Tamara Holder was a textbook case for how liberals should behave on Fox, especially on Hannity. During a debate about Fast and Furious and the House Republicans who voted earlier to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, she demanded equal time, refused to be over-talked or insulted and, best of all, refused to allow her opponent to play the patriotism card against her. The fact that Holder’s opponent was Michelle Malkin made it all that much sweeter.
Poor Michelle Malkin. First, she was called on her incivility by Sally Kohn early this month. Then her widdle feewings were hurt last week when Juan Williams said, “I’m a real reporter, I’m not a blogger.” Now came Holder on last night’s Hannity.
Holder’s essential point was that the House Committee Republicans who had voted to cite Holder had acted precipitously, instead of letting the investigation play out, whereas Malkin alleged that Holder was obstructing justice.
When Sean Hannity began interrupting Holder’s first statement, she said, “Give me the same amount of time that you give all of your Republican friends.”
And Hannity backed off. Twice.
In her most sanctimonious, condescending tone, Malkin addressed what she called the “tiresome blame-Bush card because I don’t think that Tamara knows what she’s talking about when we talk about the differences between Fast and Furious and Operation Wide Receiver and Project Gunrunner.”
Holder smartly interrupted to take exception to the accusation that she doesn’t know what she’s talking about. Hannity had to step in and let Malkin finish her point.
Which – Surprise! Surprise! – was full of more sneers and jeers. “For some of us, the core issues of national security, Second Amendment rights, integrity in government actually matters. It is not just some sort of TV game debate for us.” She concluded with, “The blood is on your people’s hands, Tamara.”
Holder snapped back, “No, actually, we’re all Americans and it’s on all of our hands.” As Holder continued to try to talk, Malkin interrupted again. So Holder said, “Can I finish?”
Malkin erupted in wide-eyed fury, saying, “I’m not gonna let you get away with that lie!” But Holder placed her elbows on the table, paused dramatically – and Malkin shut up.
You can Tweet your appreciation to Holder @TamaraHolder
Oh, you mean the investigation by the neocons? Oh yeah, that proves that sneering malkin wasn’t lying. (eyeroll) Really heirspin, you must think everyone is as stupid as right-wing apologists.
Please provide proof…CREDIBLE PROOF, that Tamara Holder was lying. By credible I mean anything but a right-wing shitsite.
Arial dear, you may not understand what an “in camera” review is because you’ve not spent years as a litigator. I have. it’s simple. privileged & sensitive documents are reviewed all the time by a judge or the ranking members of a committee. when they see privileged or sensitive information, it is redacted (covered w/ white tape made for the purpose), copies are made & only those redacted copies, which no longer contain the privileged or sensitive information are made public. I’ve had my own personal notes reviewed by a judge on more than one occasion & testified about them as well. the transcripts are sealed &, when it was determined that my notes were privileged, they were returned to me; the opposing attys didn’t even get a peek. w/ “in camera” reviews & redacting privileged & sensitive information, justice is served & no agents are compromised.
as for David Codrea’s column & Mike Vanderboegh’s blog, they just happen to be the sites where you can find every single F&F document & every single Wide Receiver document available. Codrea & Vanderboegh are the Bernstein & Woodward of F&F. the 1st whistleblowers came to them. they developed witnesses & broke the story. they also convinced Issa to investigate: Codrea’s letter asking Issa to begin the investigation is available on his blog. just use the links I provided. but don’t stop there. double check everything they say. search for the govt docs (they’re available online). do the research for yourself. I did.
It’s ok, dear… you’ll realize why no one can understand your posts after you take your medication.
this really concerns me: "The only difference between this and botched operations under âOperation Wide Receiverâ is that the right is demanding that Holder put the agents involved in danger by declassifying them. "
how is the right demanding that Holder do this? along w/ Eric Holder, the following have been subpoenaed: David Ogden, Former Deputy Attorney General; Gary Grindler, Officer of the Attorney General and former Acting Deputy Attorney General; James Cole, Deputy Attorney General; Lanny Breuer, Assistant Attorney General; Kenneth Blanco, Deputy Assistant Attorney General; Jason Weinstein, Deputy Assistant Attorney General; John Keeney, Deputy Assistant Attorney General; Matt Axelrod, Associate Deputy Attorney General; Ed Siskel, Former Associate Deputy Attorney General; Brad Smith, Office of the Deputy Attorney General; Kevin Carwhile, Section Chief, Capitol Case Unit; and Joseph Cooley, Criminal Fraud Section.
Kenneth Melson met w/ the committee of his own accord, he was not subpoenaed. none of these persons is an agent. I’ve been following this story since the beginning & have never encountered a subpoena for undercover agents. perhaps I’ve missed something. would you please provide your source?
And, as an aside, am I the only one that’s come to the conclusion that our humorous Mr. Patel just has to be a parody troll? The only other way to look at it is to hope that he doesn’t breed and pass that terminal ickiness (not to mention ignorance) on to his progeny…
It’s a TACTIC used to pinpoint the recipients of illegal arms sales by tracing the circulation of guns using trackers. It’s supposedly been in use for a very long time, we only know about since 2006. When it works, you bet your ass it gets results. When it doesn’t, or gets botched… they get the guns, people end up dead and your best bet to minimize retribution against agents is to keep it classified.
The only difference between this and botched operations under “Operation Wide Receiver” is that the right is demanding that Holder put the agents involved in danger by declassifying them.
But it’s nice to see that you endorse both cop killing and actions that could lead to a mandatory censorship of the 2nd amendment, just because Fox News told youto. You true American, you.
(1) Who is that commentator on Fox who supposedly interprets body language? I would love to hear their read on Holder vs. Malkin.
(2) My wife suggests that Hannity’s wife is more like Malkin than Holder – someone who tells him how brilliant he is rather than someone who stands their ground against him.
(3) An excellent research project would be to measure:
(a) amount of time Hannity gives to each panelists (and a measure as to how often/much he interrupts them or makes snide remarks while they are speaking);
(b) amount of time spent by Hannity speaking (since his positions are no mystery); my guess is that he spends about 50% talking…
I’m glad you screamed bloody murder when dumbya and his misadministration shredded the Constitution. Good for you. I think you missed my point that Rich S. may have been throwing that quote back in hypocrite neocon faces. I’ve not seen anyone here with the “sport mentality” you believe you see.
I suspect our other troll couldn’t see it not because of where it was sitting,but rather how.I’d presume you’d end up sitting on your shoulders with your head inserted where most trolls habitually have theirs.
Every time I see Ms. Maglalang and Shun Sannity together I get the distinct impression that the display cases at a green grocers would likely have a higher IQ.
Malkin is a coward. If you see the little woman in person, question her views. You will be lucky to get an answer. She has a nasty habit of running off than responding to questions.
NOTE TO HANNITY
Given your history and what you have done, you are the last person to call someone else less than truthful.
NOTE TO MALKIN