• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Holder, Grilled on Gun Inquiry, Says He Won’t Resign

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
WASHINGTON — House Republicans pummeled Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Thursday over the disputed gun-trafficking investigation called Operation Fast and Furious, accusing the Justice Department of hiding the truth and lying to Congress in a slugfest of an oversight hearing. Enlarge This Image
HOLDER-articleInline.jpg

[h=6]Stephen Crowley/The New York Times[/h]

Mr. Holder denied the allegations and declared that he would not resign.
Mr. Holder had testified about Fast and Furious on three prior occasions, and the hearing before the House Judiciary Committee produced few revelations. But it was the most politically charged session yet, as one Republican after another tore into the attorney general.


Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin, for example, called for “heads to roll” and threatened to impeach unspecified Obama administration officials. Representative Darrell Issa of California pronounced Mr. Holder in “contempt of Congress” for refusing to turn over certain internal departmental e-mails. Representative Ted Poe of Texas suggested that Justice Department officials should be prosecuted for manslaughter for recklessly allowing guns to fall into the hands of criminals.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/u...hes-with-republicans-on-fast-and-furious.html


Anyone else listen to this on C-SPAN yesterday? Amazing. Holder's arrogance, lying, and obfuscation is just beyond belief. This man in my opinion needs to be in jail, and we need to find out what the WH knew. What say you all?


j-mac
 
Actually, I saw a good portion of it. I also saw good portions of the times Antonio Gonzales testified under the bush administration. It's amazing how much more forthcoming Holder and the Obama administration were. I didn't see him claim "I don't recall" a single time. I think this program was screwed up and not handled well but why you think that means he needs to resign or why that means he's lying I don't know. I'm guessing it's just partisan politics on your part.
 
Injury kind of understates the consequences of the program....doesn't it? People died as a result of a very stupid operation. An operation that was so stupid, many have questioned whether or not it was intentional. I think those questions are justified.
 
Injury kind of understates the consequences of the program....doesn't it? People died as a result of a very stupid operation. An operation that was so stupid, many have questioned whether or not it was intentional. I think those questions are justified.

It looks intentional. Last I checked the US has no jurisdiction in Mexico and months later they were trying to further infringe on the 2nd amendment by trying to blame gun dealers for Mexico's cartels getting guns.
 
Actually, I saw a good portion of it. I also saw good portions of the times Antonio Gonzales testified under the bush administration.

I am not looking to compare the Bush administration v. the Obama administration. I don't think, unless they were testifying about the very same things that it is comparable at all.

It's amazing how much more forthcoming Holder and the Obama administration were.

There was a point at which Holder was being asked about e-mails, and other documentation where Holder and I think it was Issa were talking at the same time, and Issa was asking whether or not there was more documentation/e-mail that was not turned over, and you can hear Holder say "...there may be, but we won't turn that over." You think that is transparent?


I didn't see him claim "I don't recall" a single time.

No, instead he shows contempt for the committee, and tells them to pound sand.

I think this program was screwed up and not handled well but why you think that means he needs to resign or why that means he's lying I don't know.

Um, because he is lying. There are direct e-mails from one DoJ official to another strategizing how to use this to further gun control legislation, and you don't see a problem with this?

I'm guessing it's just partisan politics on your part.

Maintaining constitutional rights should not be a partisan issue. And when you have the administration doing things like this to use as a stick to take them away, it is a problem.

j-mac
 
Actually, I saw a good portion of it. I also saw good portions of the times Antonio Gonzales testified under the bush administration. It's amazing how much more forthcoming Holder and the Obama administration were. I didn't see him claim "I don't recall" a single time. I think this program was screwed up and not handled well but why you think that means he needs to resign or why that means he's lying I don't know. I'm guessing it's just partisan politics on your part.

If Holder isn't lying then why has he been stalling a congressional investigative committee for months? It makes one ask why Holder isn't forthcoming. Who is he covering for? Certainly not a subordinate....

Then there are only two people left he would impede the process for, especially since 52 House members, one senator, three presidential candidates, and two governors have called for his immediate resignation.

One would be himself, and the other would have to be the POTUS.
 
Last edited:
Holder needs to be tried for treason.
 
DEA getting paid millions in drug money.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/w...ls.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

They said agents had deposited the drug proceeds in accounts designated by traffickers, or in shell accounts set up by agents.

The officials said that while the D.E.A. conducted such operations in other countries, it began doing so in Mexico only in the past few years. The high-risk activities raise delicate questions about the agency’s effectiveness in bringing down drug kingpins, underscore diplomatic concerns about Mexican sovereignty, and blur the line between surveillance and facilitating crime. As it launders drug money, the agency often allows cartels to continue their operations over months or even years before making seizures or arrests.
Seems to me that the ATF and DEA has become a monster that doesn't serve average Americans.
 
Actually, I saw a good portion of it. I also saw good portions of the times Antonio Gonzales testified under the bush administration. It's amazing how much more forthcoming Holder and the Obama administration were. I didn't see him claim "I don't recall" a single time. I think this program was screwed up and not handled well but why you think that means he needs to resign or why that means he's lying I don't know. I'm guessing it's just partisan politics on your part.
He's either guilty of knowingly authorizing the distribution of guns to criminals and cartels, or of criminal negligence at best. Nothing "partisan" about it.
 
Last edited:
Anyone else listen to this on C-SPAN yesterday? Amazing. Holder's arrogance, lying, and obfuscation is just beyond belief. This man in my opinion needs to be in jail, and we need to find out what the WH knew. What say you all?


j-mac

What did he lie about, tell us? (with links to proof)

Or is it just his blackness that bothers you?
 
What did he lie about, tell us? (with links to proof)

Or is it just his blackness that bothers you?
Bad post, must have a baseless argument if your'e already resorting to the race card. Oh by the way here's the press conference where they announced "Operation Gun Runner", in 2009. http://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...tion_991385&src_vid=S7oyXFk4Loc&v=-PNhYk9NuNc. Now why would the head of the DOJ not know about a program that obviously was not secret and was enforced under his watch?
 
Last edited:
What did he lie about, tell us? (with links to proof)

Or is it just his blackness that bothers you?

What exactly is moderate about you?
 
What did he lie about, tell us? (with links to proof)

Or is it just his blackness that bothers you?

It only took ten posts! :lamo

Not a record, I'm sure, but definitely up there.
 
Actually, I saw a good portion of it. I also saw good portions of the times Antonio Gonzales testified under the bush administration. It's amazing how much more forthcoming Holder and the Obama administration were. I didn't see him claim "I don't recall" a single time. I think this program was screwed up and not handled well but why you think that means he needs to resign or why that means he's lying I don't know. I'm guessing it's just partisan politics on your part.

Yes, as we all know firing some attorneys (that work at the behest of the Pres) is on the same footing as an illegal gun running scheme that was designed to discredit gun dealers in order to get more gun control. Go ahead knock yourself out with that argument.

Holder is lying sack of s#!t and every just-us dept official involved in this is right there in that same sack.
 
I am not looking to compare the Bush administration v. the Obama administration. I don't think, unless they were testifying about the very same things that it is comparable at all.


j-mac

You can't avoid the comparison when so many remember the positions held then. And yes, potential wrong doing and incompetence under examination is comparable regardless of particualr wrong doing and possible incmpetence.
 
You can't avoid the comparison when so many remember the positions held then. And yes, potential wrong doing and incompetence under examination is comparable regardless of particualr wrong doing and possible incmpetence.


Trying to put the previous administration on trial for actions of this administration is sophistry, and transparent unguarded you know that this administration is in the wrong, and are only attempting to deflect, and obfuscate. Sorry Joe, your argument loses.


J-mac
 
Trying to put the previous administration on trial for actions of this administration is sophistry, and transparent unguarded you know that this administration is in the wrong, and are only attempting to deflect, and obfuscate. Sorry Joe, your argument loses.


J-mac

No. We tried to do that then, to which you defend them. So, the comparisin between your reaction now and then is appropriate.

Rarely do your self proclimations work j. :2funny:
 
No. We tried to do that then, to which you defend them. So, the comparisin between your reaction now and then is appropriate.

Rarely do your self proclimations work j. :2funny:

Just for my clarification.....what are you talking about?
 
No. We tried to do that then, to which you defend them. So, the comparisin between your reaction now and then is appropriate.

Rarely do your self proclimations work j. :2funny:

How sad....This passes for substantive debate? My reaction is to that which is correct and doesn't rely on revision and lies to make my arguments. Have fun with that.

J-mac
 
How sad....This passes for substantive debate? My reaction is to that which is correct and doesn't rely on revision and lies to make my arguments. Have fun with that.

J-mac

Nope. Only that the hypocracy on your part is clear. ;)
 
Just for my clarification.....what are you talking about?

What? J's lack of concern over Bush officals committing crimes, or j's self proclimations?

This is the post we're discussing:

Actually, I saw a good portion of it. I also saw good portions of the times Antonio Gonzales testified under the bush administration. It's amazing how much more forthcoming Holder and the Obama administration were. I didn't see him claim "I don't recall" a single time. I think this program was screwed up and not handled well but why you think that means he needs to resign or why that means he's lying I don't know. I'm guessing it's just partisan politics on your part.
 
Last edited:
What? J's lack of concern over Bush officals committing crimes, or j's self proclimations?

This is the post we're discussing:


If someone does something you consider wrong, but gets away with it. Does that now make it ok because the wrong doer is now someone you support? And you have the absolute gall to call me a hypocrite?

Get off the crack pipe dude.

J-mac
 
If someone does something you consider wrong, but gets away with it. Does that now make it ok because the wrong doer is now someone you support? And you have the absolute gall to call me a hypocrite?

Get off the crack pipe dude.

J-mac

Nope. Nor have I argued ANYONE should get away with ANYTHING. I'm just noting how you've changed based on who is in office.

The point was rather clear. Holder wasn't having trouble remembering. He may well be guilty of anythign from a crminal act to being just plain incompetent, but compared to Gonzales, who you supported, he was much more open. Unlike you, I'm fine with the law taking care of both of them.
 
Holder will resign, there is no doubt.
 
Back
Top Bottom