Fast & Furious

[MachZer0]

We really do need to forget about partisanship. If AG Holder did something wrong, then President Obama has nothing to gain from protecting him. On the other hand, if AG Holder himself has done nothing wrong, then he should be free to run the Justice Dept as he sees fit.

The real question for both Mach and RETS and anyone else who wants to weigh in, is:

If the ATF employees left ATF upper management (if not direct supervision) out of the loop, why do you think AG Holder is culpable? Because if it is only because he is technically in charge, that is not a good enough reason to interfere with his investigation (subpoena it without his permission)! It is probably one of the most important investigations any Attorney General has had to do in a long, long time.

The problem is the willingness of some to allow Holder to investigate himself to determne if he did anything wrong? There's a lot of bad actors in life who would love to have the same opportunity

 

[RETS]

We really do need to forget about partisanship. If AG Holder did something wrong, then President Obama has nothing to gain from protecting him. On the other hand, if AG Holder himself has done nothing wrong, then he should be free to run the Justice Dept as he sees fit.

The real question for both Mach and RETS and anyone else who wants to weigh in, is:

If the ATF employees left ATF upper management (if not direct supervision) out of the loop, why do you think AG Holder is culpable? Because if it is only because he is technically in charge, that is not a good enough reason to interfere with his investigation (subpoena it without his permission)! It is probably one of the most important investigations any Attorney General has had to do in a long, long time.

Number one: Define "messing with him."

Number two: Congress does not need the AG's permission to issue a subpoena.

Number three: Holder is not the only person capable of carrying out these investigations.

Number four: Holder is NOT carrying out these investigations. They are being handed down through the ranks- It's called delegation.

Number five: WHY did you create this thread to begin with?







Oh- One last thing. He is to be held in contempt for LYING UNDER OATH.

You are a Christian. Do you condone lying?

 

[Abatis]

It's clear to me that he has NOTHING to cover up because he has had NO involvement.

What's clear is that DoJ directly lied to Congress and DoJ has not explained how/why such lies were presented as the official response of the DoJ to direct questions from the Congressional Oversight Committee. Whatever bed of nails Holder finds himself on right now he hammered in every one, nobody else but him is responsible for perpetuating the questions that allude to a cover-up ordered from the highest levels of DoJ.

Even if I were to agree that Holder DoJ/OIG should be permitted to investigate the actions of ATF/FBI/DEA that trafficked 2000 firearms into Mexico, guns directly responsible for 300 deaths of Mexican nationals including the brother of a state attorney general AND the murders of two US federal LEO's, just because HE "didn't know anything" about what his underlings were doing . . . I would still argue against giving him that trust, BECAUSE HE IS OBVIOUSLY SUCH AN INEPT AND IRRESPONSIBLE MANAGER!

That you seem to ALSO be arguing that Holder should enjoy an unquestionable authority to investigate the deceitful COVER-UP of Fast and Furious by DoJ, I find just absurd beyond words!

The ATF employees didn't even discuss what they were doing with ATF supervision,

Testimony has proven that to be false. Melson, the ATF Director himself had the video surveillance of hundreds of straw buys live-fed to his office in DC.

In May of 2010 when it was clear that there was zero interdiction intended after the FFL's (gun shops) were ordered to process hundreds and hundreds of sales, the #2 at ATF (Deputy Director William Hoover) held an emergency meeting to shut the program down . . . Nothing happened.

//articles.latimes[.com]/2011/aug/11/nation/la-na-atf-guns-20110811

so what makes you think they were interacting directly with the Attorney General way over in the Justice Department?!

AG Holder was briefed in July of 2010 that ATF Phoenix through the program named Fast and Furious had, to date, allowed 1,500 US gun store sourced guns to be trafficked directly into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. Of course Holder testified before the House Oversight Committee in May of 2011 that he had first heard of "Fast and Furious" "a few weeks ago" . . .

cbsnews[.com]/8301-31727_162-20115038-10391695.html

I believe that Holder is trying to keep the details of what he might be investigating under his hat.

We agree again!

I just think that the delay is just giving him time to bury everything he can. Even staunch Democrats are getting antsy with the delayed release of the Inspector General's report. 15 months to craft a report on a wild-card operation by Phoenix ATF agents with zero oversight from ATF management and certainly no knowledge in DoJ main in DC???? Hmmmmm . . .

All Holder is guilty of doing is resisting the subpoena, but read the OP - there is precedent dating back to Reagan that says the AG can withhold information if it involves an active investigation.

Correct. Holder is claiming that he does not need to produce ANYTHING that is dated after Feb 10 (IIRC) 2011 because that's the date that he called the OIG and told them to look into Fast and Furoius. We now sit 15 months later and there is no OIG report forthcoming. The OIG is part of the DoJ and Holder is Horowitz's boss.

Holder just busted a bunch of people running a gun-smuggling ring in New Mexico, and he probably isn't done,

Yeah and Obama just signed the Brian Terry Memorial Act into law . . . that's as ironically absurd as Holder going after gunrunners.

news.yahoo[.com]/obama-holder-silent-brian-terry-memorial-act-unanimously-031610144.html

dailycaller[.com]/2012/05/15/obama-signs-brian-a-terry-memorial-act-into-law/

 

[Abatis]

The real question for both Mach and RETS and anyone else who wants to weigh in, is:

If the ATF employees left ATF upper management (if not direct supervision) out of the loop, why do you think AG Holder is culpable? Because if it is only because he is technically in charge, that is not a good enough reason to interfere with his investigation (subpoena it without his permission)! It is probably one of the most important investigations any Attorney General has had to do in a long, long time.

It is quite apparent that you have not really been following this or have relied solely on Obama News Networks (i.e., NBC/MSNBC, CNN, NPR, AP, Rueters or worse, DU, DailyKos, HuffPost etc.) for your knowledge base. It has been well presented in actual testimony before Congress and in the news outlets that have covered this deeply and completely as possible with impartiality (primarily CBS and to a laudable extent the LA Times).

That this scandal isn't a larger part of the daily discourse isn't because there's "nothing there" it is because so many Americans rely on news outlets intent on cultivating people with precisely your unquestioning outlook and Holder trusting position on this scandal. That MSNBC is IGNORING the story is not evidence that there is no story.

It truly is a sad commentary and actually frightening that such unquestioning automatons can be created in modern times, with so many outlets available to us for clear information.

Understand that the following Evening News reports is what we knew in the few weeks following border Agent Terry's murder (watch the video):

cbsnews[.com]/stories/2011/02/23/eveningnews/main20035609.shtml

cbsnews[.com]/stories/2011/03/03/eveningnews/main20039031.shtml

That 15 months later we know nothing of the operational details and who authorized this and why and by who a raft of lies was given to Congress trying to cover this all up is unconscionable and hopefully prosecutable.

Read what we knew as of July of 2011 and then tell us there is "nothing there" and Congress is overstepping authority in wanting to push DoJ out of the way (2.9mb pdf):

oversight.house[.gov]/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/FINAL_FINAL.pdf

And stop talking about "Fast and Furious under Reno" unless you can offer direct and verifiable information pertaining to the operational details of that program.

 

[Assuredcw]

All I know is that the Attorney General is not "expendable" in the ways that you gentlemen presume.

You would have to impeach the President in order to replace Holder with someone "acceptable" to Issa. Good luck with that.

(I don't think Issa is doing Romney any favors, either...)

 

[Assuredcw]

The problem is the willingness of some to allow Holder to investigate himself to determne if he did anything wrong? There's a lot of bad actors in life who would love to have the same opportunity

That's exactly what I thought was going on.

Um, Issa had whistleblowers coming to him with all sorts of information! Why didn't the whistleblowers come up with anything proving Holder to be at fault? And since they didn't, Issa had no business involving Congress in DOJ affairs at all. You don't issue a subpoena just because you feel like it. You issue a subpoena because the whistleblowers already gave you something on Holder that makes it impossible to trust him anymore. We don't have it. I looked at that "contempt report" and it is beneath contempt!

I would have asked the whistleblowers if they had brought any of this to DOJ attention. The contempt report is silent on this point, so I am assuming "No." If they told me no, I would refer them to AG Holder.

You see, someone, anyone, needs to be willing to blow the whistle on AG Holder, and you don't have one person who has done that. I'm willing to bet because the man is just trying to do his job.

 

[RETS]

I find it interesting, and very telling, that you could not answer Abatis.

 

[Assuredcw]

I find it interesting, and very telling, that you could not answer Abatis.

I would prefer not to, that is correct.

You cannot put the cart before the horse. The subpoena should never have been issued. This is a mess.

 

[RETS]

I would prefer not to, that is correct.

You cannot put the cart before the horse. The subpoena should never have been issued. This is a mess.

Actually, it would appear that you would prefer to remain ignorant of what is actually taking place. You have a fixation on this ONE MAN, and its crossing the line from admiration to messiah complex.


You also did not answer my question: As a Christian, can you condone lying?

 

[Assuredcw]

Actually, it would appear that you would prefer to remain ignorant of what is actually taking place. You have a fixation on this ONE MAN, and its crossing the line from admiration to messiah complex.


You also did not answer my question: As a Christian, can you condone lying?

Don't be silly.

On the contrary, if Issa is dealing with whistleblowers, it makes him look ridiculous if he STILL cannot accuse AG Holder of doing more than failing to disclose (classified) DOJ business that precedent dating back to Reagan allows him to keep under his hat.

I'm certainly not going to support it. I think he is "off" on this one. And I wouldn't have to be more than neutral on Holder to think so, either.

As far as the lying is concerned, the "millstone" analogy comes to mind. Issa should be ashamed of himself, for at the very least providing an occasion of sin for a man who IMO is just trying to do his job. Doing his job does depend on keeping his information classified, just so we are clear on that point. Butit is by no means clear that he lied to Congress -- he is not running the operation and it is probable that he was told a discrepancy. This is in FACT what he ended up saying. It is probably true.

 

[MachZer0]

Don't be silly.

On the contrary, if Issa is dealing with whistleblowers, it makes him look ridiculous if he STILL cannot accuse AG Holder of doing more than failing to disclose (classified) DOJ business that precedent dating back to Reagan allows him to keep under his hat.

I'm certainly not going to support it. I think he is "off" on this one. And I wouldn't have to be more than neutral on Holder to think so, either.

As far as the lying is concerned, the "millstone" analogy comes to mind. Issa should be ashamed of himself, for providing an occasion of sin for a man who IMO is just trying to do his job. Doing his job does depend on keeping his information classified, just so we are clear on that point.

I'm not following the logic here. Holder is responsible for a program that sold guns to some very bad actors resulting in the death of at least one American law enforcement officer yet you claim that Issa looks ridiculous?

 

[RETS]

Don't be silly.

On the contrary, if Issa is dealing with whistleblowers, it makes him look ridiculous if he STILL cannot accuse AG Holder of doing more than failing to disclose (classified) DOJ business that precedent dating back to Reagan allows him to keep under his hat.

I'm certainly not going to support it. I think he is "off" on this one. And I wouldn't have to be more than neutral on Holder to think so, either.

As far as the lying is concerned, the "millstone" analogy comes to mind. Issa should be ashamed of himself, for providing an occasion of sin for a man who IMO is just trying to do his job. Doing his job does depend on keeping his information classified, just so we are clear on that point.

Assured, I couldn't have given two shakes about Holder prior to this event. He was doing his job, and though he wasn't doing it WELL, (in that he was occasionally saying something he shouldn't have been saying), he was doing it.

This event, however, has him crossing the line of legality- Not just sin. Once more, Congress does not need to get his permission to issue a subpoena. Holder could have very well met with them, NOT LIED, and told them the truth. For example:

"I have all of the information you are looking for, and will make what is not currently pertinent to ongoing investigations available. I have known about this since 2010, I think. The information that you want which is necessary to our investigation can be turned over to you after the investigation is concluded, or now, though heavily redacted to hide the identities of those involved."​

He did NOT do this. Instead, he chose to go in and say:

"I have given you all the information you asked for. I haven't known about it more than a few weeks."​

Regardless of whether or not there is an investigation, that phrase right there is three things at once: It is an outright lie, meaning perjury; it is obstruction of justice; and it is stage one of cover-up.
Whether you like him or not, Holder is guilty of breaking the law, and he should not only be held in contempt, but should be looking at losing his job on this. Not because he did or did not have a hand in the actual events of F&F, but because he did not cooperate in the Congressional investigation of the program. Holder is not prosecuting or investigating the program- He is investigating the people involved in day to day operations. Congress, per their JOB DESCRIPTION, is investigating the entire program and agency.

It is in HOLDER'S job description to report to and uphold the investigations of Congress.


Ergo, not only did Holder break the law; not only did he show a serious lack of character, ethics and moral judgment; he also abdicated his responsibility. If that happens in any other job in our nation, the very least you can expect is a write-up. Most people get suspended or fired.

I'm not following the logic here. Holder is responsible for a program that sold guns to some very bad actors resulting in the death of at least one American law enforcement officer yet you claim that Issa looks ridiculous?

Don't you understand?! Holder is the messiah of attorney generals! /sarcasm

 

[Assuredcw]

assuredcw:

...if Issa is dealing with whistleblowers, it makes him look ridiculous if he STILL cannot accuse AG Holder of doing more than failing to disclose (classified) DOJ business that precedent dating back to Reagan allows him to keep under his hat.

 

[Assuredcw]

Time to talk about that precedent, RETS. What justification is Issa presenting, in your opinion (I think he is saying Holder's behavior is egregious or something) for disregarding the precedent of allowing the AG to withhold information that he needs for active investigations? Why on earth won't Issa allow the AG to withhold anything? Because this is the crux of the issue. I don't believe that AG Holder has, or should have, forfeited his right to disclose or withhold as he sees fit.

The egregious behavior would need to be unrelated to Holder's failure to disclose, because once again, precedent covers him on that.

Oh, and precisely WHEN he knew about Fast and Furious would tell current employees and others more than they should know, because I am sure that Holder is investigating them. When he knew something represents the scope of HIS INVESTIGATION. I certainly wouldn't want to tell anyone that. Especially since (I think) he wasn't intended to find out about certain things, and certain people want to know not just WHEN he found out, but WHO TOLD HIM. This is potentially very ugly, and someone could be put in danger if it's what can happen sometimes.

 

[Abatis]

Issa should be ashamed of himself, for providing an occasion of sin for a man who IMO is just trying to do his job.

By this thinking Holder should be hung, drawn and quartered for providing the structure without the guidance that permitted the occasion of sin that provided 2000 guns to homicidal drug cartel members resulting in the deaths of hundreds of people.

Come on now, come clean, you are really an agent provocateur trying to embarrass, discredit and demean those rare people out there who are truly defending Holder . . .

I can appreciate the effort because it does get guys like me to post the truth in rebuttal to your claims of innocence but you really need to keep your posts in the realm of normal, logical, human thinking.

How is anyone supposed to reply to such foolishness so detached from reality?

 

[Assuredcw]

Abatis said:

By this thinking Holder should be hung, drawn and quartered for providing the structure without the guidance that permitted the occasion of sin that provided 2000 guns to homicidal drug cartel members resulting in the deaths of hundreds of people....

No, THAT would be either Janet Reno (they need to at least ASK her) or ATF employees acting on their own. Sorry...

 

[RETS]

Time to talk about that precedent, RETS. What justification is Issa presenting, in your opinion (I think he is saying Holder's behavior is egregious or something) for disregarding the precedent of allowing the AG to withhold information that he needs for active investigations? Why on earth won't Issa allow the AG to withhold anything? Because this is the crux of the issue. I don't believe that AG Holder has, or should have, forfeited his right to disclose or withhold as he sees fit.

How about this: Nearly everyone who has engaged you on this has presented some form of evidence, while you have relied almost entirely upon your single minded conviction.

So- Why don't you present proof positive of Holder's claim to precedent? I'm sure you can do it, seeing as how your conviction must be founded upon SOMETHING in the realm of reality.


I'll wait.

 

[Assuredcw]

RETS said:

...So- Why don't you present proof positive of Holder's claim to precedent? I'm sure you can do it, seeing as how your conviction must be founded upon SOMETHING in the realm of reality.


I'll wait.

LOL! Fair enough. I'll get on this now.

 

[Assuredcw]

RETS, here is a link that also references the memo issued during the Reagan Administration that talks about separation of powers.


Quoting from it:

More importantly, there is a very good reason why DOJ has not turned over every single document Issa seeks — those documents could undermine countless ongoing criminal investigations. Many of the documents Issa seeks are confidential materials concerning open investigations. Such documents are not subject to Congressional subpoena because revealing them would also reveal “strategies and procedures that could be used by individuals seeking to evade [DOJ's] law enforcement efforts.”
Moreover, as President Reagan’s Justice Department warned in the 1980s, the Constitution’s separation of powers prevents such documents from being revealed to Congress because of the risk that the legislature could “exert pressure or attempt to influence the prosecution of criminal cases.” The Constitution separates lawmaking from enforcement because the framers feared that combining the two would be “the very definition of tyranny,” yet Issa seeks to erode this understanding as well.

The items in bold are separate links in the original link, that are the source for the precedent they are referencing. (The link has a lot of little links here and there and is extremely informative - it will be the next post.)

Oh, and they blame the Fast & Furious method on Mukasey not Reno, but for sure it wasn't Eric Holder's idea so we are on the same page there.

 

[Assuredcw]

Here's the link I quoted from above:

Issa Escalates Anti-Holder Witchhunt With Draft Contempt of Congress Citation | ThinkProgress