Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast & Furious documents

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

    From what I have read, the prior operation, Wide Receiver, used guns that were electronically monitored, and there was never an intentional "walking" of guns to Mexico. In addition, the Mexican authorities were involved.

    Contrast that with Fast & Furious, where there was no electronic monitoring, no Mexican government participation, and where guns were deliberately allowed to cross the border over the objections of field agents. Add to that the administrations initial lying about the operation and subsequent stonewalling, and you have a completely different issue, IMHO.

    Matt

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

      Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
      Rifle bullets are often difficult to ballistically match, because they are much more energetic than handgun rounds. However, how likely is it that the guns found at the scene were completely uninvolved in the shooting? Really?

      For me, a big part of the reason this is such an issue is that the administration's first response to this was to lie about it. The administration initially claimed that no guns were allowed to cross into Mexico. That was an outright, bald-faced lie.

      What has followed has been a result of the administration lying, then obstructing investigation into what actually happened.

      Matt
      They were involved in the gun fight, but there is no proof one of the guns left behind shot the fatal bullet. We are talking about a gun that killed this man. Right? If the gun that killed the man was not a f and f gun, but one that walked under Bush, would that change this hunt?

      Yet from listening to the news, one gets the idea the murder weapon was a f and f gun. Yet, there is no proof of that. But we move along as if the assumption is the fact. And that is my problem with this. It could be that the two guns left behind were left when the bandits were hit with bean bags. The ones who were not hit, and fled like hell, was the gun that killed the border agent. This is a possibility.

      All that we know for sure is the gun that killed the agent was the same model as some of the guns sold, in the previous gunwalking and in f and f. But the gun may not have been from either operation. Afterall, these were real common models and sold everywhere.

      In both operations guns were allowed to walk. Not all were recovered. And by the way, we have had murders committed in my own area with rifles that could be connected with the projectile that killed. In this case, the damage was too great to trace it to a particular gun, and certainly it could not be connected to either of the two guns left behind.

      The only question I have in regards to this ATF operation is what was the purpose of selling guns to begin with? But that would have been listed or covered with the documents already submitted to congress. Congress already knows those details. My guess is there are some details here, legitimate details that involve the operation that the justice dept. doesn't want everyone to know. To show our hand, in other words. Because the idea that holder and obama would incriminate themselves as Nixon did is a non starter. If there were some conspiracy, obama and holder would not have put it on paper, as a matter of record. Both are attorneys and they know full well not to put it on paper, on tape, etc.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

        Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
        From what I have read, the prior operation, Wide Receiver, used guns that were electronically monitored, and there was never an intentional "walking" of guns to Mexico. In addition, the Mexican authorities were involved.

        Contrast that with Fast & Furious, where there was no electronic monitoring, no Mexican government participation, and where guns were deliberately allowed to cross the border over the objections of field agents. Add to that the administrations initial lying about the operation and subsequent stonewalling, and you have a completely different issue, IMHO.

        Matt
        The gps tracking devices failed on the prior operation. The mexican police are corrupt and at times aid the cartel. What we don't know about this operation may be the key here. I think it is possible that some of the lower ATF agents did not know the entire scenerio. That would not be anything new. "a need to know basis".

        There is something odd about this entire deal. And the oddness may be nothing more than the simple matter of us not having the entire story. But what does not make sense is this idea that obama and holder were using this as a way to stop the sell of arms to everyone. And if that were some grand conspiracy they cooked up, they would have never put it in writing, and would leave no record of it. Sometimes just a little bit of reason goes a long way.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

          Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
          They were involved in the gun fight, but there is no proof one of the guns left behind shot the fatal bullet. We are talking about a gun that killed this man. Right? If the gun that killed the man was not a f and f gun, but one that walked under Bush, would that change this hunt?
          I believe you are confused about the Wide Receiver program. Nothing was "walked" under that program. They did, IIRC, lose a handful of guns due to a tracking device malfunction. The F&F program, on the other hand, involved deliberately allowing guns to be taken to Mexico - over the very vocal objections of the field ATF agents who were ordered to take no action as it happened.

          Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
          Yet from listening to the news, one gets the idea the murder weapon was a f and f gun. Yet, there is no proof of that. But we move along as if the assumption is the fact. And that is my problem with this. It could be that the two guns left behind were left when the bandits were hit with bean bags. The ones who were not hit, and fled like hell, was the gun that killed the border agent. This is a possibility.
          Let's assume for a moment that the two guns found on the scene were not in any way involved in the death of Agent Terry (which strains all bounds of credibility, but we'll try it). We are still left with a program that delivered firearms to Mexican cartel members without any means of tracking them beyond the border, without the knowledge of the Mexican government. Then, when the administration was questioned about, the response was to lie and claim that no guns were "walked" to Mexico. When several ATF agents came forward and said that it did happen, the agency retaliated against the agents and the stonewalling began.

          Of course, the idea that these guns magically appeared in the desert but were not involved in the death of Agent Terry is completely ridiculous, but there it is.

          Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
          All that we know for sure is the gun that killed the agent was the same model as some of the guns sold, in the previous gunwalking and in f and f. But the gun may not have been from either operation. Afterall, these were real common models and sold everywhere.
          Again, the previous "gunwalking" is, according to what I have read, a myth. Can you substantiate that the prior program resulted in guns being taken to Mexico?

          Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
          In both operations guns were allowed to walk. Not all were recovered. And by the way, we have had murders committed in my own area with rifles that could be connected with the projectile that killed. In this case, the damage was too great to trace it to a particular gun, and certainly it could not be connected to either of the two guns left behind.
          See above

          Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
          The only question I have in regards to this ATF operation is what was the purpose of selling guns to begin with? But that would have been listed or covered with the documents already submitted to congress. Congress already knows those details. My guess is there are some details here, legitimate details that involve the operation that the justice dept. doesn't want everyone to know. To show our hand, in other words. Because the idea that holder and obama would incriminate themselves as Nixon did is a non starter. If there were some conspiracy, obama and holder would not have put it on paper, as a matter of record. Both are attorneys and they know full well not to put it on paper, on tape, etc.
          At issue here - and what the administration is concealing - is what happened after Agent Terry was killed and the administration learned that it's initial denial was falling apart.

          As far as the "layers know better" theory - do you recall what Nixon's degree from Duke was for?

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

            Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
            I believe you are confused about the Wide Receiver program. Nothing was "walked" under that program. They did, IIRC, lose a handful of guns due to a tracking device malfunction. The F&F program, on the other hand, involved deliberately allowing guns to be taken to Mexico - over the very vocal objections of the field ATF agents who were ordered to take no action as it happened.



            Let's assume for a moment that the two guns found on the scene were not in any way involved in the death of Agent Terry (which strains all bounds of credibility, but we'll try it). We are still left with a program that delivered firearms to Mexican cartel members without any means of tracking them beyond the border, without the knowledge of the Mexican government. Then, when the administration was questioned about, the response was to lie and claim that no guns were "walked" to Mexico. When several ATF agents came forward and said that it did happen, the agency retaliated against the agents and the stonewalling began.

            Of course, the idea that these guns magically appeared in the desert but were not involved in the death of Agent Terry is completely ridiculous, but there it is.



            Again, the previous "gunwalking" is, according to what I have read, a myth. Can you substantiate that the prior program resulted in guns being taken to Mexico?



            See above



            At issue here - and what the administration is concealing - is what happened after Agent Terry was killed and the administration learned that it's initial denial was falling apart.

            As far as the "layers know better" theory - do you recall what Nixon's degree from Duke was for?
            I saw online a few days ago how many of the first gunwalked firearms were recovered, and it wasn't all of them. So there are still guns out there from the previous operation.

            Do we believe that every rifle in the cartel's collection came from f and f? What did they do for arms prior to that? They have never been short of weapons.

            One would think that what happened to nixon, would have have a learning experience for others, in gov't. And that obama and holder would have never made the same mistake. Now that is the reasonable manner in which to see this.

            Do you actually believe that obama and holder left damning evidence, on the record, of this theory that they allowed guns to walk in order to disarm america? Do you really believe that? Really?

            What would be really helpful here is for Issa to make public every damn thing said in the documents that he has. I think if he did, there would be no questions that needed to be answered. It is this conspiracy theory that is driving this, jumped upon by republicans who vowed to keep obama to one term. I mean, they already showed this hand years ago.

            I think any fogginess in this f and f operation comes from a thousand things the dept of justice is involved in, and the inability of one man to know every last minute detail. It happens in all large burocracies. The republicans have siezed upon the inefficiency and are trying to use it for political gain for the repubs.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

              Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
              I saw online a few days ago how many of the first gunwalked firearms were recovered, and it wasn't all of them. So there are still guns out there from the previous operation.

              Do we believe that every rifle in the cartel's collection came from f and f? What did they do for arms prior to that? They have never been short of weapons.
              Not at all - the vast majority of their guns come from Central America, IIRC. Most of their guns cannot be traced at all because they don't have serial numbers.

              One would think that what happened to nixon, would have have a learning experience for others, in gov't. And that obama and holder would have never made the same mistake. Now that is the reasonable manner in which to see this.

              Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
              Do you actually believe that obama and holder left damning evidence, on the record, of this theory that they allowed guns to walk in order to disarm america? Do you really believe that? Really?

              What would be really helpful here is for Issa to make public every damn thing said in the documents that he has. I think if he did, there would be no questions that needed to be answered. It is this conspiracy theory that is driving this, jumped upon by republicans who vowed to keep obama to one term. I mean, they already showed this hand years ago.

              I think any fogginess in this f and f operation comes from a thousand things the dept of justice is involved in, and the inability of one man to know every last minute detail. It happens in all large burocracies. The republicans have siezed upon the inefficiency and are trying to use it for political gain for the repubs.
              If it were not for the initial lying, I'd agree this was just normal governmental confusion. But the initial lie paints the rest of the actions of the administration in the matter.

              Matt

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

                Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                Not at all - the vast majority of their guns come from Central America, IIRC. Most of their guns cannot be traced at all because they don't have serial numbers.

                One would think that what happened to nixon, would have have a learning experience for others, in gov't. And that obama and holder would have never made the same mistake. Now that is the reasonable manner in which to see this.



                If it were not for the initial lying, I'd agree this was just normal governmental confusion. But the initial lie paints the rest of the actions of the administration in the matter.

                Matt
                I thought the intitial lying was retracted by a letter from holder himself? So it wasn't perhaps a real lie but a case of not being fully informed. See, as soon as you assume it was an intentional lie, you are in the conspiracy theory realm. And if you just ignore the retraction, it helps with the conspiracy, which coincidentally is needed here.

                BTW there was a rancher killed by illegals, drug runners, years ago. If I recall correctly it was an american made gun that shot the bullet that killed the man. Do you really believe that guns were not crossing the border before the bush gun walking deal? That american guns were not being taken back to mexico for the cartel when they dropped off their drug shipments here in the states? Remember sir there is a substantial black market of guns here in america, and we lose guns in my own area on a weekly basis. those guns are seldom found in pawn shops, but remain underground here. And you can bet your ass that some of these guns end up in the hands of the cartel. You break in a house to steal guns to swap for dope. The dope, most of it comes from mexico. Some of those stolen guns make their way back to the cartel, and this has been going on before either gunwalking programs.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

                  I have no doubt that many guns bought in the US ended up in Mexico.

                  Can we agree that when the ATF ordered dealers to sell over two thousand guns to people that the ATF knew were trafficking in them, and then watched as the guns were taken across the border, that is a pretty serious thing?

                  As far as the retraction, it loses a lot of it's value when one considers that it came 10 months later, long after the ATF went after the whistleblowers who exposed the false claim.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

                    blue
                    your spinning so hard you are turning cream into butter
                    your entire arguments are it is bushs fault or it is because he is black.
                    you complealy ignore that crimes have been comitted and he president is covering them up.
                    but being he is a liberal black president he is above the law isnt he well at least according to liberals like you, that belive he is a king and can do anything he wants including ignoring the constitution

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

                      Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                      I have no doubt that many guns bought in the US ended up in Mexico.

                      Can we agree that when the ATF ordered dealers to sell over two thousand guns to people that the ATF knew were trafficking in them, and then watched as the guns were taken across the border, that is a pretty serious thing?

                      As far as the retraction, it loses a lot of it's value when one considers that it came 10 months later, long after the ATF went after the whistleblowers who exposed the false claim.
                      Yes, we can agree that if the ATF was simply supplying guns to the cartel, with no other plans involved, this is indeed serious. But it makes absolutely no sense, which says to me that we do not know the entire story. Now, some think the entire story involved a ploy to end the sell of firearms, in the far left's agenda to take away guns from americans. And they think that there is written proof of this in the possession of holder.

                      To me that is simply ludicrous. So, I tend to think that there is more to this, and it isn't an attempt by obama and holder to get rid of americans being able to buy guns. I think that Issa has this information, and doesn't plan on sharing it because it cannot be used against obama if he came clean.

                      I think at worse, holder may have been incompetent, the head of the ATF in charge just as incompetent, and this is what is being protected. One could say the Waco deal with the branch dividians occurred by the same type of incompetence. The ruby ridge killings. Incompetence isn't new in american gov't. Neither is dodging new. But that is a different animal than holder and obama trying to stop the sell of guns to americans by letting them into mexico. And to make sure america knew of their ploy, they left written records of such. That is hard for me to accept.

                      So, has Issa given us the records as to why the justice dept and the ATF agreed to allow guns to just go to mexico? Was there any sort of mission statement here? There has to be! I want to know what the official mission statement was. Issa ain't saying. Why?

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

                        Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                        Yes, we can agree that if the ATF was simply supplying guns to the cartel, with no other plans involved, this is indeed serious. But it makes absolutely no sense, which says to me that we do not know the entire story. Now, some think the entire story involved a ploy to end the sell of firearms, in the far left's agenda to take away guns from americans. And they think that there is written proof of this in the possession of holder.
                        And while the administration plays cover-up and hide-the-fish games, we never will know the truth.

                        Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                        To me that is simply ludicrous. So, I tend to think that there is more to this, and it isn't an attempt by obama and holder to get rid of americans being able to buy guns. I think that Issa has this information, and doesn't plan on sharing it because it cannot be used against obama if he came clean.
                        Hmmm. If Issa has the information, so does the administration. I don't think your theory here works.

                        Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                        I think at worse, holder may have been incompetent, the head of the ATF in charge just as incompetent, and this is what is being protected. One could say the Waco deal with the branch dividians occurred by the same type of incompetence. The ruby ridge killings. Incompetence isn't new in american gov't. Neither is dodging new. But that is a different animal than holder and obama trying to stop the sell of guns to americans by letting them into mexico. And to make sure america knew of their ploy, they left written records of such. That is hard for me to accept.
                        The use of executive privilege to conceal incompetence is completely inappropriate, wouldn't you agree?

                        Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                        So, has Issa given us the records as to why the justice dept and the ATF agreed to allow guns to just go to mexico? Was there any sort of mission statement here? There has to be! I want to know what the official mission statement was. Issa ain't saying. Why?
                        Why isn't the administration saying? If this is so easy to clear up, you would think a political operator like Barack Obama would provide these exculpatory documents and move on.

                        Matt

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

                          Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                          And while the administration plays cover-up and hide-the-fish games, we never will know the truth.



                          Hmmm. If Issa has the information, so does the administration. I don't think your theory here works.



                          The use of executive privilege to conceal incompetence is completely inappropriate, wouldn't you agree?



                          Why isn't the administration saying? If this is so easy to clear up, you would think a political operator like Barack Obama would provide these exculpatory documents and move on.

                          Matt
                          I am confident the truth will indeed come out, but not before the election. I think if it turns out that once the truth is known, and this was no conspiracy, we won't hear a word from Issa about that. But I believe this to be just some of the dirty election tactics being used here, and it gets free airtime, especially from Fox, but also all of the media it's good to go. That is how I view this personally. It isn't all sound and fury signifying nothing, but I think what is being kept out of the light was nothing more than one grand fuck up. And that isn't illegal, but I agree it is inappropiate.

                          The information that Issa has, apparently covers the scope and details of the operation, who formulated it, who authorized it, and the objective of the operation. What Issa wants now is the correspondance between the president and holder. Issa is on a fishing expedition, or that is the way I perceive it.

                          Is the question being asked by Issa, center around the ATF running an operation in which guns were basically just sent to mexico without any operational goal whatsoever? That is, the ATF was involved in nothing more than arming the cartel? Is this what Issa is trying to find out? And the documents given to him, did not explain why the ATF was doing this? So this is what is driving the spectacle? Issa cannot find out why the justice dept formulated f and f and why higher ups of the ATF agreed to it?

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

                            So there is a conspiracy about a non-conspiracy?

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • Re: Obama asserts executive privilege to hide Fast &amp; Furious documents

                              Switching gears here, it now looks like some of thee dems (who fear the voters in their districts) are going to vote to hold Eric in contempt as well. June just doesn't seem to be the boss' month!

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X