• 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: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the operation

Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

It's just like Solyndra. No one but wingnuts cared about it, and even they forgot about it once they heard about FnF. It won't be long before some new imagined misdeed captures their ADD-addled brains and FnF will be forgotten
No, Issa is going to chew on this bone until his teeth wear out; he obviously envisions an opportunity to take the Obama administration down on the back of the agent's dead body. Pretty despicable, yes, but Issa seems to have somewhat of a history in that area.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

In other words, most people don't care about conspiracy theories that are manufactured to support a partisan witch hunt, that may well be fueled by racism.

I think that hits the high points ;)
Conspiracy is something that exsist in the real world. Its not just a lambasting tactic for figure heads on the news.

Just type in conspiracy conviction or charged with conspiracy. People actually conspire and sometimes it has nothing to do with tinfoil.
 
Last edited:
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

In other words, most people don't care about conspiracy theories that are manufactured to support a partisan witch hunt, that may well be fueled by racism.

I think that hits the high points ;)

You are alleging that this is a conspiracy theory manufactured to support a partisan witch hunt fueled by racism? Do you have any itty bitty bit of data to support any of that?

Facts: Someone knowingly allowed a few thousand weapons to be carried across the border, in fact insisted on making law abiding gun dealers go along with the plan.
To the best of my knowledge, no one has started this witch hunt because of someone's race.
Many have stated here that if this is indeed the result of Bush actions, then that is the head, or heads, that should roll.

Since the powers that be would like nothing better than to blame this on someone, anyone, other than themselves, it should follow that the documents that Holder refuses to turn over as requested legally by Congress point in only one of two directions, and that is either toward himself or up. All the administration has to do to put this thing to rest is produce valid documents.

Surely the administration is aware that if Issa and Bush walk away with their tails tucked between their legs that Obama gains 10 points in the polls. On the other hand, if the administration is found guilty, then the Republicans have the White House. Hence, the stonewalling on the documents.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

No, Issa is going to chew on this bone until his teeth wear out; he obviously envisions an opportunity to take the Obama administration down on the back of the agent's dead body. Pretty despicable, yes, but Issa seems to have somewhat of a history in that area.
In other words, most people don't care about conspiracy theories that are manufactured to support a partisan witch hunt, that may well be fueled by racism. I think that hits the high points

Charges of racism dont deflect from actual wrongdoing.

Too bad the Bush Administration is no longer in office.

If you find someone else who meets your criteria, give us a shout

BOOOOSHHHHH. Cmon. Nice try for a derail.

Assuming your claims are accurate, you know the program began in 2006, right?

So, do you want some Republican heads as well? Or are only Democratic heads on your menu?

Hmmm thats interesting, and wrong. Even Holder doesnt agree with you :p

Holder contradicts Bush did it too.wmv - YouTube!

In this particular case, none that you could ever prove in a court of law (other than some type of accessory or negligence charge)... the obvious logic being that if the U.S.-supplied guns had never been provided, guns from some other source would have been obtained and the murders would therefore have occurred regardless.

As the right is prone to say, guns don't kill people -- people kill people

We dont have to prove it in a court of law, the standard Holder is facing is that of a Federal Official testifying before congress. Impeachment is both a political and law based process. We have laws prohibiting guns from going to known criminals and trafficking in arms, youre against that now? Secondly, you dont make it easier for criminals to commit armed crime. Using your logic I could argue that a drug dealer is innocent because someone else will deal eventually anyway. Terrible logic. Even further that isnt burden of proof. You arent eliminated from wrongdoing by a someone else would do it defense. I dont think Brian Terry's parents would buy that defense either.

So from Karl we got a deflect, a BOOOOSHHH, a second BOOOOSHHH, the Race Card, and a logical progression that ignores the wrongdoing involved.

Well, Ive got to think this is pretty bad for Holder, Liberals are doing whatever they can to change the subject.
 
Last edited:
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

Moderator's Warning:
Arguing about whether or not other posters are off-topic is off-topic.

Don't play moderator. If you have a problem, report it and leave it to the professionals.
Z told me he works for free, you better not let him see this. ;)
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

In other words, most people don't care about conspiracy theories that are manufactured to support a partisan witch hunt, that may well be fueled by racism.

I think that hits the high points ;)

Racism???

That is such a baseless claim.

The only racism I see is coming from Holder himself for dropping charges against the Black Panthers.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

You are alleging that this is a conspiracy theory manufactured to support a partisan witch hunt fueled by racism? Do you have any itty bitty bit of data to support any of that?
Oh, I have nothing but data to support my argument; unlike yours, which is steeped in empty partisan rhetoric.

Working backwards, we have the long standing racism exhibited by certain elements on the right, who fervently wish to get Obama out of office. Wishing Obama to fail, wishing him a 'Waterloo', calling him and his wife all type of vile and insulting names -- the racism angle is self-evident since such vitriol had never before been hurled at a president in modern times, even before he has a chance to implement many or any policy goals. Of course, despite your strawman I did not claim that this particular witch hunt was fueled by racism, but that it could be a component.

The partisan element is also self-evident. Many name-brand Republicans are on record as wishing Obama -- and Democrats -- failure. While this too may be fueled by racism, the fact that they so fervently wish failure upon him -- and the country, in order to make him fail -- is again, self evident (witness the hysterical acts of Congress since the Tea Party took the reins from the GOP).

Now we have the conspiracy component, which has already been established by a few posters in this thread -- that the gun walking deal was intended, somehow, to create support for domestic gun control/regulation/prohibition. You can read those posts as easily as I, so I presume you will not deny their existence. The second conspiracy component is Rep. Issa's attempt to construct some type of scenario where Holder personally approved the ATF program and is now trying to cover that up, which is ludicrous on its face since -- despite the protestation of one poster -- the program, under various names, has been operational since 2005/2006, long before the great Satan -- Obama -- arrived on the White House scene.

Summary: a group of racist, partisan right wing nutters doing their best to bring down a black Democratic president over a program which was initiated by white Republicans.

Facts: Someone knowingly allowed a few thousand weapons to be carried across the border, in fact insisted on making law abiding gun dealers go along with the plan.
Fact: this has been going on for quite some time.

To the best of my knowledge, no one has started this witch hunt because of someone's race.
Fact: there are enough racist statements on file that make it a distinct possibility.

Many have stated here that if this is indeed the result of Bush actions, then that is the head, or heads, that should roll.
If you can get Darrell Issa to say that, I would be very interested in reading it. Good luck.

Since the powers that be would like nothing better than to blame this on someone, anyone, other than themselves, [...]
You presume that there is any blame. The reality is that it was a poorly thought out, poorly implemented sting operation that got out of hand. While some should probably have their careers short-circuited over it, and probably will once the I.G. report is complete, it has been totally blown out of proportion for purely partisan reasons.

[...] it should follow that the documents that Holder refuses to turn over as requested legally by Congress point in only one of two directions, and that is either toward himself or up.
From what I have read, it appears that local ATF managers were the ones pushing the program. Since this will not satisfy the right wing partisan goals (again, damaging Obama), they will not be interested in that fact.

All the administration has to do to put this thing to rest is produce valid documents.
Whatever documents are produced, they will be deemed insufficient.

Surely the administration is aware that if Issa and Bush walk away with their tails tucked between their legs that Obama gains 10 points in the polls. On the other hand, if the administration is found guilty, then the Republicans have the White House. Hence, the stonewalling on the documents.
Issa will never walk away. There is no guilt.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

Charges of racism dont deflect from actual wrongdoing.
Unless sting operations were outlawed some time ago (and I would certainly support such a law), there is no wrongdoing. Apparently some ATF or DOJ guidelines were violated, but that's about it. If you have evidence of criminal wrongdoing, I'm sure that we -- and Rep. Issa -- would like to see it.

Hmmm thats interesting, and wrong. Even Holder doesnt agree with you :p Holder contradicts Bush did it too.wmv - YouTube!
Actually he doesn't (disagree). While he states he is not trying to 'equate' the two, the fact remains that the 2006 program also allowed U.S. guns to 'walk' into Mexico.

We dont have to prove it in a court of law, [...]
Of course not -- you are only concerned with the court of public opinion, which is probably -- more often than not -- wrong. Which is a perfect match ;)

Using your logic I could argue that a drug dealer is innocent because someone else will deal eventually anyway.
No. Using my logic, you could argue that the gov't is innocent in giving drugs to a 'professional, full time' drug dealer (in a sting operation), because he would have obtained the drugs elsewhere.

I dont think Brian Terry's parents would buy that defense either.
Unfortunately his parents have been co-opted by political vultures that hope to profit from his death. According to my research they can't even ID the bullet that killed him, so they don't know if it came from a 'walked' gun or not.
 
Last edited:
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

Unless sting operations were outlawed some time ago (and I would certainly support such a law), there is no wrongdoing. Apparently some ATF or DOJ guidelines were violated, but that's about it. If you have evidence of criminal wrongdoing, I'm sure that we -- and Rep. Issa -- would like to see it.


Actually he doesn't (disagree). While he states he is not trying to 'equate' the two, the fact remains that the 2006 program also allowed U.S. guns to 'walk' into Mexico.


Of course not -- you are only concerned with the court of public opinion, which is probably -- more often than not -- wrong. Which is a perfect match ;)

I can only handle this much stupid in small bits because its so wrong headed its touch to sort out.

The differences between Wide Reciever and Fast and Furious are as follows: Wide Reciever was done with full cooperation and support of the Mexican government and its scope was very limited and interdiction of the arms was capable in all aspects of the operation. Meaning they could go after the guns at every step due to Mexican government cooperation and support. Fast & Furious did neither of these and the distribution was both larger and less controlled. Tracking of the guns was lost after 1 or 2 steps of the process. While Holder did not try to equate the two because to do so is rediculous, you did--Holder does not share your viewpoint. Meaning ---they are not equateable. BDS, pure and simple.

Second, thanks for the out of context quote linked into a strawman: Its being investigated in a congressionary oversight committee that is fully empowered to do exactly what its doing. The court of public opinon both has nothing to do with it and I never suggested such.

No. Using my logic, you could argue that the gov't is innocent in giving drugs to a 'professional, full time' drug dealer (in a sting operation), because he would have obtained the drugs elsewhere.

Which is still guilty because they, in fact, did allow people that would never have obtained the guns easier means to do so and in greater numbers than they would have accomplished. Which is the crux of the problem.

Unfortunately his parents have been co-opted by political vultures that hope to profit from his death. According to my research they can't even ID the bullet that killed him, so they don't know if it came from a 'walked' gun or not.

Its not quite that simple. The two guns recovered at the scene have not been proven to have killed Terry, they also have not been ruled out and a third gun remains a mystery. So the people that DID kill him were armed with those weapons, which likely contributed to his death.
Blog: Issa to FBI's Mueller: 'Agent Terry's Family and the American Public Deserve to Know'
Fast and Furious: FBI report at odds with ATF claim on weapons - Los Angeles Times
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politi... Mueller-FBI - Ballistics Report due 11-2.pdf

Finally the interviews of the Terry family and their feelings towards Holder :
Family Of Murdered Border Agent Breaks Silence, Lashes Out At Holder | Fox News
Whether you feel they have been co-opted or not, they are justifiably angry with how DOJ and ATF are making every attempt to hide and stonewall the congressional investigation into the matter.

Lastly, the racial thing? If the guy in the DOJ were white and the President in the matter were white, I think things would be moving faster in this ivestigation, not slower.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

Funny, the only people that want to disarm the entire American population, are the same that are ignoring this.

Wouldn't go so far as to say ignoring. Due process is fine. If they find something, fine. And BTW, I have no emotional attachment or hate of guns. Responsible people having weapons is fine with me.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

Does anyone seriously not just bust out in laughter when this clown testifies? I mean really now....


j-mac

Glad to hear it Eric, it should make it that much easier to prosecute the Criminally Negligent.

Criminal negligence

Negligence shows the least level of culpability, intention being the most serious and recklessness of intermediate seriousness, overlapping with gross negligence. The distinction between recklessness and criminal negligence lies in the presence or absence of foresight as to the prohibited consequences. Recklessness is usually described as a 'malfeasance' where the defendant knowingly exposes another to the risk of injury. The fault lies in being willing to run the risk. But criminal negligence is a 'misfeasance or 'nonfeasance' (see omission), where the fault lies in the failure to foresee and so allow otherwise avoidable dangers to manifest. In some cases this failure can rise to the level of willful blindness where the individual intentionally avoids adverting to the reality of a situation.

Criminal negligence becomes "gross" when the failure to foresee involves a "wanton disregard for human life"

Criminal negligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Criminally negligent manslaughter

Criminally negligent manslaughter is variously referred to as criminally negligent homicide in the United States, gross negligence manslaughter in England and Wales. In Scotland and some Commonwealth of Nations jurisdictions the offense of culpable homicide might apply.

It occurs where death results from serious negligence, or, in some jurisdictions, serious recklessness. A high degree of negligence is required to warrant criminal liability. A related concept is that of willful blindness, which is where a defendant intentionally puts himself in a position where he will be unaware of facts which would render him liable.

Criminally negligent manslaughter occurs where there is an omission to act when there is a duty to do so, or a failure to perform a duty owed, which leads to a death. The existence of the duty is essential because the law does not impose criminal liability for a failure to act unless a specific duty is owed to the victim.

Manslaughter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Law Enforcement officials have a duty to protect life. Purposefully allowing assault rifles to pass into the hands of known murderous cartels not only violated their duty to protect life, but will likely be found to cross the line into "wanton disregard for human life" territory.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

Oh, I have nothing but data to support my argument; unlike yours, which is steeped in empty partisan rhetoric.

Working backwards, we have the long standing racism exhibited by certain elements on the right, who fervently wish to get Obama out of office. Wishing Obama to fail, wishing him a 'Waterloo', calling him and his wife all type of vile and insulting names -- the racism angle is self-evident since such vitriol had never before been hurled at a president in modern times, even before he has a chance to implement many or any policy goals. Of course, despite your strawman I did not claim that this particular witch hunt was fueled by racism, but that it could be a component.

The partisan element is also self-evident. Many name-brand Republicans are on record as wishing Obama -- and Democrats -- failure. While this too may be fueled by racism, the fact that they so fervently wish failure upon him -- and the country, in order to make him fail -- is again, self evident (witness the hysterical acts of Congress since the Tea Party took the reins from the GOP).

Now we have the conspiracy component, which has already been established by a few posters in this thread -- that the gun walking deal was intended, somehow, to create support for domestic gun control/regulation/prohibition. You can read those posts as easily as I, so I presume you will not deny their existence. The second conspiracy component is Rep. Issa's attempt to construct some type of scenario where Holder personally approved the ATF program and is now trying to cover that up, which is ludicrous on its face since -- despite the protestation of one poster -- the program, under various names, has been operational since 2005/2006, long before the great Satan -- Obama -- arrived on the White House scene.

Summary: a group of racist, partisan right wing nutters doing their best to bring down a black Democratic president over a program which was initiated by white Republicans.


Fact: this has been going on for quite some time.


Fact: there are enough racist statements on file that make it a distinct possibility.


If you can get Darrell Issa to say that, I would be very interested in reading it. Good luck.


You presume that there is any blame. The reality is that it was a poorly thought out, poorly implemented sting operation that got out of hand. While some should probably have their careers short-circuited over it, and probably will once the I.G. report is complete, it has been totally blown out of proportion for purely partisan reasons.


From what I have read, it appears that local ATF managers were the ones pushing the program. Since this will not satisfy the right wing partisan goals (again, damaging Obama), they will not be interested in that fact.


Whatever documents are produced, they will be deemed insufficient.


Issa will never walk away. There is no guilt.

Which part of this is itty bitty data?
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

I can only handle this much stupid in small bits because its so wrong headed its touch to sort out.

The differences between Wide Reciever and Fast and Furious are as follows: [...]
Your posts indicate the opposite.

I don't care what the differences are... both programs walked guns into Mexico, which is what the right is braying about. Even if all the Fast and Furious guns had been tracked, and had permission of the Mexican gov't, the right would still be trying to string Holder up because -- guns were walked into Mexico (and their 2nd Amendment conspiracy theory would still be in use). Therefore your distinction is simply a red herring.

Second, thanks for the out of context quote linked into a strawman: Its being investigated in a congressionary oversight committee that is fully empowered to do exactly what its doing.
It is being investigated by a right wingnut (Rep. Issa).

The court of public opinon both has nothing to do with it and I never suggested such.
That is the only court that Rep. Issa is concerned with. This is proven by his right wingnuttery commentary, such as "As facts continue to emerge about a botched gun investigation of Mexican cartels, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has given the American people reason to doubt his ability to effectively lead the Department of Justice."[sup][1][/sup], and such as "a U.S. Border Patrol agent was killed by a weapon linked to the botched operation,"[sup][1][/sup] (a bald faced lie, as you have already concurred). Of course, I'm sure he'd be kicking his heels in glee if the administration did something dumb, like implicated themself in a coverup.

Whether you feel they have been co-opted or not, they are justifiably angry with how DOJ and ATF are making every attempt to hide and stonewall the congressional investigation into the matter.
You cannot produce evidence of a crime that has not been committed. Anger is also not evidence... anger that an agent got killed, nor anger that a black man is in the White House.


___________________________________________________________
1. http://issues.oversight.house.gov/fastandfurious/
 
Last edited:
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

I don't care what the differences are... both programs walked guns into Mexico, which is what the right is braying about. Even if all the Fast and Furious guns had been tracked, and had permission of the Mexican gov't, the right would still be trying to string Holder up because -- guns were walked into Mexico (and their 2nd Amendment conspiracy theory would still be in use). Therefore your distinction is simply a red herring.

You should care about the distinctions because they're significant, real, and important.

And you don't get to call facts in this comparison/contrast a "red herring"--a fallacious emotional diversion, in other words--just because you have your own partisan axe to grind.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

[1] You should care about the distinctions because they're significant, real, and important.

[2] And you don't get to call facts in this comparison/contrast a "red herring"--a fallacious emotional diversion, in other words--just because you have your own partisan axe to grind.
1. They are only important to hypocrites (i.e., those who are trying to punish the Obama administration for a program that was germinated under the Bush administration).

2. May I suggest remedial logic instruction? I count at least three errors in same in that one sentence.
 
Last edited:
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

Your posts indicate the opposite.

I don't care what the differences are... both programs walked guns into Mexico, which is what the right is braying about. Even if all the Fast and Furious guns had been tracked, and had permission of the Mexican gov't, the right would still be trying to string Holder up because -- guns were walked into Mexico (and their 2nd Amendment conspiracy theory would still be in use). Therefore your distinction is simply a red herring.

The ways in which they are different is exactly why it is pertinent. WIde Reciever and Gunwalker were different programs with different intermediaries and different interdiction capabilities. Holder can see that, why cant you?


It is being investigated by a right wingnut (Rep. Issa).
Nice ad hom. Thats your argument? Dismissed.




That is the only court that Rep. Issa is concerned with. This is proven by his right wingnuttery commentary, such as "As facts continue to emerge about a botched gun investigation of Mexican cartels, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has given the American people reason to doubt his ability to effectively lead the Department of Justice."[SUP][1][/SUP], and such as "a U.S. Border Patrol agent was killed by a weapon linked to the botched operation,"[SUP][1][/SUP] (a bald faced lie, as you have already concurred). Of course, I'm sure he'd be kicking his heels in glee if the administration did something dumb, like implicated themself in a coverup.

Actually the only thing I said was that the weapons have not been proven to be the weapons that shot Terry, but they also have not been ruled out. Can you tell the difference between the two?


You cannot produce evidence of a crime that has not been committed. Anger is also not evidence... anger that an agent got killed, nor anger that a black man is in the White House.
There is all kinds of evidence of a crime committed, but because it was undertaken as a law enforcement activity its hard to prove when its prosecutable. Secondly your blanket accusation of racism towards Terry's parents is pretty disgusting.


___________________________________________________________
1. Fast and Furious Investigation

1. They are only important to hypocrites (i.e., those who are trying to punish the Obama administration for a program that was germinated under the Bush administration).

2. May I suggest remedial logic instruction? I count at least three errors in same in that one sentence.

I cant tell whether this is trolling, a personal attack or a red herring, it has elements of all three.

Soooo, we are back to your defenses of this being BOOOOOOSSSSHHHHH, the Race Card(tm), Crime? What Crime? and its Republicans so it don't matter.

Post when you have an actual argument, some of us actually want to know what our government is doing.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

[...] some of us actually want to know what our government is doing.
I doubt it. However, they are spying on you (as we 'speak'), and they are turning you into economic slaves (mostly at the direction of Wall Street). Now you know.

That should give you something useful to look in to... why not petition Mr. Issa to get right on that? Instead of wasting huge amounts of money and distressing number of lives on a silly war on drugs. . . . legalize 'em, tax 'em, what's your next insurmountable problem? :peace
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

I doubt it. However, they are spying on you (as we 'speak'), and they are turning you into economic slaves (mostly at the direction of Wall Street). Now you know.

That should give you something useful to look in to... why not petition Mr. Issa to get right on that? Instead of wasting huge amounts of money and distressing number of lives on a silly war on drugs. . . . legalize 'em, tax 'em, what's your next insurmountable problem? :peace

Just say no. Really.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

Glad to hear it Eric, it should make it that much easier to prosecute the Criminally Negligent.





Law Enforcement officials have a duty to protect life. Purposefully allowing assault rifles to pass into the hands of known murderous cartels not only violated their duty to protect life, but will likely be found to cross the line into "wanton disregard for human life" territory.

Im not sure what this is. But ill leave it here and read it more later.

Gunwalker: Justice Dept. Violated U.S. Laws Beyond Those Being Investigated | Kajunman's Blog

It is not necessary that an individual or governmental entity be shown to have “knowingly” violated any of these programs:

I know, because I was the principal drafter of some of the legislation.
by
James K. Stinebower

Bio

December 5, 2011 – 12:00 am
As we continue to watch the general uproar over the Operation Fast and Furious program, and specifically what Attorney General Holder knew and when he knew it, it needs to be noted that perjury is not the only apparent violation of law to have occurred.

I refer to the apparent violation of at least one (probably two) major U.S. laws by the Holder Justice Department. A few years ago, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, the follow-on to the Trading with the Enemy Act) was expanded in order to criminalize any transactions between U.S. entities — to include departments and agencies of the U.S. government — and all foreign drug cartels.

I am familiar with these prohibitive statues because several years ago, while serving as the senior drug analyst for the Senate Intelligence Committee, I was tasked to initiate and became the principal drafter of legislation which became known as the Kingpin Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 1901-08). The Kingpin Act is an extension of the highly successful IEEPA sanctioning program specifically targeting Colombian drug cartels. It expands sanctions authority against various drug cartel operations worldwide — including Mexico — which have been determined by the president to be threats to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.

A violation of any of the IEEPA sanctioning programs or the Kingpin Act carries stiff penalties, both criminal and civil, and potentially totaling decades in prison and tens of millions of dollars in fines. It is not necessary that an individual or governmental entity be shown to have “knowingly” violated any of these programs: it is illegal for any U.S. entity or individual to aid, abet, or materially assist — or in the case of Operation Fast and Furious, to facilitate others to aid, abet, or materially assist — designated drug traffickers. There are no exceptions within IEEPA programs for unlicensed U.S. law enforcement or intelligence agency operations.

Based on the July 5, 2010, memo to Eric Holder, it would appear that Fast and Furious facilitated the delivery of weapons to — at a minimum — the Sinaloa cartel in Mexico. The U.S. Department of the Treasury, which administers both the IEEPA and Kingpin Act programs, has designated numerous members of the Sinaloa cartel under both programs. IEEPA prohibitions apply to the U.S. government as well as to individuals, and as stated there are no exceptions within IEEPA programs for unlicensed U.S. law enforcement or intelligence agency operations.

There is a provision in the Kingpin Act for “authorized” law enforcement and intelligence activities, however the only procedure by which an Operation Fast and Furious program could have been “authorized” under the Kingpin Act was by the U.S. attorney general requesting a waiver (known within the Treasury Department as a Specific License), prior to any such operation being undertaken. To illustrate and emphasize this point: even during the run-up to war in Iraq, the U.S. secretary of Defense had to obtain waivers (specific licenses) from the Treasury Department to allow U.S. Special Forces and their necessary equipment (to include weapons, intelligence gathering, and targeting gear) to go into Iraq, as Iraq at the time was under separate IEEPA sanctions.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

I doubt it. However, they are spying on you (as we 'speak'), and they are turning you into economic slaves (mostly at the direction of Wall Street). Now you know.

That should give you something useful to look in to... why not petition Mr. Issa to get right on that? Instead of wasting huge amounts of money and distressing number of lives on a silly war on drugs. . . . legalize 'em, tax 'em, what's your next insurmountable problem? :peace

I see, so it is all the fault of capitalism eh?

You commies are so funny....And predictable.


j-mac
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

I doubt it. However, they are spying on you (as we 'speak'), and they are turning you into economic slaves (mostly at the direction of Wall Street). Now you know.

That should give you something useful to look in to... why not petition Mr. Issa to get right on that? Instead of wasting huge amounts of money and distressing number of lives on a silly war on drugs. . . . legalize 'em, tax 'em, what's your next insurmountable problem? :peace

I am utterly convinced that you're shacked up somewhere in a tent at one of those OWS location. Do you actually believe these things you're saying?
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

I doubt it. However, they are spying on you (as we 'speak'), and they are turning you into economic slaves (mostly at the direction of Wall Street). Now you know.

That should give you something useful to look in to... why not petition Mr. Issa to get right on that? Instead of wasting huge amounts of money and distressing number of lives on a silly war on drugs. . . . legalize 'em, tax 'em, what's your next insurmountable problem? :peace
I see, so it is all the fault of capitalism eh?

You commies are so funny....And predictable.
Not as funny as this particular application of your analytical skills... for if you want to find fault, my comment clearly indicates
a) that the fault lies with excessive government intervention into the lives of its citizens (to wit: outlawing drugs), and
b) the solution is to remove the prohibition against drugs, allow capitalism (instead of criminalism) to flourish and tax it accordingly.
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

You should try to avoid kook blogs if you want the truth.

So where they trading with friends or enemies of the USA/Mexico?
 
Re: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the opera

So where they trading with friends or enemies of the USA/Mexico?

If your talking about "Gunrunner" they were dealing with enemies. How can anyone be friends with murderous gangs?
 
Back
Top Bottom