is…

Agree with eCAHN about the “example” being set for us all vis the ‘net. Unsure if I’d call Manning/Assange “small potatoes,” but it’s all on the continuum.

I can not wait for Holder to be beaten and raped in prison. In a perfect world, this would lead the news every night, in a “Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead” sort of way.

Bring back John Mitchell, Richard Kleindienst, Edwin Meese, John Ashcroft, Arturo Gonzales…hell, even A. Mitchell Palmer is looking pretty good right about now.

what a disgusting thing to say

Given his track record, particularly on going after Wall Street criminals, Holder has zero credibility on anything.

On the other hand, he’s guaranteed himself a very cushy, post-government gig.

O doesn’t have wishes. He’s doing what he is told to do.

That’s the best short version I’ve seen about why JFK was assassinated. Came across it yesterday. JFK was not doing what he was told to do.

Examples cited included not invading Cuba, looking into FRB, mafia, thinking of leaving VN.

I know little about JFK assassination and am not going to delve into it, but do run into info on it in my normal perambulations around the internet.

I have to agree. One can dislike and disapprove of someone without wishing harm or violence on that person.

Worth noting here is that again, it was a republican asking these questions.
And I’m no republican, but I’m also no longer a democrat.

Holder is John Mitchell with a tan. No banksters prosecuted, no war crimes, no posecution of the pharma companies flooding the country with synthetic heroin.
Boycotting the media outlets that give politicians cover is the only way to get that bad coverage changed.

Eric Holder is the Attorney General?????

Since when?????

I agree. But some people deserve a “banana in the tailpipe”.

I though HE was the guy that played Sgt. Harris on “Barney Miller“.

Holder states his findings are based on interviewing the prosecutor and others in the prosecutors office. He does not state that they interviewed the deceased defendants family or his lawyers.

OK, but it might be nice to balance it out with a recognition of the violence Holder’s opinions and actions/inactions visit on innocent people in South Asia, investors whose retirement savings have disappeared, and people who are spending this winter on the streets because Holder’s Justice Department refuses to even investigate massive mortgage fraud.

Yes, Eric Holder is awful. He’s complicit in all the egregious in/actions you mention, as well as an accessory after the fact.

However, I think points are better and more effectively made when we take the high road a la Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Of course it was good prosecutorial discretion – his boss made the call. Expecting someone who won’t resign in protest from a senior government post to say that the President is wrong is just silly :)

But the trouble is, the people we are talking about wouldn’t stop to reflect a second before “bulldozing” you and your entire family, if necessary, if for some reason you stood in their way. They are major, dangerous criminals. And they are vicious. Cum bye yah will be met with the full force of the state. You’ll either be arbitrarily prosecuted and threatened with life imprisonment, or maybe just “disappear” entirely – they have the means to do both.

The high road will be napalmed if necessary. These are thugs of a completely different order to anything you encountered before.

Well, yeah, you are correct. O is doing what he’s told, but nonetheless, O “approves” of the jobs well done by those holding office, and that includes all the Bush appointees who are still there at the various agencies. We are in agreement.

Also in agreement vis JFK. Well I think if you do certain types of research, what you surmise is what one sees. I’m no expert, either, but those theories have been bandied about for quite some time now. I started hearing them back in the late ’60s or early ’70s, which is waaay before the Internet. Stuff was discussed in underground presses.

No kidding. Mahatma Ghandi would be gunned down a lot sooner than as happened back in the day… these thugs don’t give a shite about the high road or anything approaching morals or ethics or doing the right thing or whatever…

I don’t equate ‘cum bye yah’ with taking the high road.
Yes, they are thugs. They are despicable. Does that mean we need to stoop down to their level and become thugs too?

I don’t condone violence. Period.

Not surprised to hear it’s been around for that long. Peter Dale Scott has been doing his deep govt geopolitics for all those decades.

Me, I’m a newbie, but trying to move up the learning curve quickly. :-)

Even at the time, those who were paying attention felt that the Warren Report was bogus. Kind of like whatever the Commission was that “investigated” 9/11, only the Warren Report *seemed* more “reasonable.” I think that’s mainly, again, bc there was no Interent, so information resources were less readily available, esp in real time.

I was in high school when the Warren Report was issued, and I felt, even then, that it was a load of crap; said so to my parents, who of course countered with how Big Daddy in the Gubmint would lie… like yeah: sure. My eyes were opened (as we’ve discussed) when I witnessed Lee Harvey get kilt “live” on the tv… eyes further opened when, as you pointed out yesterday, Jack Rubie died some time later by cancer… why hooow convenient. Stunk like 2 week old fish. pee-yew.

OK. First, this wasn’t real violence like Eric Holder helps visit upon US nationals and foreigners every day and would like to visit upon more of them. It was a rhetorical wish for violence. Second, Dr. King died in a hail of bullets and no one ever caught the person(s) who did it, because no one ever really looked very hard: that’s where the high road got him. Holder is up there using the opportunities for African-Americans that Dr. King did so much to help build to screw poor people, the middle class, dissenters, people at weddings in Yemen and the rule of law in general Third, liberals and decent folk generally have been “taking the high road” for decades now hoping that the press would notice lies and hypocrisy and call them out. I think the results are in now: they aren’t going to.

Peter Dale Scott is hardly a wild eyed conspiracy nutcase. He’s as level headed and careful as any expert on the secret history of the U.S. Keep reading. Much more is known about the “Crime of the Last Century” than before or more is being admitted by those who were always afraid to speak.
JFK had many enemies, most of them WASP establishment guys. Guys he fired were hired to run (whitewash) the Warren Report. The trail is cold after these many years, but there’s still an ember here and there. Write Dr. Scott. He writes back.

Obama has surrounded himself with sycophants who tell him how great he is and what a great president he is.

I’d rather there was no violence either. However, if ever, by some miracle, a majority of Americans rose from their complacency and TPTB felt genuinely threatened, there would be literally nothing they would not do to remain in power. “Democracy” would be dispatched in a heartbeat followed by a crackdown the like of which was never seen before on this planet. They will stop at nothing. They are already all-in. The potential lists of charges against them should they lose power is endless. The sentences would run to thousands of years. They’ve both nothing and everything left to lose at the same time. They are the mythical cornered, wild animal.

I know wishing violence is not the same as *real* violence. The points you make are all valid. Yes, MLK was killed in a hail of bullets, but had he taken up arms, I believe it would have happened sooner than it did. My point is simply that wishing violence on another demeans and degrades what would otherwise be an important message one is trying to make.

Holder is a guy who jumped head-first into the Pit years ago. There isn’t anything this guy wouldn’t do or say if his handlers ordered him to. But of course that goes for this entire Administration, top down, side to side.

Cheney was right. The Shadow Government IS in control.

Holder is Obama’s dog so the argument is with Obama who never fails to disappoint.

So Aaron Swartz was prosecuted for down-loading too much material & was prosecuted by Obama-Holder.

Rupert Murdoch was complicit in hacking into 911 widows’ phone mail accounts & E-mail and he hasn’t been prosecuted.

… yes to this

… this guy has done so little good in/with this position but he is employed by B.H.Obama who has not let him go … Obama is the kingpin in this… post WH these guys will be cleaning up

… decency?… whats that?

… what a shameless / bent bunch to be in the WH until 2017

Gotta disagree. Too lenient. Deserves no better than the scum at Nuremberg.

Gandhi pointed out that non-violence – aka the high road – was dependent upon its target having a conscience, as the British do and as the US did in MLK’s day. That is no longer the case, not for Obama Democrats or Republicans or our corrupt, stupid and ignorant news media. Persisted in, the high road is going to lead straight to a Children’s Crusade.

Is there anyone who doesn’t know about JFK?

Anytime a President of the USA thinks he’ll go against something the military, or the CIA, or the rest of them want, he just thinks about JFK, and decides staying alive is more important.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that real democracy ended that day, in the USA.

Uh, maybe Obama chose the people he knew would support his donors and paymasters?

I mean, think Geithner. Now, Lew. Ewww.

Obama wants to do well by his Corporate benefactors. It’s his job description, as they gave it to him. We and our needs, desires are not part of his job objectives.

First, rise up, revolt.

I thought Holder was done after one term. What happened to that? He is terrible and a scourge in the Judiciary, which a we have seen, is full of them.

Hey, hey! Ho, ho!
Eric Holder has GOT to go.

Swartz was probably just too brilliant and might find ways around internet privacy and openness controls the gov’t and the Powers That Be want imposed on us.

His sentence under the plea deal also included that he not use or work with computers.

They wanted him stifled. Death works as well, probably better, than keeping him from working in his field.

What do you suggest?

Look, I have no problem with civil disobedience, and I’m no saint, but in my humble opinion, no good can come from violence. Period.

Well, again, your original objection was to rhetorical violence. So, the first thing I would suggest is to let others stop being so nicey-nice rhetorically. People do not know the facts in this country and they are not going to learn them from the news media, “liberal” or otherwise. We as informed citizens need to step up and tell the truth, wounds and all. A lot of the truth is that our government – under both parties – is committing a lot of violence, both the direct kind that Sen. Paul is worried about, and the violence of poverty, which Holder and a deeply complicit DoJ have done so much to enable.

I agree Holder is a worthless piece of shit. But, that reflects verrry poorly on the person who hired him perhaps even more than on him.

That’s very catchy. I like that.

You have a very valid point. AS the PTB are only beholden to the 1%, a disatisfied 99% is of little concern to them.

That’s really BAD news. Even when we vote the current corrupt and misguided political party OUT of office, they are replaced with an equally corrupt and misguided political party.

Ruper Murdoch is RICH Beyond imaginging, plus he knows where the bodies are buried… literally.

Schwartz knew a lot, but not enough to give him the leverage that Murdoch has. Plus Murdoch built up his connections; Murdoch’s a connected guy. Schwartz was, essentially, a “nobody” in today’s criminal aristocracy, but he needed to be squashed. And so: he was.

Is there anyone who doesn’t know about JFK?

Sadly, yes. While it’s been crystal clear to some of us what happened near the “grassy knoll” in Big D… I truly don’t think the majority of citizens “get it.” Not. at. all.

But I do believe it’s a very credible explanation for part of the reason why Obama is who he is. I don’t think Obama “minds” being this way, but IF he had a shred of conscience, I’m sure some Goombah would be sent to him pronto to ‘splain it real clearly… Like: nice daughters you got there; real cute & smart. Too bad if something really bad happened to them….

That reminds me of the joke I made up when I thought there was a difference between dems and reps:
In every ‘pub’s bed, there’s a horse’s ass
In every dem’s bed, there’s a horse’s head

Now I think the “dem” could be replaced by “one who is getting ready to wander off the reservation” (but it’s not as catchy)

Thank you for your reply…
Good points – all of them, but I’d like to think that there’s something in between “nicey-nice” and “rhetorical violence”. I never said or even implied that we need to be all sweet all the time, or EVER, for that matter.

I agree that we need to be informed, as well as try to inform others whenever/wherever we get the opportunity. I don’t mince words when I run into some obamabot, just as I didn’t with the bush defenders. I try to make them aware of what’s going on, until my patience wears thin because I see that their party loyalty renders them deaf and blind to facts.

It just doesn’t feel right (to me) to express ‘rhetorical violence’ while trying to educate someone about the violence being perpetrated by our govt on innocent, poor, elderly, disabled people across the globe and at home.

yup

I don’t believe that a president of the United States doesn’t have any leeway and must totally do what he/she is told. Certainly, a president cannot all at once go against the established order. But he can make changes at the edges of policy, emphasize different points in his speeches, appoint some people who are not total insiders and make sure they are treated decently, etc. And these changes can build over time. So it is NOT a pass for president to argue that he is simply doing what he is told. Look how Gorbachev was able to change the Soviet Union.

I don’t pretend to know anything inside about the circumstances of JFK’s assassination. What is public record is this: The Kennedy administration pursued a much more militaristic foreign policy than the Eisenhower/Nixon administration which preceded it. It was Eisenhower who warned of the military-industrial complex; Kennedy never (publicly at least) repeated this warning.

In the 1960 presidential campaign, Kennedy ran on the platform of a phony “missile gap” with the Soviet Union. It was Kennedy who started the initial escalation in Vietnam and whose administration condoned the assassination of Vietnamese President Diem in the summer of 1963, which was arguably the real start of the war. I have never seen substantiation for Oliver Stone’s claim that Kennedy wanted to pull out of Vietnam at the end of his life. I have often wondered if the Vietnam War would have started if Nixon was elected in 1960.

Kenneday also carried out a year-long effort to assassinate Fidel Castro, following the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invastion. According to a recent article in the Atlantic magazine, Kennedy contemplated a first nuclear strike against the Soviet Union from missiles based in Turkey, and this may have been the reason the Soviet Union placed its own missiles in Cuba. http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2001/10/kaplan.htm

The Cuban missile crisis which resulted brought the world closer to nuclear war than it has ever been, and though Kennedy apparently showed some wisdom by not following the advice of some of his advisors to invade Cuba, he was totally wrong in bringing the world to the brink of nuclear precipice.

So the claim that Kennedy was an enemy of the military-industrial complex doesn’t, on its face, seem to me to hold up.