Fast & Furious

SolomonVII · Nov 29, 2012

Faith.Man said:
Mexican Cartels Violently Beat and Kill Female Mayor

Mexican Cartels Violently Beat and Kill Female Mayor - Katie Pavlich

Katie Pavlich is the author of Fast and Furious, a book I'm reading now.

It is possible that in Mexico, this has all passed the point of no return. The drug cartels are richer, better armed, and more powerful than the legitimate authorities.

What some think might happen is that as the cartels become the de facto authority in Mexico the will have to set up security to protect their own interests, and that is how a semblance of stability may finally return.

morningstar2651 · Nov 29, 2012

The first movie was bad...the rest were worse.

Fast And The Furious Trailer. - YouTube

Rion · Jan 21, 2013

Holder Asks Court To Block Release of Fast and Furious Documents - Reason 24/7 : Reason.com

MachZer0 · Jan 21, 2013

Rion said:
Holder Asks Court To Block Release of Fast and Furious Documents - Reason 24/7 : Reason.com

I imagine all criminals would like to be able to make such a request

Assuredcw · Jan 21, 2013

MachZer0 said:
I imagine all criminals would like to be able to make such a request

Um, he is the only Attorney General we have at the moment, because he has not been found guilty of anything, let alone replaced. Calling him a criminal is a bit premature, and will allow the actual criminals involved in this situation, to get away with what they have done.

Furthermore, even if he IS found guilty of something (and that is a BIG "if," because no evidence has ever been produced so Holder is INNOCENT unless PROVEN guilty), Justice Dept files have to remain classified.

Rion · Jan 21, 2013

Assuredcw said:
Um, he is the only Attorney General we have at the moment, because he has not been found guilty of anything, let alone replaced. Calling him a criminal is a bit premature, and will allow the actual criminals involved in this situation, to get away with what they have done.

Furthermore, even if he IS found guilty of something (and that is a BIG "if," because no evidence has ever been produced so Holder is INNOCENT unless PROVEN guilty), Justice Dept files have to remain classified.

So by your point of view, we could never call Nixon a criminal? Weird.

Assuredcw · Jan 21, 2013

Rion said:
So by your point of view, we could never call Nixon a criminal? Weird.

I have bolded the word "your," because what is interesting is, I had nothing to do with the fact that Nixon was actually impeached. Attorney General Holder still IS the Attorney General, and has not been impeached. Why has he not been impeached? No evidence.

So you see, this has nothing to do with me, or my supposed point of view. It's just what is.

Rion · Jan 21, 2013

Assuredcw said:
I have bolded the word "your," because what is interesting is, I had nothing to do with the fact that Nixon was actually impeached. Attorney General Holder still IS the Attorney General, and has not been impeached. Why has he not been impeached? No evidence.

So you see, this has nothing to do with me, or my supposed point of view. It's just what is.

I never said you did have anything to do with it. The fact is, however, that
A) Nixon was never impeached. He resigned prior to that.
B) Clinton was impeached, but he kept serving. Impeachment =/= being forced to resign.
C) The primary reason Holder hasn't been impeached is because Obama is covering for him. It would be like declaring Nixon innocent because Nixon refused to turn over his tape recordings.

Illuminaughty · Jan 21, 2013

The Mexican government could deal a major blow to organized crime by legalizing drugs. They probably would have already went this route were it not for the US putting pressure on them to keep up the war on drugs. If we legalized drugs it would be a double blow. The problem would then be solvable.

Rion · Jan 21, 2013

Assuredcw · Jan 21, 2013

Illuminaughty said:
The Mexican government could deal a major blow to organized crime by legalizing drugs. They probably would have already went this route were it not for the US putting pressure on them to keep up the war on drugs. If we legalized drugs it would be a double blow. The problem would then be solvable.

If you make drugs legal, then what on earth would you prosecute the cartels FOR? Their activities would be legal at that point.

MachZer0 · Jan 21, 2013

Assuredcw said:
Um, he is the only Attorney General we have at the moment, because he has not been found guilty of anything, let alone replaced. Calling him a criminal is a bit premature, and will allow the actual criminals involved in this situation, to get away with what they have done.

Furthermore, even if he IS found guilty of something (and that is a BIG "if," because no evidence has ever been produced so Holder is INNOCENT unless PROVEN guilty), Justice Dept files have to remain classified.

Justice dept files do not have to remain classified, but classifying them is one way to withhold evidence, which itself is a means of obstructing justice

Illuminaughty · Jan 21, 2013

Assuredcw,

It would cause the price to fall drastically so the profit margin would decrease. It would also allow law abiding entrepreneurs to provide competition. It would destroy their monopoly. Why would people want to get their drugs from violent thugs when they could simply purchase them from a respectable non violent businessman or corporation? Making drugs illegal is the sure fire way to insure that the industry is monopolized by thugs.

Illuminaughty · Jan 21, 2013

Back before drug prohibition in the US people literally just bought their cocaine and heroin from the sears catalog rather then violent criminal syndicates.

Look at where people buy booze now compared to where they purchased during alcohol prohibition. During prohibition they had to get their whisky from the violent mafia types now most people buy it from the friendly people at Rite Aid or Walmart.

Assuredcw · Jan 21, 2013

Illuminaughty said:
Assuredcw,

It would cause the price to fall drastically so the profit margin would decrease. It would also allow law abiding entrepreneurs to provide competition. It would destroy their monopoly. Why would people want to get their drugs from violent thugs when they could simply purchase them from a respectable non violent businessman or corporation? Making drugs illegal is the sure fire way to insure that the industry is monopolized by thugs.

I don't know why the Feds won't legalize drugs. But I have a feeling it would pull the rug out from under Federal prosecutors, who would have MUCH less room to maneuver if they were only able to prosecute whatever WASN'T drug-related! This would be a mess.

But let's get back to Eric Holder, who I believe has decided to retire in a year or two...

Illuminaughty · Jan 21, 2013

Yeah, Holder strikes me as being kind of a weasel.

Assuredcw · Jan 21, 2013

Illuminaughty said:
Yeah, Holder strikes me as being kind of a weasel.

He has a VERY important job, and he's all we've got for now.

We need the Attorney General, and whoever he is, his files need to remain confidential to protect prosecutions and Federal witnesses.

It wouldn't surprise me if he is just tired of being blamed for the insubordination of his staff.

TerranceL · Jan 21, 2013

Assuredcw said:
He has a VERY important job, and he's all we've got for now.

Not at all, he can be very easily replaced.

We need the Attorney General, and whoever he is, his files need to remain confidential to protect prosecutions and Federal witnesses.

That is until congress decided they need to see something.

It wouldn't surprise me if he is just tired of being blamed for the insubordination of his staff.

They are his stuff, if they are being insubordinate and still in his staff then of course he's going to get the blame.

Assuredcw · Jan 21, 2013

TerranceL said:
....
They are his [staff], if they are being insubordinate and still in his staff then of course he's going to get the blame.

Not true. If you are insubordinate at your job, your boss can fire you. Your boss isn't supposed to get blamed for what you've done. Your boss is supposed to fire you and be given an opportunity to clean it up.

The US Attorney of Arizona has some explaining to do, by all accounts.

Fast And Furious: Michael Horowitz, Justice Dept. Inspector General, Testifying Before House Committee

Quoting from the link:

"There needs to be supervision; there needs to be oversight," and law enforcement operations like Operation Fast and Furious need to be referred from the start to "the highest levels" of the department, [Justice Dept Inspector General] Horowitz testified. His report faulted midlevel and senior officials for not briefing Attorney General Eric Holder much earlier.

Chief among those levels of supervision was US Attorney of Arizona Dennis Burke. When you do what you want to do without telling your boss, that is insubordination.

RETS · Jan 21, 2013

Assuredcw said:
Not true. If you are insubordinate at your job, your boss can fire you. Your boss isn't supposed to get blamed for what you've done. Your boss is supposed to fire you and be given an opportunity to clean it up.

The US Attorney of Arizona has some explaining to do, by all accounts.

Fast And Furious: Michael Horowitz, Justice Dept. Inspector General, Testifying Before House Committee

Quoting from the link:

"There needs to be supervision; there needs to be oversight," and law enforcement operations like Operation Fast and Furious need to be referred from the start to "the highest levels" of the department, [Justice Dept Inspector General] Horowitz testified. His report faulted midlevel and senior officials for not briefing Attorney General Eric Holder much earlier.

Chief among those levels of supervision was US Attorney of Arizona Dennis Burke. When you do what you want to do without telling your boss, that is insubordination.

Wait... So the AG of Arizona is reproachable, but not AG Holder?

Fast & Furious

Should Attorney General Holder be held in contempt?

Yes, he should be held in contempt (explain)

No, he should not be held in contempt (explain)

I am not sure.

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Annuit Cœptis

Caught Between Barack and a Hard Place

Citizen for Civil Public Discourse

Annuit Cœptis

Citizen for Civil Public Discourse

Annuit Cœptis

Drift and Doubt

Annuit Cœptis

Citizen for Civil Public Discourse

Caught Between Barack and a Hard Place

Drift and Doubt

Drift and Doubt

Citizen for Civil Public Discourse

Drift and Doubt

Citizen for Civil Public Discourse

Sarcasm is kind of an art isn't it?

Citizen for Civil Public Discourse

Telling it like it is

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency