Fast and Furious scandal


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Fast and Furious scandal

Author Message
Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21790
Credit: 2,510,901
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1252935 - Posted: 28 Jun 2012, 22:43:43 UTC

US House holds Atty General Eric Holder in contempt
____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,115,010
RAC: 4,469
United States
Message 1252974 - Posted: 28 Jun 2012, 23:32:35 UTC - in response to Message 1252935.

Mark, actually the TeaPublicans have held Holder in contempt since he took office.

Issa wants to run a witch hunt and Holder didn't help him out.

That being said, just like friendly fire incidents -- some needs to be held accountable. We do hold the military accountable for friendly fire, right? For that matter, who is getting indicted for stingers being used against the 'good guys' in Afghanistan?


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 40,146,576
RAC: 91,029
Message 1252995 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 0:34:22 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 14:30:27 UTC

--

Message 1253010 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 1:29:26 UTC

Bob Beckel on "the five" says it's no big deal and it doesn't matter.


I caught that tonight. He is wrong.

There will be Some Smite From The Right and Hell Will Break Loose.

SoSaysTheFourthAngel
____________


Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2910
Credit: 6,579,704
RAC: 2,066
United States
Message 1253082 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 6:52:27 UTC
Last modified: 29 Jun 2012, 6:53:40 UTC

Holder is being disingenuous at best. He was willing to show Issa's committee the documents he said would fulfill the subpoena, as long as the contempt proceedings were stopped (sounds like a bribe), but when Issa didn't take the bait--and I wouldn't have agreed to that deal either, sight unseen--Holder whipped out a letter declaring that the very documents he just been willing to give were now protected by "executive privilege". If nothing is being covered up, then why take such extreme measures to protect documents that you were willing to reveal in one breath, but have to be "protected" in the next breath?

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,115,010
RAC: 4,469
United States
Message 1253119 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 8:26:58 UTC - in response to Message 1253082.

Holder and Issa are both being disingenuous at best. Crap happens on both sides of this political equation. Makes it balance.

Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2910
Credit: 6,579,704
RAC: 2,066
United States
Message 1253123 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 8:41:46 UTC - in response to Message 1253119.

Holder and Issa are both being disingenuous at best. Crap happens on both sides of this political equation. Makes it balance.

I'm sure you can find examples of your claim about Holder being disingenuous, but that is not the point. In this instance, Holder was asked to explain an action by his department (sending a letter that was admitted to be false during a legitimate Congressional investigation) and he refused, relying on executive privilege . . . for documents he once was ready to reveal.

One person's bad actions (Issa) do not excuse the actions of another (Holder).

But besides that, this claim of privilege just smells like stonewalling. If you have nothing to hide then let the facts come out. It's a little late, after offering to reveal those documents, to then claim that they can't be revealed because they are "privileged".

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,115,010
RAC: 4,469
United States
Message 1253225 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 16:08:35 UTC - in response to Message 1253123.

I agree that that Holder's response looks like stonewalling. My understanding though is that in back room discussions Holder offered significantly more (but not all) the documents surrounding this mess. Issa demanded ALL of them, hence the citation.

The phrase speaking truth (Issa) to Power (Holder) doesn't apply any more than the phrase 'Stand up to Bullies' applies in the reverse.

Fast and Furious was a disgrace. But Issa is trying to move toward impeachment and that oversteps badly here.

Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21790
Credit: 2,510,901
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1253231 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 16:19:54 UTC

(Reuters) - Perhaps as significant as the contempt citation Congress issued to Attorney General Eric Holder is the likelihood Republicans will also go to court to enforce a congressional demand for documents - a tactic pursued only twice before in U.S. history.

The Republican-led House of Representatives voted on Thursday to find Holder, the country's top law enforcement officer, in contempt of Congress for withholding documents in a botched gun-running sting operation on the U.S.-Mexico border.

In a second vote, the House gave itself the authority to go to court to get the documents.

That will put a spotlight not only on Holder but also on his boss, President Barack Obama, who has insisted he can withhold the documents under executive privilege.

LINK
____________

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,274
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1253243 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 16:51:50 UTC - in response to Message 1253231.

Oh no not contempt of Congress!!! Wait they have no means of enforcing the order. Can I have one, too?
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21790
Credit: 2,510,901
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1253303 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 18:23:18 UTC

Darrell Issa Puts Details of Secret Wiretap Applications in Congressional Record
____________

Message 1253316 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 18:53:18 UTC

Yeah.

I bet he resigns before Aug. 1.

Sweet.

FastAndFuriousResignationFourthAngel
____________


BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,115,010
RAC: 4,469
United States
Message 1253348 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 19:55:05 UTC

Indeed, it would be grand if Issa resigns in the coming month.

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/more-senate-corruption-rep-darrel-issa-questionable-ethics-goldman-sachs-paying-for-protection/6041

http://www.nhdp.org/guinta-and-issa-corruption-brothers-meet-in-new-hampshire

http://issawatch.couragecampaign.org

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-21/issa-sought-u-s-clean-energy-aid.html


Profile Misfit
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 21 Jun 01
Posts: 21790
Credit: 2,510,901
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1253387 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 21:04:34 UTC

Darrell Edward Issa is the U.S. Representative for California's 49th congressional district, serving since 2001. He is a member of the Republican Party. He was formerly a CEO of Directed Electronics, the Vista, California-based manufacturer of automobile security and convenience products. His district consists of portions of southern Riverside County and northern San Diego County. Since January 2011, he has served as Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Issa is a self-made millionaire with a net worth estimated at as much as $450 million, making him the wealthiest currently-serving member of Congress.

He is very popular here and should always have the majority vote of his constituents. So resigning is not an option for him.
____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 12,115,010
RAC: 4,469
United States
Message 1253461 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012, 22:31:55 UTC - in response to Message 1253387.

Resigning is always an option.

But in as much as he represents one of the reddest of the California red districts he'd only be replaced by another TeaPublican so I take your point in that he represents the mentality of his specific district.

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12475
Credit: 6,791,759
RAC: 6,615
United States
Message 1253536 - Posted: 30 Jun 2012, 1:33:45 UTC

Can you say Richard Nixon? Can you say Watergate?

Justice Department shields Holder from prosecution after contempt vote
The Justice Department moved Friday to shield Attorney General Eric Holder from prosecution after the House voted to hold him in contempt of Congress.

The contempt vote technically opened the door for the House to call on the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia to bring the case before a grand jury. But because U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen works for Holder and because President Obama has already asserted executive privilege over the documents in question, some expected Holder's Justice Department to balk.

Deputy Attorney General James Cole confirmed in a letter to House Speaker John Boehner that the department in fact would not pursue prosecution. The attorney general's withholding of documents pertaining to Operation Fast and Furious, he wrote, "does not constitute a crime."

"Therefore the department will not bring the congressional contempt citation before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute the attorney general," Cole wrote, in the letter obtained by Fox News.

My oh my. I bet there are a bunch of lawyers reading up the the cases from then right now. I bet real soon we have a big constitutional crises and SCOTUS will be called upon to settle it. And everything that was done to Nixon is going to be done to Holder and Obama. Payback is a bitch isn't it?

Stupid idiot justice dept., just put on a super sloppy job in front of the Grand Jury and let them refuse to indict and it is over with.

____________

Message boards : Politics : Fast and Furious scandal

Copyright © 2014 University of California