suppression debate. If they can discredit Holder, they can frame his enforcement actions as unfair and partisan.

when he took office. So every department is filled with repugnant appointments who do not believe in the work of that department. Do you remember that the Cheney administration was hiring lawyers for the Justice department based on how much they hated Roe v Wade and whether they were good "christians"? How many Liberty U law school grads are still there hunkered down in the woodwork waiting to sabotage something like investigations into voter suppression?

But, surely, Holder brought in some of his own staff to served directly under him. And, he and his surrogates should know who the moles are by now.

division of the U.S. Department of Justice does not require a sitting Attorney General to enforce the law, FFS. Holder could resign and his replacement be stalled and not voted upon until after November and that still would not prevent enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.

The GOP is trying to send the Obama administration and the DOJ a message that the GOP does not like Attorney General Holder using civil rights laws to uphold civil rights like voting. The real effect would be if President Obama lost because a Romney DOJ would be worse than a bush DOJ. Remember it was under Bush that the staff of the voting rights section of the DOJ was overruled in order to allow the Georgia voter id law to go into effect. That was a purely political act that ignore the recommendations of the staff of the DOJ

It's got nothing to do with voting rights.

That's the scenario.

Smear holder as corrupt. (and Obama as corrupt)

Then claim Rick Scott is fighting "voter fraud", while the corrupt Holder is trying to promote "voter fraud" to steal the election for Obama.

Fuck the GOP and their enablers.

Don

I really wanted to know why others in the AG's office couldn't take up this mantle.

How in the hell do you get any support or enabling of the GOP from my merely asking why others in Holder's employ couldn't do the job? Protecting voting rights needs to be done and I know that the federal AG's office isn't staffed by only Eric Holder.

The "moles" explanation upthread is a good issue, for example.

My question was merely logistical.

They are trying to make him look dirty.

Then the right wing noise machine will claim Issa "proved" he is "corrupt", and say he is being corrupt and trying to promote "Voter Fraud"

Issa is a corrupt, morally bankrupt criminal, himself.

This is what they always do - lie and muddy the waters.

You are right about Issa. Every word he says about Obama being corrupt is pure Republican Projection.

Rick Scott can say - why should we listen to Holder? (but in Rick's language).

PB