Fast & Furious

[Rion]

There must be some misunderstanding, here. The only reason why I am defending AG Eric Holder is that I looked into his background (as I did President Obama's) when he was first appointed. Very impressive, and originally appointed as a Federal judge by President Reagan. So yes, I am not only reluctant but skeptical, because he didn't pay his dues to get this far to ruin everything by getting corrupt now. I simply do not buy it, and we NEED him to clean up this mess.

Here's a quick Wikipedia for you to skim if you'd like, or you can do a Google search:

Eric Holder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since he took office as AG, he's been pretty clear that he will apply the law selectively.

 

[RETS]

There must be some misunderstanding, here. The only reason why I am defending AG Eric Holder is that I looked into his background (as I did President Obama's) when he was first appointed. Very impressive, and originally appointed as a Federal judge by President Reagan. So yes, I am not only reluctant but skeptical, because he didn't pay his dues to get this far to ruin everything by getting corrupt now. I simply do not buy it, and we NEED him to clean up this mess.

Here's a quick Wikipedia for you to skim if you'd like, or you can do a Google search:

Eric Holder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ma'am, with all due respect, I don't need Wikipedia. I've been following him for quite some time, and I am not impressed. At all. Federal judge- Really? That's what makes his background so impressive? Kagan was appointed SCotUS Justice, and she's never practiced law!

Moreover, do you really think- Are you truly so naive- As to believe that just because someone reaches a certain point, and has "paid dues," they are beyond the temptation or possibility of wrong doing?!

Since he took office as AG, he's been pretty clear that he will apply the law selectively.

Saving me the trouble of bringing that up, I see. Thank you.

 

[Leere]

Since he took office as AG, he's been pretty clear that he will apply the law selectively.

Did you read that article? No where does it indicate that Holder only applies the law "selectively." He took offence when some guy insinuated the Black Panther incident had been the worst voter intimidation act in his life. Holder, rightly, took offence at that guy having ignored the entire Civil Rights Movement. One Texas Republican is complaining that the Justice Department is biased in race cases (and no surprise: Holder was appointed by a Democrat. Were Holder a Republican, this story never would have happened).

Sorry, no evidence of "selectively" applying the law.

 

[Assuredcw]

Did you read that article? No where does it indicate that Holder only applies the law "selectively." He took offence when some guy insinuated the Black Panther incident had been the worst voter intimidation act in his life. Holder, rightly, took offence at that guy having ignored the entire Civil Rights Movement. One Texas Republican is complaining that the Justice Department is biased in race cases (and no surprise: Holder was appointed by a Democrat. Were Holder a Republican, this story never would have happened).

Sorry, no evidence of "selectively" applying the law.

And isn't it impressive that Holder was first appointed as a Federal judge by Ronald Reagan, a Republican? That should have bought Holder a little respect among people who keep up with these things. But what do I know?

 

[Rion]

Did you read that article? No where does it indicate that Holder only applies the law "selectively." He took offence when some guy insinuated the Black Panther incident had been the worst voter intimidation act in his life. Holder, rightly, took offence at that guy having ignored the entire Civil Rights Movement. One Texas Republican is complaining that the Justice Department is biased in race cases (and no surprise: Holder was appointed by a Democrat. Were Holder a Republican, this story never would have happened).

Sorry, no evidence of "selectively" applying the law.

Yes, I did. As for no evidence? Yep, none. Except the NBP thing, oh and not wanting to prosecute blacks.

See, the difference here is that if Holder was a Republican, we'd both be yelling, instead of just me.

 

[RETS]

And isn't it impressive that Holder was first appointed as a Federal judge by Ronald Reagan, a Republican? That should have bought Holder a little respect among people who keep up with these things. But what do I know?

Please, for the love of Pete- Buy him a card, flowers, chocolates and propose already.

 

[Leere]

Yes, I did. As for no evidence? Yep, none. Except the NBP thing, oh and not wanting to prosecute blacks.

See, the difference here is that if Holder was a Republican, we'd both be yelling, instead of just me.

Had you read it, you would have noted the lack of evidence for your accusation.

As for the other article...still no evidence. Just hearsay. Sorry, one man's word does not prove that Holder "selectively" applies the law (did you note that Holder actually had nothing to do with the Philly case anyway?)

 

[Rion]

And isn't it impressive that Holder was first appointed as a Federal judge by Ronald Reagan, a Republican? That should have bought Holder a little respect among people who keep up with these things. But what do I know?

Why would I care who appointed him? That meant that Holder had done well enough to impress Reagan (or whomever Reagan had to review the candidates for him) at that point in time. Does that mean Holder had never done anything wrong? Does that mean that Holder is somehow absolved of any wrong doing he's done since that time? Does this have anything to do with what he's currently doing?

 

[Rion]

Had you read it, you would have noted the lack of evidence for your accusation.

As for the other article...still no evidence. Just hearsay. Sorry, one man's word does not prove that Holder "selectively" applies the law (did you note that Holder actually had nothing to do with the Philly case anyway?)

It was a part of a transcript of him before congress. Hence why I posted it. As for evidence, sure, whatever. You wouldn't be convinced if an angel came down from Heaven and gave you a set of video tapes showing Holder from multiple angles.

 

[Leere]

It was a part of a transcript of him before congress. Hence why I posted it. As for evidence, sure, whatever. You wouldn't be convinced if an angel came down from Heaven and gave you a set of video tapes showing Holder from multiple angles.

You're right. Woe is me, unconvinced by ONE man's testimony.

DOJ Ethics Office: No Evidence That Politics, Race Influenced New Black Panther Party Case | TPMMuckraker

Sorry, but you'd be hard pressed to get any angel to effectively lie

 

[Rion]

DoJ cleared itself? I'm shocked. Really. This is my shocked face.

 

[Assuredcw]

Why would I care who appointed him? That meant that Holder had done well enough to impress Reagan (or whomever Reagan had to review the candidates for him) at that point in time. Does that mean Holder had never done anything wrong? Does that mean that Holder is somehow absolved of any wrong doing he's done since that time? Does this have anything to do with what he's currently doing?

No, but you don't start with trying to get his head to roll, when Fast & Furious wasn't his idea and he has this kind of background. You fail to see the significance of his being originally appointed by a Republican, even though he is a Democrat. It means he knows Constitutional law extremely well (we would say "he knows his stuff"), and because his rulings since have made no waves, he has applied the law even-handedly in his tenure as judge. No news is good news, believe me.

No, he theoretically would not be immune to temptation, but it has been proven demonstratively that you will miss multiple perpetrators of this outrage, if you obstruct the man who is least likely IMO to have been involved with it or to have authorized it.

I posted a link earlier (I'll try to grab it and repost it here) about a smuggling ring in New Mexico that involved corrupt law enforcement and government officials. It's ugly, and the last thing we need is a DOJ with no AG (or a new "interim" AG) because while you are reinventing the wheel the potential corruption will have an opportunity to more deeply entrench itself. I was scared when I read the details of the Fast & Furious operation, and am not surprised that corrupt government officals and law enforcement appear to be at the root of it. And we already have testimony that supervision at the ATF wasn't kept informed. If you don't tell the boss what you're doing, people start telling themselves they can do anything they want, and before you know it you have an implosion.

Furthermore, I read the basis of Congressman Issa's subpoena, which is the OP of this thread. When I was finished reading it, I was laughing. Because it's a joke, and unfortunately, not a particularly funny one. But I just couldn't help myself - LOL!

 

[Assuredcw]

"multiple perpetrators of this outrage" - here you go:

New Mexico Town Caught In Gun Smuggling Scandal Tries To Recover (VIDEO)

New Mexico town dissolves police dept after gun smuggling scandal | The Lookout - Yahoo! News

And this is only New Mexico. I wonder who might be doing it in the other border states? The only state I would think might be in the clear would be Arizona, for many of the same reasons we were discussing about AG Holder. You don't waste time with the people least likely to do things, if you want to give yourself any opportunity at all to catch the people who ARE DOING THEM.

 

[Assuredcw]

Quoting from the first link:

...Suspended police chief Vegas last week changed his plea on conspiracy smuggling and public corruption charges to guilty, the last of three town officials to plead guilty in the case that has now seen all but two of 14 defendants admit being involved in the plot.
The indictment didn't say who specifically on the other side of the border received the guns, only that they were crossing into Mexico with a ready market among drug cartels. Vega faces up to 35 years in prison, Espinosa faces 68 years and Gutierrez could be sentenced to almost 300 years.

Hm - I thought it was the mayor who pleaded guilty? Let me go back and correct my previous post.

 

[Assuredcw]

Please, for the love of Pete- Buy him a card, flowers, chocolates and propose already.

I wouldn't be willing to do one thing to distract AG Holder from doing his job. I would have liked to have been able to say the same about Congress. It's enough to make me want to bang my head against the wall. What is this world coming to?

 

[RETS]

I wouldn't be willing to do one thing to distract AG Holder from doing his job. I would have liked to have been able to say the same about Congress. It's enough to make me want to bang my head against the wall. What is this world coming to?

*facepalm*


Unbelievable.


. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /_.(. . .“~-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(. . ”~,. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{..$;. . .”=,. . . .“-,. . . ,.~,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,\. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \. . . . . .,-%. . . ..`

 

[Leere]

DoJ cleared itself? I'm shocked.

Yes, I'm sure it's a massive conspiracy in which the ENTIRE Justice Department, minus Adams. And they all are racist against whites and love black people too much.

Wait, I'm sorry, you really think one man's testimony (which was proven false) makes something a fact? Dear me.

 

[Assuredcw]

Maybe we need a Black Panthers thread. Did you want to start one, Rion?

(But thank you, Leere, for responding.)

 

[Rion]

Yes, I'm sure it's a massive conspiracy in which the ENTIRE Justice Department, minus Adams. And they all are racist against whites and love black people too much.

Wait, I'm sorry, you really think one man's testimony (which was proven false) makes something a fact? Dear me.

You're so funny when you try to be snarky.

It doesn't require belief in a conspiracy to believe that a group would find itself innocent. That's why there's a popular thing called an independent investigation.

So apparently it's a bad thing to think those are good things.

 

[Rion]

Maybe we need a Black Panthers thread. Did you want to start one, Rion?

(But thank you, Leere, for responding.)

Nah, I was just referencing them.