- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
What was that? I couldn't hear you over the gnashing of teeth coming from the conspiracy brigade! :lol:
Well if the Fast and Furious outrage was about justice sure...everybody agrees with the outcome and glad the issue was brought up.
This tying it to Obama is the ginned up portion.
That video showed that Eric Holder was accused of these things, however, Holder was not given a chance to respond. Now that the independent investigation clears Holder of all wrong doing, it is clear that these aligations are wrong as well. I can see many reasons why the documents do not need to be released to the public.
Much as there were those who insisted there was no scandal at all.
Yeah! Obama is just the head honcho. How could he have any responsibility?
There are two differen aspects to Fast and Furious.
The first being a dead border agent and guns being funneled to Mexican drug cartels.
I don't know of many people that believed that wasnt' a scandal.
The other aspect was trying to tie it to the Obama administration via Eric Holder.
They "walked" them, meaning they allowed illegal sale to dealers they knew would supply the cartels. They may as well have sold the guns themselves.
It's certainly tied to Holder -- in terms of mismanagement and incompetence -- as even the report says.
If it's in the Justice Department under Obama, it's already tied to Obama. How could it not be? Even if he DIDN'T refer to to departments and cabinet secretaries as "my" all the time, the whole shebang IS under him. Recall that he invoked Executive Privilege to protect Holder. How is this so if what goes on in Justice is not tied to the President?
Actually, those sales were not illegal under Arizona law. The ATF could only watch the purhcases to see where they lead. This is why it only happened in Arizona. They have very laxed gun laws and even if the ATF has arrested someone, the prosicutors would have had a hard time making a charge stick. The ATF simply tried to watch to see if these guns crossed the boarder, which would be illegal. However, once the guns were sold, it was hard to keep track of them.
The fact is...it's exactly what most media sources reported in the first place...it's a program that was started before Obama took office and continued after Obama was swore in.
So now invoking Executive Privilage is some sign of guilt?
The Department of Justice provided over 7,600 page of documents as well as making numerous officials available for questioning
Or maybe the answer they gave Congress was correct....that the documents requested were currently relevant to ongoing criminal investigations.No. It's a sign that the Dept of Justice is the President's responsibility. If you're right, you don't have to twist.
The tactics date back to 2006...different name same program same branch running it.Where do you get that? Operation Fast and Furious, which is what's in question here, was an original operation created by Holder's ATF in 2009
Or maybe the answer they gave Congress was correct....that the documents requested were currently relevant to ongoing criminal investigations
Or maybe the answer they gave Congress was correct....that the documents requested were currently relevant to ongoing criminal investigations.
The tactics date back to 2006...different name same program same branch running it.
I'm not deflecting...I'm operating under the assumption that we have a large bureacracy that for the most part is autonomous. That President Obama...or President Bush...or President Clinton...going back to all the modern Presidents are unaware of the majority of things that happen under their watch.You're attempting to deflect again, even after your error was pointed out.
It's not about what was protected. It's about the Dept of Justice being the responsibility of the President
As I stated above....no President rolls in and stops government long enough to go through every field office and operation in every sector of government and condones ore repeals policies. It would be chaos. For the most part...government goes on no matter who is the President and does their best to fullfill their mission. This policy origionated under the Bush administration and wasn't ended by the Obama administration until the death of the agent.Dude. Nothing under investigation happened under the previous Administration. Bush is gone. Let it go.
Really, you'd think Bush never left office, and there's been no new Administration for the last (nearly) four years. Or that none of them had any choice but to do exactly what Bush was doing, even though they'll tell you they were elected specifically to reverse all of it.
What documents did Obama hold back from the congressional hearing? Holder handed over everything and then some. Issa wanted something that didn't exist. Now that Holder has been cleared, we know Issa was just playing politics by trying to drum up a scandal where there was none.
Why would Obama know?
I'm not deflecting...I'm operating under the assumption that we have a large bureacracy that for the most part is autonomous. That President Obama...or President Bush...or President Clinton...going back to all the modern Presidents are unaware of the majority of things that happen under their watch.
When the situation was reported and people became aware of what was taking place was changes made? Yes. Was the operation ended? Yes.
As I stated above....no President rolls in and stops government long enough to go through every field office and operation in every sector of government and condones ore repeals policies. It would be chaos. For the most part...government goes on no matter who is the President and does their best to fullfill their mission. This policy origionated under the Bush administration and wasn't ended by the Obama administration until the death of the agent.
The incident took place his first year in office! The fact he's now been in nearly 4 years is irrelevant. This idea that everything changes under a new President is bunk. They are kind of busy!
So what's your point. All I'm getting is that it was an ATF office that was running the program. The ATF office is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice. The head of the Department of Justice is appointed by the President. Therefore everything done in any ATF office is a result of the President. If I'm wrong clarify. If that's the point you were making I don't see how my point was irrelevant.You keep saying all of this stuff as though it has relevance to the point I made. This is answering the point you wish I made, rather than answering the point I actually did.
Once again...please detail me the differences between Fast and Furious and Wide Receiver. The only difference I can see is one was done under Bush...the other by Obama. Same office, same tactic.No, it didn't. Fast and Furious was initiated in 2009. That you're having a problem owning up to that speaks volumes.
Thank you for at least sort of acknowledging that it didn't happen under Bush.
The rest of this is laughable, and aimed solely at giving the Obama Administration a pass for those things which you find inconvenient. Under this reasoning, no one's responsible for anything.
You keep saying all of this stuff as though it has relevance to the point I made. This is answering the point you wish I made, rather than answering the point I actually did.
And it's the third time you've done it.
No, it didn't. Fast and Furious was initiated in 2009. That you're having a problem owning up to that speaks volumes.
Thank you for at least sort of acknowledging that it didn't happen under Bush.
The rest of this is laughable, and aimed solely at giving the Obama Administration a pass for those things which you find inconvenient. Under this reasoning, no one's responsible for anything.
Might have been in one of those security briefings he didn't attend.
If the system has become so large that it is autonomous and information really is not getting to those who should know about it it needs to be changed and this program highlights that. It is illegal for a person to use a "spring trap" for home defense, a device or system that can trigger without oversight such as a shotgun pointed at a door that will fire if the door is open. Th reasoning is rather obvious. This program resulted in many deaths. Not fixing a system like this is the same as that shotgun. It is indiscriminate killing and should be dealt with strongly whether it is an individual or a government program.
So what's your point.
Once again...please detail me the differences between Fast and Furious and Wide Receiver. The only difference I can see is one was done under Bush...the other by Obama. Same office, same tactic.
Conservative reasoning...something that happens in a branch office of the ATF in Arizona...Obama's fault. A major terrorists attack on US soil? Nobody's fault...just systematic problems with the bureacracy. It's a load of horse**** honestly. I'm just glad the elctorate isn't as blind.
The problem is that the ATF has been killing through incompetence, extortion, lies, and coercion for a very long time. Since at least 1990, the ATF has been plagued with fatal scandals.No entity is infaliable. The difference between government and Wal Mart is that government is in charge of life and death situations and screw ups can cost lives.
The problem is that the ATF has been killing through incompetence, extortion, lies, and coercion for a very long time. Since at least 1990, the ATF has been plagued with fatal scandals.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?