December 12, 2011, 07:35 AM | #1701 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,113
|
Quote:
This stuff is a political sideshow. Its entertaining, it gets folks minds off the crushing 15 trillion dollar national debt, the sorry economy and the do nothing congress. Why are Grassley and Issa not talking about the hundreds of Mexicans killed with F&F guns? Is it because US citizens could care less? In the end no political appointee will be fired unless he/she becomes a liability to the POTUS. No one will be impeached. |
|
December 12, 2011, 06:44 PM | #1702 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
Hypocritical but remember the ends always justify the means once you are in power. It is only when you are not in power that they don't. I am getting cynical again? With a government like ours it is really hard not to.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
December 12, 2011, 08:33 PM | #1703 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,113
|
Quote:
|
|
December 12, 2011, 09:09 PM | #1704 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
|
Thick Tin hats seem to be the gift of the anyone who knows anything factual about F & F...
Paranoid doesnt equal wrong.... |
December 13, 2011, 12:21 AM | #1705 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 7, 1999
Posts: 3,847
|
The realities of the situation being mentioned multiple times, the "realities" strike me as follows:
Tha Obama Administration is rotten to its' core. |
December 13, 2011, 06:29 AM | #1706 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2002
Posts: 1,936
|
Quote:
Just because you were not paying attention does not mean they did not say anything. It just means you could care less about finding out the truth. |
|
December 13, 2011, 07:36 AM | #1707 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,113
|
Quote:
|
|
December 15, 2011, 09:20 AM | #1708 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Here is an interesting question raised by Investor's Business Daily.
Lanny Breuer has testified that he knew about gunwalking in Wide Receiver in April 2010 and that he flew out to Arizona to meet and reprimand the ATF agents involved (Bob Newell, David Voth, Hope McAllister). Breuer then claims that even when these same three agents were accused of Fast and Furious, it totally slipped his mind to make any connection between the people involved and the accusations of gunwalking - even as his office was signing off on wiretaps for Fast & Furious and news reports were being published. So much so, that he never warned the Attorney General or notified Congress until September 2011. So in January 2011, when Department of Justice was asked to respond to Sen. Grassley's letter asking about gunwalking in Fast and Furious, it is Lanny Breuer's people who draft the response. The response turns out to be so riddled with lies that the Department of Justice withdrew the response recently. In recent testimony, Sen. Grassley directly asked Breuer if he reviewed this reply. Breuer responded ""At the time," he testified, "I was in Mexico dealing with the very real issues that we are all so committed to." However, as emails show, it turns out Breuer did both review and approve of the draft, which was worked on by Jacob Weinstein - another DOJ employee with knowledge of previous gunwalking by the same people. So you've got a solid case that at least two senior DOJ officials have lied to Congress. It is interesting to me that AG Holder continues to defend Lanny Breuer and seeks to keep him in that position. After all, if you had a subordinate who couldn't make the connection between Fast and Furious and previous gunwalking by the same people, would you trust his judgment? Would you want the same guy who drafted a response to Congress that was so untruthful you had to eat it during a Congressional hearing into your department's activities to continue working for you? It doesn't seem like a rational response - unless of course the employee only did those things because you told him to do it. |
December 15, 2011, 09:28 AM | #1709 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,323
|
Let's get Lenny to roll over...
|
December 15, 2011, 01:15 PM | #1710 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
armored, it's pretty clear you're unfamiliar with Lanny Breuer - who he is, and what he represents. He is not your run of the mill, everyday Asst. AG. He has been a dogged, no-holds-barred advocate for his political party and a committed true believer. He would not roll over on anyone in the current administration, no matter what he might be offered. Since no one can threaten him with anything, well...no way on earth Lanny Breuer is ever going to tell the truth about Fast and Furious.
|
December 15, 2011, 10:01 PM | #1711 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,061
|
I'll bet Breuer gets thrown under the bus as a rogue element, then pardoned in 2013.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
December 15, 2011, 10:22 PM | #1712 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 7, 1999
Posts: 3,847
|
Bartholomew Roberts:
Re what seems to be the ever changing tale of woe offered by Mr. Breuer, is there anyone in officialdom at DOJ whose word can be taken for the fact that we are currently in the month of December, let along concerning substantative matters? I suspect that the answer would be NO!! Given this, when, if ever, will we see some DOJ dirtbags dragged off in chains, their offense being Contempt of Congress, which might well be deserving of contempt, looking at their general performance, however it remains thast contempt of congress, as evidenced by what appears to be ongojng lying is actionable. Should I be in serious error here, feel free to correct me, you or anyone else in this discussion. |
December 15, 2011, 10:40 PM | #1713 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 8, 2000
Location: SLC,Utah
Posts: 2,704
|
Alan, since the DOJ officials are in the Executive Branch, separation of powers may be a substantial barrier to such an action. Otherwise, we would likely have Contempt of Congress charges filed against Supreme Court justices who ruled a law to be unconstitutional or against a president who vetoed a bill.
|
December 16, 2011, 06:23 AM | #1714 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
I don't see Breuer rolling. As noted, he has been around for awhile and I'm sure he already has his post-administration big law job lined up. Plus he has already indicated a willingness to fall on his sword. I tend to agree with Tom Servo that he is going under the bus. The only question is when.
Jacob Weinstein is another candidate. He has more exposure than Breuer. In fact, it seems it is his emails to Breuer that repeatedly tripped up Breuer in testimony; but right now Breuer seems to be the firewall between Holder and Fast & Furious. The other loose end is the NSC staffer assigned to Iraq now. It will be interesting to hear his testimony when it eventually happens. As for when something is going to be done about it? The justice system isn't speedy even on a good day and it doesn't pick up speed when you throw in legislators, highly experienced lawyers, and Constitutional separation of powers issues. I believe Rep. Issa and Sen. Grassley are committed to seeing justice done; but it is going to be a slow process. It is after all, the DOJ and Attorney General being investigated. In baseball terms, I'd say we are still in the second inning. |
December 16, 2011, 07:59 AM | #1715 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Breuer will not go anywhere without more pressure from congress, a lot more.
The thing that still gets me over all this is the fact that they don't care in the least about the life of the agents in their charge. When a solider is lost in battle that is a significant event for everyone from the team leader all the way up to the President signing the letter to the next of kin. Here an agent was gunned down in the performance of his duties and they are using it as political football to punt as far away as possible to avoid taking any responsibility for their illegal acts that caused him to be killed. I still find it difficult to believe the leadership vacuum that exists at the highest levels. I am embarrassed for them. For the agents I have to wonder what this is doing to their morale, knowing that their ultimate sacrifices will be forgotten by their leaders and used for political gain.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
December 16, 2011, 03:23 PM | #1716 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 29, 2004
Posts: 3,351
|
Quote:
They can then impeach, or try to exert pressure to get a resignation if they believe an executive branch person has broken the law - "high crimes and misdemeanors" (and remember the meaning if "misdemeanor" has changed). |
|
December 16, 2011, 09:41 PM | #1717 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 14, 2007
Location: Palmer Ak
Posts: 319
|
senator-mike-lee-argues-against-defense-authorization-act
Some will argue these people are in need of tin hats ,but the point so be taken quite seriously. |
December 17, 2011, 12:57 AM | #1718 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 7, 1999
Posts: 3,847
|
Don H wrote, in response to my post:
Alan, since the DOJ officials are in the Executive Branch, separation of powers may be a substantial barrier to such an action. Otherwise, we would likely have Contempt of Congress charges filed against Supreme Court justices who ruled a law to be unconstitutional or against a president who vetoed a bill. __________________ I had earlier written on 15 Dec., at 1022PM Bartholomew Roberts: Re what seems to be the ever changing tale of woe offered by Mr. Breuer, is there anyone in officialdom at DOJ whose word can be taken for the fact that we are currently in the month of December, let along concerning substantative matters? I suspect that the answer would be NO!! Given this, when, if ever, will we see some DOJ dirtbags dragged off in chains, their offense being Contempt of Congress, which might well be deserving of contempt, looking at their general performance, however it remains thast contempt of congress, as evidenced by what appears to be ongojng lying is actionable. Should I be in serious error here, feel free to correct me, you or anyone else in this discussion. Then brickeyee wrote and quoted: "Alan, since the DOJ officials are in the Executive Branch, separation of powers may be a substantial barrier to such an action. Otherwise, we would likely have Contempt of Congress charges filed against Supreme Court justices who ruled a law to be unconstitutional or against a president who vetoed a bill." Congress has oversight authority that it can use to review actions taken by the executive branch. They can then impeach, or try to exert pressure to get a resignation if they believe an executive branch person has broken the law - "high crimes and misdemeanors" (and remember the meaning if "misdemeanor" has changed). -------------------------------- I don't agree with Don H, quoted above, here I make reference to separation of powers. As to bricklee's offering, yes, congress has all manner of power, perhaps spelled oversight responsibility. Unfortunately, it appears that congress is loth to actually use the poweres that it does have, though of course, the same congress has, from time to time, complained about what it described as a grasping, overweaning executive branch, that has somehow, perhaps in the dead of night, stolen its' powers. Might these powers be the ones it so dismally failed to utilize or exercise, for could it be that powers, like muscles lain fallow, detoriate, perhaps to the point of vanishing. What is the ordinary citizen, a person like myself to do? Having worked in engineering design and construction, I believe that I can add 2 + 2, getting 4 a conclusion that most people wouild agree with. Problem seems to be that with "government", which includes the executive branch, the legislative branch and the judicial branch, adding 2 + 2 appears to give a markedly different answer. |
December 17, 2011, 01:03 PM | #1719 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 29, 2004
Posts: 3,351
|
Quote:
|
|
December 17, 2011, 01:06 PM | #1720 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
There is no math in this thread!
Wait for the next political debate if you want to ask math questions! I'm bad -
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
December 17, 2011, 03:06 PM | #1721 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 11, 1999
Location: Longmont, CO, USA
Posts: 4,530
|
That computes.
|
December 17, 2011, 09:02 PM | #1722 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,061
|
Pi is exactly three. Discuss.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
December 17, 2011, 09:21 PM | #1723 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 941
|
Tom Servo:
What's to discuss? You're right. |
December 17, 2011, 09:32 PM | #1724 |
Member
Join Date: December 23, 2007
Location: Central South Carolina
Posts: 89
|
I thought pi was cherry!
Rick
__________________
NRA Training Counselor NRA Advanced Pistol Instructor NRA RTBAV Regional Counselor Member IALEFI, SCLEOA |
December 17, 2011, 10:29 PM | #1725 |
Member
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Posts: 66
|
Pi aint square, pi are round
. |
Tags |
atf , fast and furious |
|
|