erynthered Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) Yeah...not happening. It's a political issue now, "truth" has ****-all to do with it. You may be right, but I think eventually it will be told. Edited June 21, 2012 by erynthered
TheMadCap Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 I think it would help us in the future to know how this whole operation came about, who knew about it, who authorized it and who tried to cover it up. As I'm writing this Press Secretary Carney is blaming the House Republicans for making this political and not focusing on the economy. That is most deserving of a "pBills" HAHAHAHAAHAHAH!!!! The President made it political when he used executive privilege. And Dems are more than guilty of trying to distract the Sheeple from the economy with thier various tacts like the WOW, etc.
dayman Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) I think it would help us in the future to know how this whole operation came about, who knew about it, who authorized it and who tried to cover it up. As I'm writing this Press Secretary Carney is blaming the House Republicans for making this political and not focusing on the economy. It would help we should probably investigate it...oh wait we are...so why are the Republican house members doing what they're doing? B/c there's some huge conspiracy where the DOJ or ATF wanted this happen? Of course not, not even you would think that. They're doing this to find anything they can that can be used as publicly as possible for political purposes. The answers aren't going to be found in a Congressional hearing. And Brian Terry's death is actually irrelevant to Fast and Furious. (Yes, I know..."Tell that to Terry's family." Whoever's going to post that, let me preemptively call you a !@#$ing moron. An ill-advised government program didn't kill him.) Edited June 21, 2012 by TheNewBills
DC Tom Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 You may be right, but I think eventually it will be told. Like Watergate? Or Iran-Contra? And actually, there's a decent chance that no one really knows what happened. And, as I've said, are trying to cover their ignorance.
erynthered Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 Like Watergate? Or Iran-Contra? And actually, there's a decent chance that no one really knows what happened. And, as I've said, are trying to cover their ignorance. They might need a guy like Mark Felt to help a bit.
dayman Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 They might need a guy like Mark Felt to help a bit. They might need a guy like Issa and his ilk to help they'll get to the bottom of this for the sake of the truth, they're not motivated by the political theater of it all in the least. It's not as if I turn on the tv and see Issa and other Republican house members grandstanding every 5 minutes...
erynthered Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 They might need a guy like Issa and his ilk to help they'll get to the bottom of this for the sake of the truth, they're not motivated by the political theater of it all in the least. It's not as if I turn on the tv and see Issa and other Republican house members grandstanding every 5 minutes... I guess you're not old enough to remember Watergate. A little side note. When the break in occured, I was staying in the hotel accross the street. Wild.
3rdnlng Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 It would help we should probably investigate it...oh wait we are...so why are the Republican house members doing what they're doing? B/c there's some huge conspiracy where the DOJ or ATF wanted this happen? Of course not, not even you would think that. They're doing this to find anything they can that can be used as publicly as possible for political purposes. The House Oversight Committee is investigating it and the DOJ appears to be covering up. When this first came up, Elijah Cummings, senior dem on the committee swore to get to the bottom of this. Lies were made to Congress and also two letters to congress from the DOJ had to be recalled due to their inaccuracies. Carney just said in his presser that this was started during the Bush administration which is an f'n lie. The ATF had a much smaller program during the Bush admin. called "Wide Receiver" that put tracking devices in the weapons and actually attempted to track them, with full knowledge of the Mexican government. It failed for numerous reasons and was stopped. This program let thousands of guns & rpg's go and didn't have any program in place to track them. So, the DOJ investigation went nowhere other than reassigning two people and the House Oversight Committee had to step in because they wanted answers on how this could happen and why DOJ was lying and covering up. Sure, it's all political.
dayman Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 3rd you are the definition of an idiot. I'll say it before Tom does. Keep on fighting the good fight.
DC Tom Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 The House Oversight Committee is investigating it and the DOJ appears to be covering up. When this first came up, Elijah Cummings, senior dem on the committee swore to get to the bottom of this. Lies were made to Congress and also two letters to congress from the DOJ had to be recalled due to their inaccuracies. Carney just said in his presser that this was started during the Bush administration which is an f'n lie. The ATF had a much smaller program during the Bush admin. called "Wide Receiver" that put tracking devices in the weapons and actually attempted to track them, with full knowledge of the Mexican government. It failed for numerous reasons and was stopped. This program let thousands of guns & rpg's go and didn't have any program in place to track them. Actually, "Fast and Furious" is "Wide Receiver" resurrected, in that while they differ (slightly) at the policy level, the person responsible for the tactical implementation of that policy was the same rocket surgeon that created "Wide Receiver" in the first place - the bonehead just dusted off his old dearly beloved and cancelled pet program and ran with it again.
3rdnlng Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 3rd you are the definition of an idiot. I'll say it before Tom does. Keep on fighting the good fight. I explain the situation to you and you have nothing so all you can do is call me an idiot? I don't know why I even respond to your sorry ass. I suggest you learn about the subjects you shoot your mouth off on.
DC Tom Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 I explain the situation to you and you have nothing so all you can do is call me an idiot? I don't know why I even respond to your sorry ass. I suggest you learn about the subjects you shoot your mouth off on. But you are an idiot. And if you explained the situation accurately (not likely), why do we need an investigation?
B-Man Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) Chuck Grassley Schools CNN's Soledad OBrien over Fast and Furious By Jeffrey Meyer It appears as though CNN anchor Soledad OBrien has joined the ranks in +the liberal media who argue that the GOP is engaging in a political witch hunt over the lethal Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal. During an interview with Sen. Chuck Grassley this morning, Soledad pressed the Iowa Republican about GOP congressmen's motives behind the contempt of Congress vote against Attorney General Eric Holder. O'Brien hyped Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings's charge that the the House GOP's vote for the contempt charge was purely partisan politics. O'Brien agreed, noting the partisan breakdown of the contempt vote. To O'Brien, that necessarily means, of course, that only Republicans are acting in a "partisan" manner while Democrats -- who toed their party line defense of a Democratic president's attorney general -- presumably are acting purely out love of country. I'm motivated to get the facts out, to make sure the law is faithfully executed, to make sure [the] Terry family gets the information, and make sure a stupid program like this never happens again," Grassley snapped. GRASSLEY: Well, I think there's several respects where it rises to this level. Number one, Congress passes laws. That doesn't -- that isn't the end of Congress' involvement. We are supposed to be a check on the executive branch to see that the laws are faithfully executed. When you're encouraging -- the government is encouraging guns to be sold illegally to people that shouldn't have them, you know the laws aren't being faithfully executed. So in order to be a check on the executive branch under our Constitution, we need this information. O'BRIEN: Seems to I think give fodder to those like Elijah Cummings who I was talking to this morning who said this is purely partisan. Look at the vote. It was purely along partisan lines. Congress these days is viciously partisan. Here's what he told me a little earlier this morning, sir. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. ELIJAH CUMMINGS (D), MARYLAND: This is not about the facts. This is about politics. And anybody who looks at this knows that. The chairman had made up his mind, and this is a result that I guess he wanted. And now we see where we are. (END VIDEO CLIP) O'BRIEN: There are lots of people besides the congressman saying that. What would you say to him? GRASSLEY: Well, I would say to him -- he can say anything about members of the House of Representatives he wants to. But he knows me well enough in the three decades that Ive been in the Senate, I have established a reputation for vigorous oversight. And I have probably taken on more Republican presidents of my own party than I have Democrat presidents. So nobody can question whether or not I'm politically motivated by this. I'm motivated to get the facts out, to make sure the law is faithfully executed, to make sure Terry family gets the information, and make sure a stupid program like this never happens again. NewsBusters Edited June 21, 2012 by B-Man
3rdnlng Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 Actually, "Fast and Furious" is "Wide Receiver" resurrected, in that while they differ (slightly) at the policy level, the person responsible for the tactical implementation of that policy was the same rocket surgeon that created "Wide Receiver" in the first place - the bonehead just dusted off his old dearly beloved and cancelled pet program and ran with it again. "Wide Receiver" was 1/4 the size of F&F and actually attempted to track the weapons and was stopped when it failed. F&F started under Obama and no attempts were made to track the weapons. Stating that F&F started under Bush is a lie.
DC Tom Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 GRASSLEY: Well, I think there's several respects where it rises to this level. Number one, Congress passes laws. That doesn't -- that isn't the end of Congress' involvement. We are supposed to be a check on the executive branch to see that the laws are faithfully executed. When you're encouraging -- the government is encouraging guns to be sold illegally to people that shouldn't have them, you know the laws aren't being faithfully executed. So in order to be a check on the executive branch under our Constitution, we need this information. You know what the brilliant thing is in all this? We've got the gun control party not enforcing gun control laws and arguing it was okay, and we've got the anti-gun control lobby arguing for gun control. I'm motivated to [...] make sure a stupid program like this never happens again. Yeah...then where were you in 2007? "Wide Receiver" was 1/4 the size of F&F and actually attempted to track the weapons and was stopped when it failed. F&F started under Obama and no attempts were made to track the weapons. Stating that F&F started under Bush is a lie. I didn't say that. I said it was the same program, dusted off and used again by the guy responsible for the implementation of F&F, who happened to be the same guy responsible for implementing Wide Receiver. Different program, same tactical implementation, because - as I said last night - some jerkoff civil servant wanted his program to succeed. You're going to misunderstand that too, aren't you?
3rdnlng Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 You know what the brilliant thing is in all this? We've got the gun control party not enforcing gun control laws and arguing it was okay, and we've got the anti-gun control lobby arguing for gun control. Yeah...then where were you in 2007? I didn't say that. I said it was the same program, dusted off and used again by the guy responsible for the implementation of F&F, who happened to be the same guy responsible for implementing Wide Receiver. Different program, same tactical implementation, because - as I said last night - some jerkoff civil servant wanted his program to succeed. You're going to misunderstand that too, aren't you? No, you are misunderstanding what I said. I had previously claimed that Carney was lying about the program starting under Bush. I wasn't saying that you were lying.
dayman Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) 3rd your perception is riddled with misinformation peddled by political grand-standers in congress. Go ahead and clearly explain 1) what you actually believe could be uncovered from this investigation and 2)why this deserves so much attention beside political theater/attacks. There is no interest in actually resolving any issues here...hate to break it to you. Issa is a retard. Edited June 21, 2012 by TheNewBills
DC Tom Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 No, you are misunderstanding what I said. I had previously claimed that Carney was lying about the program starting under Bush. I wasn't saying that you were lying. Just as a further point of fact: DOJ's and ATF's own briefings qualify "F&F" as "part of" their ongoing gunwalking program started in 2006. They themselves, while not claiming they're the same operation, make it perfectly clear that they're like aspects of the same program, and were both initiated and run by the same knucklehead. Which, again, is probably where any real cover-up would be happening: no one wants to admit that SAC Knucklehead didn't have enough oversight.
dayman Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 Just as a further point of fact: DOJ's and ATF's own briefings qualify "F&F" as "part of" their ongoing gunwalking program started in 2006. They themselves, while not claiming they're the same operation, make it perfectly clear that they're like aspects of the same program, and were both initiated and run by the same knucklehead. Which, again, is probably where any real cover-up would be happening: no one wants to admit that SAC Knucklehead didn't have enough oversight. The point is what is the point? What is the point of all this and how does it help? The answer? No point, doesn't help, pure political grandstanding in an attempt to humiliate Holder. Yes there was a **** up, no ****. A department not wanted to make every detail of their **** up public? Wow huge surprise. Republicans want a confrontation here...plain and simple.
Recommended Posts