Tag Archives: Eric Holder

How Eric Holder Lost The Struggle For Social Justice

This article continues the story of US Attorney Eric Holder’s failure to carry the torch passed on by the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. and shows how US Attorney Eric Holder made a deal with JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon and the New York Federal Reserve gang instead using his historic opportunity to achieve true Equality and Social Justice as the first African American Attorney General of the United States.

Read Part 1 here

EricHolderBabylonian money magic and the actual business model of the international banking cartel that controls the Federal Reserve and other key Central Banks around the World depends on cycling a target population through economic expansion and contraction.

Bankers make money by lending. Then, bankers make money by taking away. While counterintuitive, bankers know that the increase in currency an asset can command as a sale price is a function of their expansion in the borrowing facility they make available to that population. With each new loan, the banks obtain security and an ownership of an interest in additional property along with the streams of income used by the borrower to obtain the loan. When the target population is deceived into taking on as much unfavorable debt as it can pledge to, banks then make money by contracting the economy for the target population.

Foreclosing On The New Equality

USHomeOwnership

Veterans’ Today readers will of course notice the above graph took a big turn to the South in 2007 at the end of George W. Bush’s (Bush 43) presidency. Every one of the gains in home ownership, jobs, and wealth under Bush 41 and Bill Clinton have been taken back. For young African American men facing real unemployment of near 50% like Michael Brown, those that did not make it out of decaying urban core areas to better schools and safer neighborhoods under President Bill Clinton, the prospects are grim and home ownership is unreachable:

“The unemployment rate for black youth reached a high of 49.1 percent in November 2009 and as of January 2012 had fallen to 38.5 percent. Not only has the unemployment rate remained high, but a large number of black teens are no longer in the labor force – either working or looking for work — which explains some of the drop in the unemployment rate.

In 2007, black teens participated in the labor force at a rate of 30.3 percent. By 2011, that rate had declined to 24.9 percent. Labor force participation of black men and women aged 20-54 declined by 2.3 percentage points from 78.2 percent in 2007 to 75.9 percent in 2011, while participation among older black workers (aged 55 and older) increased by 1.3 percentage points — 35.3 percent in 2007 to 36.6 percent in 2011.”

DOL Special Reports- The African-American Labor Force in the Recovery, February 29, 2012. US Department of Labor.

Ferguson in North St. Louis, South Chicago, Wrong Sides of the Red Line

In America, before the White majority and the middle class experienced that organized crime engineered economic contraction in 2008, African Americans in inner city core neighborhoods were already experiencing an economic contraction. And it was a deliberate artificial contraction by the banks that was unconnected to a lessening of employment or wage levels.

This process or scam played by the major commercial banks on Black families was known as “Reverse Redlining.” The big banks that lost market share to Savings and Loans, and then to more responsive and customer friendly state and regional banks pulled out of serving urban residential neighborhoods with high minority populations.

However, the banks could not leave the profit potential of these same neighborhoods unexploited, so they located more predatory versions of mortgage and credit services in the neighborhoods they had pulled their regular banks out of.  In the article The Color of Money by Bill Dedman, printed in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. January 5, 1988, the Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative-reporter showed that banks would often lend to lower-income whites but not to middle- or upper-income blacks. The Reverse Redlining scam involved selling mortgages, credit and insurance to these previously abandoned customers, but with far less value on offer for the otherwise similar appearing financial products.

Often, these new institutions would have similar names or variations of the names of the parent banks, but since they were organized as independent units in the abandoned neighborhoods, the services and rates offered could be uniformly much higher than those available in the suburbs. To the point of usury, but also through less favorable terms and conditions majority race customers in more competitive locations would never have to accept.

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) were the first advocacy groups to stand up for low income home owners in urban core neighborhoods subjected to Reverse Redlining. The young Barak Obama, with several other attorneys, had served as local counsel for ACORN in a 1995 voting rights lawsuit joined by the Justice Department and the League of Women Voters.

ACORN_Missouri

ACORN Protestors Calling For Justice To Stop Foreclosures

In Missouri, where non judicial foreclosures are the rule, the sudden collapse of the Black Middle Class in places like my urban region, the greater Kansas City Metropolitan Area, was disastrous. Whole neighborhoods of freshly restored beautiful turn of the past century houses appeared to be boarded up over night. During the Clinton years, urban blight had been ruthlessly hunted down and eradicated, new Costcos and Home Depots appeared in what had been ghettos. And, the people reinvested in their neighborhoods. The houses were brought up to current HUD standards and to meet every banking quality requirement.  Continue reading . . .


SF Source VeteransToday  Jan 10 2015

Jeff Berwick ~ The Beginning Of The End For The Leaders Of The Free World…Humanity Awakens!

ActivistPost  May 5 2014

In just the past few weeks, First Lady Michelle Obama, Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Attorney General Eric Holder have had to cancel appearances due to protests.

They’re just the latest in a long line.

Michelle Obama cancelled the commencement speech she was scheduled to give at a Kansas high school after nearly 2,000 people signed a petition protesting her appearance.

Over the weekend we learned that former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has cancelled her appearance at Rutgers University due to protests. Condoleezza wrote,

“Commencement should be a time of joyous celebration for the graduates and their families,” Ms. Rice wrote in a Facebook post. “Rutgers’ invitation to me to speak has become a distraction for the university community at this very special time.”

Rutgers faculty and anti-war activists berated the university administration for offering Rice the speaking slot, citing her “efforts to mislead the American people about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.”

That cancellation came only one week after Attorney General Eric Holder’s last-minute cancellation of his speech at a police academy graduation to 42 cadets. Holder’s cancellation comes on the heels of the House holding him in contempt for road-blocking an investigation into a covert gun-running sting called Fast and Furious.  His appearances prompted threats of protests, with opponents noting that Holder was an “ironic” choice of speaker because of his “tactics of obfuscation and redirection of blame” as attorney general.

The recent cancellations come after many US leaders have had to cancel appearances as people all over the world wake up to their violent and criminal ways. Former Vice President Dick Cheney has had to cancel multiple appearances, for example, in Canada because it was “too dangerous” for him, a former leader of the “free world.”

“Basically they felt that it would be a major security issue if Vice President Cheney came back to Canada,” said Ryan Ruppert, president of Spectre Live Corp, which was promoting Cheney’s speech.

The first time, in 2011, Cheney’s appearance at a $500-a-plate book club dinner in Vancouver last September had a shadow cast over it by protestors who blocked the entrance to the venue and were beat by police. Cheney had to stay inside while police dispersed the crowd.

The protestors were calling for Cheney’s arrest over war crimes.

George W. Bush had to cancel a visit to Switzerland where he was to address a Jewish charity gala. He was worried about possible legal action against him for alleged torture as pressure has been mounting on the Swiss government to arrest him and open a criminal investigation if he enters into the country. Swiss judicial officials have said that Bush would still enjoy a certain diplomatic immunity as a former head of state.

In 2002 Henry Kissinger cancelled a trip to Brazil because of human rights protests. Kissinger was even sought by French police during a visit to Paris in a case involving a French citizen murdered by the US-backed military dictatorship in Chile.

The state as a façade is fading as the Internet helps people wake up to the true terrorists and criminals. We expectmore of these types of protests to cancel future events in the US and elsewhere, and many of the top criminals in the US government will continue to have a hard time travelling internationally without being arrested for their crimes.

Millennials Distrust Government

A new poll surveying young Americans’ political attitudes released by Harvard University’s Institute of Politics Tuesday found millennials have less trust in government than ever before – that includes the Presidency, the military, Congress, the Supreme Court, and the federal government as a whole. The President and the military lost the most trust among young Americans with a seven point drop. The pollsters said the level of trust millennials have in “most American institutions tested in our survey” had dropped below even “last year’s historically low numbers.” Look at this dramatic drop:

US_CompositeTrustIndex1

The pollsters also created this chart showing young peoples’ levels of trust in almost every public institution. Across the board, the “commanding heights” of society are not trusted.

US_CompositeTrustIndex2

“Currently, less than one-in-four (24%) young Americans under the age of 30 say that they will  ‘definitely be voting,’ in the upcoming midterm elections for Congress, a sharp decrease of 10 percentage points since the Fall,” the pollsters said. “During a similar time of the year in 2010, 31 percent of 18- to 29-year olds reported that they would definitely vote.”

The people are awakening and it is beautiful to watch.

Anarcho-Capitalist. Libertarian. Freedom fighter against mankind’s two biggest enemies, the State and the Central Banks. Jeff Berwick is the founder of The Dollar Vigilante, CEO of TDV Media & Services and host of the popular video podcast, Anarchast. Jeff is a prominent speaker at many of the world’s freedom, investment and gold conferences as well as regularly in the media including CNBC, CNN and Fox Business.

Bill Whittle ~ World Gone Mad [Video]

PJ Media  August 15 2013 (Thanks, Minty)

President Obama took yet another vacation. This time, Obama used combat aircraft to fly his dog to his luxurious Martha’s Vineyard holiday rental, all while his government, including Attorney General Eric Holder, continues to flout the law. While Obama plays golf, the NSA continues to abuse power. Will Obama’s world gone mad collapse?

Jon Rappoport ~ Eric Holder: Idiot Zen Master

nomorefakenews.com May 17 2013

In his recent testimony before Congress, US Attorney General Eric Holder, the so-called highest law-enforcement officer in the land, responded to questions about the AP scandal.

Holder’s Justice Dept. had secretly subpoenaed and seized the phone records of Associated Press reporters.

Holder stated he didn’t know anything about anything, because he had recused himself from the issue and recused himself from the new internal DOJ investigation of the matter.

What?

Huh?

His own agency, the US Dept. of Justice, had spied secretly on reporters. But he, Holder, the head of that agency, decided to remain entirely ignorant about the whole fiasco, once he discovered the vague outline of what was going on.

This is like the manager of a car agency learning that 50 new cars in his lot have packets of heroin in their glove compartments, and immediately withdrawing to Bermuda for a fishing vacation.

The Congressional committee then asked Holder about the new internal DOJ investigation of itself vis-a-vis the AP scandal. Holder said he wasn’t absolutely sure about that either, because, again, he had recused himself.

This is like that car-agency manager sitting in his boat in Bermuda and putting a blindfold over his eyes and plugs in his ears.

Why did Holder recuse himself? Unasked, unanswered. That in itself is staggering.

Continue reading

A Non-Combatant Terrorist? Holder Issues New Statement On Obama’s Right To Kill Citizens Without Charge or Conviction

Jonathan Turley’s blog March 8 2013

We previously discussed how Attorney General Eric Holder wrote a letter confirming that the President would have authority to kill citizens on U.S. soil without a charge or conviction. His answer triggered a principled filibuster by Sen. Rand Paul and another embarrassment to Democratic Senators who, again, chose personality over principle in staying silent. Now, Holder has issued a new statement. No, President Obama still claims the right to kill U.S. citizens on his sole authority. However, Holder now says that, if the citizen is “not engaged in combat on American soil,” the President cannot vaporize him. The answer leaves the constitutional claim of Obama even more confused and conflicted. Does this mean we have a third category now under the policy: citizen, citizen terrorist, and citizen non-combatant terrorist? The difference appears to determine whether you can be vaporized or speak to counsel but Holder is not explaining to the citizenry.

In his prior letter, Holder answered a question about whether the President was claiming the right to kill citizens on U.S. soil. This follows the release of a memo showing that Holder’s description of the policy at Northwestern University Law School was narrower than the actual policy described within the Administration. A memo leaked to the press shows that the Administration has adopted a virtual limitless definition of imminence: “The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.”

Last week, Holder said “It is possible I suppose to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.”

After the filibuster, Holder wrote a short terse response to Paul: “It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’ The answer to that question is no.”

Continue reading

Holder Tells Senator That Obama Does Have Authority To Kill Citizens With Drones On U.S. Soil Without Criminal Charge or Conviction

Jonathan Turley’s blog March 6 2013

Attorney General Eric Holder this week held out the possibility that the President could kill an American citizens with a drone attack on U.S. soil without any criminal charge or trial. After Holder announced President Obama’s kill list policy, many apologists for the Administration insisted that the policy was limited to targets outside of the United States and was subject to a form of due process of the President’s own making. At the time, I wrote that these arguments were nothing but spin by the Administration and its supporters since the underlying claim of authority would have no such limitations. Holder now appears to have confirmed that even they do not believe in such limitations. This follows the release of a memo showing that Holder’s description of the policy at Northwestern University Law School was narrower than the actual policy described within the Administration.

Holder was responding to a letter from Sen. Rand Paul concerning the nomination of CIA director John Brennan on the use of lethal force. Holder said “It is possible I suppose to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.”

Continue reading

Glen Greenwald ~ Obama’s Justice Department Grants Final Immunity To Bush’s CIA Torturers

Jeenyus Corner | September 2 2012

The Obama administration’s aggressive, full-scale whitewashing of the “war on terror” crimes committed by Bush officials is now complete. Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder announced the closing without charges of the only two cases under investigation relating to the US torture program: one that resulted in the 2002 death of an Afghan detainee at a secret CIA prison near Kabul, and the other the 2003 death of an Iraqi citizen while in CIA custody at Abu Ghraib. This decision, says the New York Times Friday, “eliminat[es] the last possibility that any criminal charges will be brought as a result of the brutal interrogations carried out by the CIA”.

To see what a farce this is, it is worthwhile briefly to review the timeline of how Obama officials acted to shield Bush torturers from all accountability. During his 2008 campaign for president, Obama repeatedly vowed that, while he opposed “partisan witch-hunts”, he would instruct his attorney general to “immediately review” the evidence of criminality in these torture programs because “nobody is above the law.” Yet, almost immediately after winning the 2008 election, Obama, before he was even inaugurated, made clear that he was opposed to any such investigations, citing what he called “a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards”.

Throughout the first several months of his presidency, his top political aides, such as the chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, and his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, publicly – and inappropriately – pressured the justice department to refrain from any criminal investigations. Over and over, they repeated the Orwellian mantra that such investigations were objectionable because “we must look forward, not backward”. As Gibbs put it in April 2009, when asked to explain Obama’s opposition, “the president is focused on looking forward. That’s why.”

Continue reading