Page 34 of 72 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 340 of 714

Thread: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/226]

  1. #331
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,909

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Seriously, you have to ask why the DOJ would not just hand over a ton of sensitive documents about the war against the cartel to a bunch of right wing political hacks? Do you have any idea what the cartel would do to get its hands on that kind of information? They would kill, kidnap, break in to federal buildings, whatever they need to do. In order to get access to that kind of information within the DOJ you get vetted and trained for years first and your name is never publicly released. They have extensive procedures to make sure everything is encrypted and transfers of the information are super secure, etc. You think they should just hand it over to some Republicans and their unpaid interns and whatnot? That would be insane. Hell, odds are that the Republicans would opt to just release whatever made Obama look bad to the press. They don't give a sh1t.
    There are 17 Democrats serving on that committee. I really have to object to a description of it as "a bunch of right wing political hacks."

    Here's the list of members:

    Committee Members - House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform

  2. #332
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    Μολὼν λαβέ's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    09-29-17 @ 11:22 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,914

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    Much hay will be made in the court of public opinion, which is the one the GOP is really interested in winning anyway. They don't want an actual conviction, because it just means that Democrats will go after their AG when the time comes. Which it will, these things always come back around. It may take a few years, but they do.
    And they should if he/she lies to and/or stonewalls a congressional investigation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Generalizations are stupid.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Steel View Post
    The Second Amendment has nothing to do with guns.

  3. #333
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    Μολὼν λαβέ's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    09-29-17 @ 11:22 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,914

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    I keep up quite well. So much so, in fact, that I am way ahead of many.

    What crime is the Terry family accusing Holder of?

    This simple question is apparently stumping the right.
    Everyone seems to know but you. Denial, there's treatment for it you know.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Generalizations are stupid.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Steel View Post
    The Second Amendment has nothing to do with guns.

  4. #334
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Because there are some questions about Holder's two statements which were retracted.
    AFAIK there was only one statement retracted, memo actually, and it was not Holder's (stating explicitly that guns were not walking).
    As to Holder's equivocation about when he first heard of F and F, it would be reasonable to assume that a few earlier emails which only mentioned the program in passing (within pages of other unrelated material), with no details as to the actual gunwalking, is hardly proof of any intent to deceive or mislead (and only one of which, IIRC, was directly addressed to him).

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    That no one has as yet been held accountable or responsible for F&F and the illegality of the walking 1,800 weapons into Mexico without Mexico's knowledge.
    First, I'm sure that no Republican gives a damn about Mexico's knowledge, and I'm sure that we both know that.
    Second, a couple of higher ups at the AZ Justice Dept. office have resigned (such as AZ DOJ Atty Burke, who gave the gunwalking his legal blessing). The ones directly responsible, that championed the program, should indeed be held accountable (I'm thinking AZ SAIC Newell would be the prime cheerleader). However, I think we both know that Issa is not interested in the little fish who did the dirty deed, but the big fish whom he is trying to make guilty by association -- because he has a hard on for the big fish's boss (one Barack Obama).

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    That the BATF and people in charge are still working for the Government, that a few have even been promoted and moved. That no one seemed to know what was going on when it was their job to know and that they've been seemingly non-compliant when Congress asks for information, emails, letters, etc. [...] If Holder would release the information Congress could find out.
    The information is already out there. Hell, Wikipedia has it. Issa is not looking for information, he is hoping for a misstep by the administration, totally unrelated to F and F, that will allow him to pounce. He is clearly a partisan hack that has zero interest in justice. I suspect we both know that too.

  5. #335
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    There are 17 Democrats serving on that committee. I really have to object to a description of it as "a bunch of right wing political hacks."

    Here's the list of members:

    Committee Members - House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform
    Right, and the Democrats have all repeatedly denounced Issa's flagrantly political hackery. A few of them have talked about how they are utterly ashamed to be a part of what he is doing.
    Total tax rates- People living in poverty: 16.2%. The median American: 27%. Working people who make over $140k/year: 31%. The top 1%: 30%. Super rich investors: around 15%. Help the democrats retake the house.

  6. #336
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

    IMO, yet another opportunity to develop appropriate policy solutions to remedy a problem was missed. Instead, political theatrics carried the day.

    In my view, a better approach would have entailed:

    1) Requesting the DOJ to conduct a review of what happened. If negligence was a major reason for the BATF's having "lost control" of the operation, the agent or agents involved would be subject to immediate demotion or, depending on the extent of the negligence, dismissal.

    2) Requesting the BATF to provide Congress with a system of controls to minimize the risk of similar outcomes within 90 days. Congress would then submit those controls to scrutiny by independent experts. Until an adequate framework of controls were approved by the Congress, the BATF would be barred from conducting any similar operations. If the BATF refused to submit such controls, Congress could either include language barring such operations in future appropriations for the BATF, specify the use of the appropriations for the BATF (with zero funding being provided for such operations, or such other enforcement mechanisms that would deter the BATF from carrying out similar operations.

    Unfortunately, politics, not policy, was the focus of what transpired.

  7. #337
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    1) Requesting the DOJ to conduct a review of what happened. If negligence was a major reason for the BATF's having "lost control" of the operation, the agent or agents involved would be subject to immediate demotion or, depending on the extent of the negligence, dismissal.
    The DOJ is conducting that review. Actually, they tasked the Office of the Independent Counsel to do it. Which is, by far, the people best equipped for this kind of thing. And unassailable impartial. They are housed in the DOJ, but neither Holder nor Obama can fire them without court approval. I don't think any president from either party has even suggested removing somebody from the Office of the Independent Counsel since Nixon did, which is when they made the rule that you need court approval.

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    2) Requesting the BATF to provide Congress with a system of controls to minimize the risk of similar outcomes within 90 days. Congress would then submit those controls to scrutiny by independent experts. Until an adequate framework of controls were approved by the Congress, the BATF would be barred from conducting any similar operations. If the BATF refused to submit such controls, Congress could either include language barring such operations in future appropriations for the BATF, specify the use of the appropriations for the BATF (with zero funding being provided for such operations, or such other enforcement mechanisms that would deter the BATF from carrying out similar operations.

    Unfortunately, politics, not policy, was the focus of what transpired.
    Well there I think it is trickier than you are thinking. The tactic of allowing low level transactions to go through to work your way up the chain is always risky, but it is central to law enforcement at all levels. Without that we would never catch anybody but street dealers for guns and drugs. The big cahoonas would be totally untouchable. And it carries quite a bit of risk that you'll end up having let drugs or guns slip through your hands for nothing. The people at the top are more paranoid than the people at the bottom. You have to call it in at just the right time when you are pretty sure you're as high as you're going to get up the chain. But that is an extremely tough judgment call. Clearly the call they made here was wrong. Somebody they thought they could land spooked and it was all for nothing. But, you gotta remember that every year there are hundreds of major drug and gun busts that are big enough deals to make the news where that tactic did work, and tens of thousands that are too small to make the news.

    Anyways, I don't know that some kind of Congressionally approved policy is the solution. It's about the people running the operations making the right judgment calls. I bet if we actually were in the room when they were making those calls, 99 times out of 100 we'd come out thoroughly impressed. They should always try to do better, but it's an art, not a science.
    Total tax rates- People living in poverty: 16.2%. The median American: 27%. Working people who make over $140k/year: 31%. The top 1%: 30%. Super rich investors: around 15%. Help the democrats retake the house.

  8. #338
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    AFAIK there was only one statement retracted, memo actually, and it was not Holder's (stating explicitly that guns were not walking).
    There are now two.

    Feb 4, 2011 - retracted the BATFE statement regarding the walking of guns into Mexico

    June 18th, 2012 - Holder retracted a statement where he claimed former AG Mulkasey had been briefed about gun walking.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    As to Holder's equivocation about when he first heard of F and F, it would be reasonable to assume that a few earlier emails which only mentioned the program in passing (within pages of other unrelated material), with no details as to the actual gunwalking, is hardly proof of any intent to deceive or mislead (and only one of which, IIRC, was directly addressed to him).
    Then he should have came out and said, "We didn't know, we didn't pay attention. It's our fault, we're taking corrective steps, it won't happen ever again." And then clean house internally. It would have been done with. The question is, why didn't they do that? The WH and the DoJ wouldn't have to go through any of this nonsense - no subpoena's, no nothing. Hell, the Secret Service debacle was over in a few weeks.


    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    First, I'm sure that no Republican gives a damn about Mexico's knowledge, and I'm sure that we both know that.
    No... we don't. Generalizing ALL of any group is never a good move.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    Second, a couple of higher ups at the AZ Justice Dept. office have resigned (such as AZ DOJ Atty Burke, who gave the gunwalking his legal blessing). The ones directly responsible, that championed the program, should indeed be held accountable (I'm thinking AZ SAIC Newell would be the prime cheerleader). However, I think we both know that Issa is not interested in the little fish who did the dirty deed, but the big fish whom he is trying to make guilty by association -- because he has a hard on for the big fish's boss (one Barack Obama).
    If Holder came to him 14 months ago and claimed responsibility, took action, cleaned house - it'd be over. Issa not interested now because 16 months of obstruction has passed. There's blood in the water and now Obama's waded in. Doesn't take more than a 2nd graded to add 1+1 here... They think there's a cover-up, a big one. And they want to find out what it is. All time dumb move by the WH and DoJ.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    The information is already out there. Hell, Wikipedia has it. Issa is not looking for information, he is hoping for a misstep by the administration, totally unrelated to F and F, that will allow him to pounce. He is clearly a partisan hack that has zero interest in justice. I suspect we both know that too.
    He was looking for information.. but it's now gone past that and Holder and the WH are to blame. Simple as that.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  9. #339
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over F&F doc [W:116/2

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    The DOJ is conducting that review. Actually, they tasked the Office of the Independent Counsel to do it. Which is, by far, the people best equipped for this kind of thing. And unassailable impartial. They are housed in the DOJ, but neither Holder nor Obama can fire them without court approval. I don't think any president from either party has even suggested removing somebody from the Office of the Independent Counsel since Nixon did, which is when they made the rule that you need court approval.
    I know that an investigation is underway and have no issues with that. It is not clear that individuals responsible, if negligence is found, would be demoted, much less dismissed. If no negligence is found and simple errors were responsible, then that would be an entirely different matter.

    Well there I think it is trickier than you are thinking. The tactic of allowing low level transactions to go through to work your way up the chain is always risky, but it is central to law enforcement at all levels. Without that we would never catch anybody but street dealers for guns and drugs. The big cahoonas would be totally untouchable. And it carries quite a bit of risk that you'll end up having let drugs or guns slip through your hands for nothing. The people at the top are more paranoid than the people at the bottom. You have to call it in at just the right time when you are pretty sure you're as high as you're going to get up the chain. But that is an extremely tough judgment call. Clearly the call they made here was wrong. Somebody they thought they could land spooked and it was all for nothing. But, you gotta remember that every year there are hundreds of major drug and gun busts that are big enough deals to make the news where that tactic did work, and tens of thousands that are too small to make the news.
    I'm not advocating the impossible standard of zero risk. I am suggesting that a control mechanism be devised and approved that does what is reasonably possible to minimize risk. Of course, some errors and accidents could still occur, but if this case is similar to most cases where bad outcomes occur, there are improvements that can be made. Congress should focus on being provided with the information that gives it confidence that adequate measures to reduce the risk of similar outcomes will be implemented and the approach I suggested would provide maximum assurance.

    Congress would not be micromanaging by authorizing each law enforcement operation. That's not Congress's role. Congress would merely approve a control framework (or it could choose just to review it) to be assured that robust safeguards would be implemented. Only if Congress is not provided adequate assurance would I suggest that Congress take measures, including restricted funding to precluder operations for which Congress lacks confidence about safeguards.

    In any case, I don't think today's political theatrics were helpful. They merely amplified political divisions. They did nothing to address potential problems associated with the operation in question.

    Anyways, I don't know that some kind of Congressionally approved policy is the solution. It's about the people running the operations making the right judgment calls. I bet if we actually were in the room when they were making those calls, 99 times out of 100 we'd come out thoroughly impressed. They should always try to do better, but it's an art, not a science.[/QUOTE]

  10. #340
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Last Seen
    02-21-17 @ 07:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    309

    Re: Justice Dept says president has exerted executive privilege over Fast and Furious

    Quote Originally Posted by Μολὼν λαβέ View Post
    Everyone seems to know but you. Denial, there's treatment for it you know.
    Some are just too dense to see what is right in front of their faces. Sad really but not unexpected.

Page 34 of 72 FirstFirst ... 24323334353644 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •