Fast & Furious

[HerbieHeadley]

If nothing else they repeated the same mistake just two years after the atf had done it, and the ATT was even involved again.

“Wide Receiver” was a Bush operation that was shut down immediately after the efforts to trace the guns failed thanks in part to Mexican authorities droping the ball on their end as well. GPS transmitters were used but didn’t work out as planned under a particular small operation and so US authorities shut it down and the operation was killed.
“F&F” resurrected it, but not to trace the weapons. F&F was done to deliberately undermine public support for the 2nd Amendment and promote the 90% myth. Under Fast & Furious the orders were to not track the weapons purchased at all and to let them walk. Not the same program. It’s an amazing folly of logic.

Don’t be distracted by the “Bush did it, too” crowd. "F&F" was not a "mistake" at all, Obama/Holder sucessfully got what they wanted and the 'operation' went exactly as planned till those on the front lines had enough and spoke out under threats of retaliation and Lord knows what could have happened.

How did nobody speak up and make sure this wasn't a complete repeat of a failure? Even if you think they had good intentions, the incompetence alone is criminal.

Those lower the chain of command that were involved did speak up to their acting superiors and were ordered to stand down.

And if releasing further info would compromise other government ops, then GOOD! What else are they doing that we dont know about? What other crimes are they commiting and covering up? This is hardly the first time our government has helped violent drug runners before. At least last time we had a reason.

Yep, anyone that believes Obama and Holder are trying to cover for the previous administration is dreaming and not intouch with reality. Let the chips fall where they may. We need to know what would be the point of the programs continuation at all other than purposeful treason against the American citizens.?

 

[Rion]

Accidently unsubscribed to the thread.

 

[Vylo]

Neither Bush nor Obama did it, it was Newell in both cases. Who kept Newell on and let him run Fast and Furious? If it was Holder, he should be fired.....out of a cannon.

 

[Assuredcw]

Accidently unsubscribed to the thread.

Welcome back!

 

[Assuredcw]

Neither Bush nor Obama did it, it was Newell in both cases. Who kept Newell on and let him run Fast and Furious? If it was Holder, he should be fired.....out of a cannon.

Thank you for telling us about this. Newell, huh?

I don't think Holder made the decision to keep him. Check out this organizational chart:

http://www.justice.gov/agencies/index-org.html

You do see that the ATF is many, many, many layers BELOW Holder. Many layers. Did I say many layers?

Also, I Googled Newell, and the Executive Privilege being invoked by President Obama, is being extended to him. No, I am sure they are not protecting him. Holder is probably investigating his role. Stay tuned. Here's another link:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_1...affer-cant-be-questioned-on-fast-and-furious/

 

[TerranceL]

Oh, and President Bush's Administration had nothing to do with it? You jump right over Bush to Clinton?! Alrighty then...

Um.

I have one question... if you thought he was referring to Bill Clinton when he said Clinton.... who in the world did you think he was talking about when he said Nappy?

 

[Assuredcw]

Moving right along...

Quoting from this link (it is on the 2nd page of the story, towards the bottom of the page):

Fast and Furious: Political fallout continues following Eric Holder contempt vote - The Washington Post


....Republican strategist Ed Rogers has some doubts about the political upside for Republicans in pursuing a vote to hold Holder in contempt:

This is the wrong fight at the wrong time for the attorney general. The Wall Street Journal has an excellent editorial explaining some of the facts and legal issues of this case, and today, Dana Milbank has a clear piece in The Post from another point of view.
But Holder is playing to lose if the GOP will let him. The public generally has a bias toward more disclosure rather than less when the government has to account for its actions. And in this case, there is a dead American law enforcement officer, killed because of government failure or incompetence, which demands a full explanation. Just using the words "executive privilege" as an excuse to withhold information about government failures on this scale is a loser with the public.
But arguing in a partisan fashion is a loser for Republicans. Already there are GOP leaders who want to promote what they're doing, not just on the merits of the matter at hand, but by asserting that the Democrats were much worse in their treatment of the Bush Justice Department. That is not a reason to aggressively pursue this tragedy. No Republican or conservative commentator should even raise it. The notion that this is partially motivated by political payback is very damaging to what very little credibility Congress has today, and the approach is belittling to agent Brian Terry, who was killed, and unfair to his family. Also, by the way, it's the worst political move Republicans can make.
There are so many mutual feelings of unfair treatment among Republicans and Democrats that overreaching and over-acting has become the norm. The public tunes out when something becomes just another partisan squabble. Why isn't this more obvious to GOP leaders?

 

[TerranceL]

LOL

Ok... so congress shouldn't do it's job because it might be politically damaging?

 

[Assuredcw]

It's a Republican strategist's comments. Thought they would be informative.

 

[TerranceL]

It's a Republican strategist's comments. Thought they would be informative.

It's just another demonstration of what's wrong with american politics.

Putting what's politically helpful before whats the right thing to do.

 

[HerbieHeadley]

Which Democrat strategist advised Holder to lie to congress, and then cover-up the lies and lie some more to congress?

 

[Blackguard_]

It's just another demonstration of what's wrong with american politics.

Putting what's politically helpful before whats the right thing to do.

Also, this isn't the Lewinsky affair we're talking about. Then the Republicans did turn a relatively minor scandal into a huge partisan issue damaging their credibility.

This is potentially the biggest Presidential scandal ever, violating anti-arms-smuggling treaties to arm anti-government factions in what is essentially the Mexican Civil War in an attempt to undermine a US Constitutionally protected right.

They aren't going nearly far enough against the Obama administration. Holder should not be facing "contempt of congress" votes, he should be in jail and a real investigation into Fast and Furious should happen to find out who did and who knew about and ordered what and how high up, without the President getting to make stuff up about being above the law. This should end up with people facing treason trials.

If there was ever a time for the Republicans to get partisan, this would be it(not that that would be right, but it would be politically advantageous). They could topple the administration if they played their cards right. If burglary could force a President to resign, if lying about getting BJ can get a President impeached, smuggling to weapons to arm factions in a civil war against a friendly foreign nation in order to undermine Constitutional rights should result in Obama's head on a pike.

Also on the issue of playing this for partisan politics, what about the Democrats/Liberals? It's just as much partisan hackery to hammer away at scandals as it is to defend the players and try to bury and downplay the story and hope it'll blow over.

What about the Democrats in that party line contempt vote?

 

[NightHawkeye]

If there was ever a time for the Republicans to get partisan, this would be it(not that that would be right, but it would be politically advantageous). They could topple the administration if they played their cards right. If burglary could force a President to resign, if lying about getting BJ can get a President impeached, smuggling to weapons to arm factions in a civil war against a friendly foreign nation in order to undermine Constitutional rights should result in Obama's head on a pike.

Thing is ... this is an asymmetrical battle. Each side plays by a different set of rules. One side has a religious base which fervently believes in morality and the difference between good and evil. The other side, not so much. Personal behavior matters to one side, but on the other ... morals are relative, even flexible, LOL.

Just the way it is ...

The way to defeat this arrogant administration is to again crush them at the polls ... just as happened in 2010.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYPqv99l7rwhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7imejrYNqyA

 

[MachZer0]

Thing is ... this is an asymmetrical battle. Each side plays by a different set of rules. One side has a religious base which fervently believes in morality and the difference between good and evil. The other side, not so much. Personal behavior matters to one side, but on the other ... morals are relative, even flexible, LOL.

Just the way it is ...

The way to defeat this arrogant administration is to again crush them at the polls ... just as happened in 2010.

We already have Democrats like Pelosi circling the wagons to defend what has happened. It's hard to imagine what the Terry's are feeling

 

[Assuredcw]

It's just another demonstration of what's wrong with american politics.

Putting what's politically helpful before whats the right thing to do.

Politics is what we are discussing, here. I know you want conservatives to rule the world, but that's not the reality they operate under. Sorry.

 

[Illuminaughty]

Thing is ... this is an asymmetrical battle. Each side plays by a different set of rules. One side has a religious base which fervently believes in morality and the difference between good and evil. The other side, not so much. Personal behavior matters to one side, but on the other ... morals are relative, even flexible, LOL.

The Republicans are pretty bad on that account. The ends justifies the means is a phrase many of the Reps take to heart. If they have to lie to defeat the liberals they feel free to do it.

 

[TerranceL]

Politics is what we are discussing, here. I know you want conservatives to rule the world, but that's not the reality they operate under. Sorry.

LOL

You don't actually read anything people write do you?

I mean at all. You just gloss over it and come up with whatever is easier for you to respond to.

How in this or any other world did you come up with that?

 

[Assuredcw]

The Republicans are pretty bad on that account. The ends justifies the means is a phrase many of the Reps take to heart. If they have to lie to defeat the liberals they feel free to do it.

They'll only be successful when they "lie to defeat the liberals" if the electorate is in fact as ignorant as they think they are. (You do yourselves no favors by ONLY watching Fox News, folks! Pick up a local paper occasionally, and read it.)

Defeating the liberals doesn't do Republican voters any good, if THEY are being lied to, ALSO.

 

[TerranceL]

The Republicans are pretty bad on that account. The ends justifies the means is a phrase many of the Reps take to heart. If they have to lie to defeat the liberals they feel free to do it.

Erm, all politicians are pretty bad on that account.

The democrats are just as bad, you want to cut waste from the social security program? Democrats put out ads saying that you want grandma eating dogfood.

 

[Assuredcw]

Uh, TerranceL? Let's stick to Fast & Furious on my thread, OK?

Thanks!