- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 31,645
- Reaction score
- 7,598
- Location
- Canada, Costa Rica
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Yeah, I'm sure the Mexicans would appreciate Holder turning over all kinds of documents containing sensitive intelligence about the cartels and gun runners.
But it can, and likely will, be stalled until after the election, then Obama and Holder can toss out some mid-level DOJ scapegoat that will take the "fall" for making "an error in judgement", and all will be forgotten.
Indeed it was a screw up, over 200 dead and no tough gun control got called for. Oh well, Obama still gets to look presidential and the press is no longer looking at the economy. Obama is VERY good at campaigning, just not so good at governing. Now congress looks stupid, so they will get all mad and mean, making Obama look cool, calm and presidential by comparison. Yes he did!
1. That is irrelevant unless your claim is that Fast and Furious was illegal. Is that your claim?WHO authorized fast & fuzzy and WHY.
That was the intent of the program, so "why?" in this case is a pointless question.Why did about 2,000 guns, their serial numbers carefully logged by federal agents, get sold to KNOWN cartel straw buyers
Read all about it. There are even pictures of recovered weapons :doh:and then suddenly "disappear", with NO arrests or recovery of the weapons?
Tuesday, January 25, 2011 -- Federal authorities announced charges today against 34 Arizonans accused of buying about 700 guns in gun stores in the state on behalf of Mexico's Sinaloa drug cartel.
Borderland Beat: Feds charge 34 Arizonans for trafficking weapons to Sinaloa cartel
That would be correct, assuming that is the only reason it was claimed. Do you have any evidence that is the case?Shielding the president from "political damage" is not a sufficient reason to claim Executive Priviledge. [...]
Exactly so whatever gun control there was, he lifted, so please explain to me how gun control would have prevented this from happening, when the government lifts the rules.
Just think if Bush was the President and exerted this type of executive privilege to cover up a crime. I can just see what CNN and MSNBC would be saying. CNN is busy sugar coating Obama's latest executive action as we speak.
Evidence of what?Μολὼν λαβέ;1060611210 said:Evidence Holder is hiding from Congress with the help of the POTUS.
Obviously it would depend upon the subpoena. If the subpoena were illegal, or beyond the scope of Congress' authority, then certainly.My question is this: Does the AG have the right to ignore a subpoena?
That would be correct, assuming that is the only reason it was claimed. Do you have any evidence that is the case?
Can you describe these beans? Are they magic beans?[...] These morons in the DOJ were finally about to have to spill the beans, so king Obama had to call a time-out. [...]
The conspiracy theory forum is a few floors down.They did not "lift the rules", they ordered ILLEGALLY that the current law be ignored, so that they could let KNOWN drug cartel straw buyers flood the area with thousands of TRACEABLE U.S. bought weapons, hoping for headlines like "Mexican cartels execute hundreds using legally purchased U.S. firearms" and then get very strict gun control laws passed since even most, hard core, gun toting, rednecks hate the Mexican drug cartel thugs. ;-)
Obviously it would depend upon the subpoena. If the subpoena were illegal, or beyond the scope of Congress' authority, then certainly.
Congress -- unless sitting in some type of special session, such as impeachment -- is not a court of law, nor a judge. I would imagine that their subpoena's are subject to judicial review in a real court of law.
Evidence of what? What crime do you think has been committed?That's the WHOLE POINT, simply to keep the evidence from getting out. No evidence, no problem. No brain, no headache.
Obviously it would depend upon the subpoena. If the subpoena were illegal, or beyond the scope of Congress' authority, then certainly.
Congress -- unless sitting in some type of special session, such as impeachment -- is not a court of law, nor a judge. I would imagine that their subpoena's are subject to judicial review in a real court of law.
They did not "lift the rules", they ordered ILLEGALLY that the current law be ignored, so that they could let KNOWN drug cartel straw buyers flood the area with thousands of TRACEABLE U.S. bought weapons, hoping for headlines like "Mexican cartels execute hundreds using legally purchased U.S. firearms" and then get very strict gun control laws passed since even most, hard core, gun toting, rednecks hate the Mexican drug cartel thugs. ;-)
Evidence of what? What crime do you think has been committed?
Evidence of what? What crime do you think has been committed?
Evidence of what?
Or if that question is not clear,
What kind of evidence? What crime will this purported evidence prove?
Can you describe these beans? Are they magic beans?
Also, how do you know that the DOJ was about to spill them? Link? Psychic network? Radio transmission from Mars?
Oooh, sorry, wrong answer.He doesn't have the right to ignore the subpoena. If he deems it illegal, then it goes to the courts.
Under [Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund], Courts generally do not hear motions to quash Congressional subpoenas; even when executive branch officials refuse to comply, the Courts tend to rule that such matters are "political questions" unsuitable for judicial remedy.
Contempt of Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I see. You won't know if there's any evidence until you get all the evidence. And I suppose you wont know what crime has been committed until you get all the evidence.He's already talked about that, and asking for evidence? Silly considering we won't know if there's actual evidence until all the docs are released. [...]
No, I don't know that. What is your ... ahem ... evidence?You do not know that hundreds of people were killed as a result of this F & F program?
No, I don't know that. What is your ... ahem ... evidence?
Your argument makes no sense to me. Arrests and recoveries have already been proven (with photos even). You seem to be the only one talking about "accident", "error in judgement" or "mistake". Therefore I will leave you to argue with yourself. Have a nice dayPlease, do you honestly beleive that over 2,000 guns, their serial numbers all carefully logged, all of a sudden just "walked" without any arrests or recovery of the guns? Maybe 50 in a single botched delivery, but not over 2,000 guns, sold over several months, from multiple sales locations and in multiple states, that is WAY beyond the realm of an "accident", "error in judgement" or "mistake" .
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?