No evidence White House involved in ‘Fast and Furious’

Jarod said:
How is it being used? We dont know... thats the point, the reason its being used is kept from us. I dont know if the President is using it approperatly or not, neither do you. I do know that the same people who were not upset when Bush did it 6 times, are screaming now. Its silly politics. I belive that 16 times for Clinton was excessive, but I dont know why they did it, and maybe it was acceptable.
Click to expand...

Yet you didn't seem to be upset then... hmmmm...
 
Superfreak said:
I stand corrected. I thought I had stated the Obama admin.
Click to expand...

No problem.

Superfreak said:
So we should wait for the Terry family to get an AG to file criminal charges against the Obama admin/Holder? That the act of war should be ignored? That the Obama admin was using the gun running to try and justify stricter gun laws here?
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with the propriety of the assertion of the privilege. I mean, I love the appeal to emotion and all, but get a fucking grip.
 
Jarod said:
I did not take a position then, I dont take one now.... hmmmmm.....
Click to expand...

Weak. So, people who were upset about Bush using it six times just "don't take positions" now.

Seriously. This "it's hypocritical" is nonsense.

Bush used it six times, never once to attempt to stop investigations into acts of war against friendly nations.

I was vocal against it when Bush used it to try to block the names of people brought to the WH to advise on energy policy. Knowing who advises the President is, IMO, important and simply naming them would not stop them from being free with their opinions when advising the President.

I am vocal against it when it is used to try to end investigation into acts by our own government arming criminals where the arms were used to kill agents of a friendly government as well as our own agents.

This is absolutely significant, what happened here matters. And if the WH was not involved, executive privilege does not apply.
 
Fast and Furious cost a US law enforcement agent his life. At the same time the justice department was calling for stricter gun control because guns from America were being used by cartels. Some of those guns were provided BY the US government. This is every bit as egregious as Iran contra and heads should roll. IF F&F was a Bush operation Dems would be having seizures over it, and rightly so.
 
Socrtease said:
Fast and Furious cost a US law enforcement agent his life. At the same time the justice department was calling for stricter gun control because guns from America were being used by cartels. Some of those guns were provided BY the US government. This is every bit as egregious as Iran contra and heads should roll. IF F&F was a Bush operation Dems would be having seizures over it, and rightly so.
Click to expand...

F&F started as a Bush Operation.
 
Socrtease said:
Fast and Furious cost a US law enforcement agent his life. At the same time the justice department was calling for stricter gun control because guns from America were being used by cartels. Some of those guns were provided BY the US government. This is every bit as egregious as Iran contra and heads should roll. IF F&F was a Bush operation Dems would be having seizures over it, and rightly so.
Click to expand...

Two agents lost their life due to Fast and Furious. And yes, because it is literally (as the Mexican government pointed out) an act of war on a friendly neighboring nation.
 
Jarod said:
F&F started as a Bush Operation.
Click to expand...

Utter rubbish. Wide Receiver was an operation worked in cooperation with the Mexican government, when it was found that the tracking was inadequate it was stopped by agreement from both nations.

Fast and Furious was done without the Mexican government's knowledge, without even an attempt to track the guns, and wasn't stopped until some patriots became whistleblowers.

The fact of the guns, provided by this insane policy, in Mexico was used as a reason to try to pass laws restricting US citizens. In every way this was very different than what the Bush Administration did.
 
Damocles said:
Utter rubbish. Wide Receiver was an operation worked in cooperation with the Mexican government, when it was found that the tracking was inadequate it was stopped by agreement from both nations.

Fast and Furious was done without the Mexican government's knowledge, without even an attempt to track the guns, and wasn't stopped until some patriots became whistleblowers.

The fact of the guns, provided by this insane policy, in Mexico was used as a reason to try to pass laws restricting US citizens. In every way this was very different than what the Bush Administration did.
Click to expand...

If you say so.
 
Damocles said:
Utter rubbish. Wide Receiver was an operation worked in cooperation with the Mexican government, when it was found that the tracking was inadequate it was stopped by agreement from both nations.

Fast and Furious was done without the Mexican government's knowledge, without even an attempt to track the guns, and wasn't stopped until some patriots became whistleblowers.

The fact of the guns, provided by this insane policy, in Mexico was used as a reason to try to pass laws restricting US citizens. In every way this was very different than what the Bush Administration did.
Click to expand...
THIS
 
Jarod said:
F&F started as a Bush Operation.
Click to expand...

No, it did not. Wide receiver started under Bush. It was organized in conjunction with Mexican authorities. The guns were tracked with GPS chips. When some of the chips failed, the program was shut down.

A similar program... Fast and Furious started in late 2009. The only similarity is that guns were allowed to be run across the border. Unlike Bush, Obama did not consult with Mexican authorities or even let them know it was happening. Unlike Bush, the Obama admin did not use GPS chips to track the weapons. Unlike Bush, Obama admin was focusing on using the sales of weapons (that IT authorized) as a reason for stricter gun laws in the US.

Unlike Bush, the Obama admins program resulted in an act of War and in the death of Brian Terry and hundreds of innocent Mexicans.
 
Superfreak said:
Let me ask you... do you personally feel this is a non-issue? That we should just move along now that executive privilege has been proclaimed?
Click to expand...


I personally don't care. The way I see it, the documents that are the subject of the assertion of the executive privilege speak to who discussed and ordered X (whatever X may be). Those documents aren't necessary to establish that X was illegal or whatever it is the Republicans think they have here. If the Republicans establish some illegal conduct, maybe I'd care. But they haven't.
 
Here's the thing about lefties and righties. Both tend to minimize the crap THEIR side does and to demonize the crap the OTHER side does. Bush et al lied about WMD's in Iraq, they lied about Iraq's involvement with Al Qaeda, and righties accused anyone that called them on it as being unpatriotic and loving the terrorists. Obama lied about closing Gitmo, lied about his dislike of the Patriot Act and has basically continued the foreign policy of Bush, and Lefties claim that any criticism of Obama is only political and because the right doesn't like black people being in charge. This is why our system of government is no longer working. We allow the fringes of both parties to dictate to the entire nation. This is not the government that our founders envisioned anymore and it is because both the left and the right have done everything they can to demonize the other side and destroy any attempts at compromise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top