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

teamosil · Jun 20, 2012

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

Born Free said:
There is a cover up of wrong doing, otherwise why not hand over the documents?

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.

Karl · Jun 20, 2012

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

Born Free said:
That is exactly what they are trying figure out. One of our own was murdered by guns that our government supplied.

Not in the real world, where the bullet was too damaged to determine that; I understand some have a theory based upon semantics and dueling newspaper articles (was that you in another thread?). However, even if it were true, the right wing argument is based upon the laughable premise that if F and F had never happened, the thugs that Agent Terry stumbled across would have been unarmed. Please :roll:

Next, the right wing argument depends on ignoring similar gunwalking activity that occurred under the Bush administration, to the point -- if I have been correctly informed -- that they refuse to even call any Bush-administration witnesses to get to the bottom of how all this gunwalking began and how it progressed to the point where it was terminated under the Obama administration. So, in this race to find out who knew what and when (while no crime has been alleged, making those questions curious), the race does not start with the origins of the program, but with the origin of the Obama administration. Odd how that happened, eh?

Born Free said:
There is no answers to who, or why this happened, unless of course you can tell us. Please do.

Certainly. Agent Terry was killed by armed thugs. That is the who. Because he stumbled upon them and they were up to no good. As I read it, he also fired first (albeit with non-lethal ammo; a bad policy IMHO). That is the why.

Anything else I can help out with?

___________________________________________________________________________
Today's tag line: Guns don't kill people, People kill people. Hat tip to the NRA :mrgreen:

Karl · Jun 20, 2012

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

Ockham said:
You need to read up on Contempt of Congress. According to Wiki: [...]

I asked for an F and F crime. Since you can't come up with one, you have to substitute something else.... a manufactured crime. You see, if the whole F and F investigation is a partisan sham (no basis in law), then the only crime Issa can come up with is refusal to submit to unreasonable demands (unreasonable subpoenas, as the initial ones have already proven to be).

So I again ask -- what Holder crime prompted the F and F investigation?

ksu_aviator · Jun 20, 2012

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

Karl said:
Not in the real world, where the bullet was too damaged to determine that; I understand some have a theory based upon semantics and dueling newspaper articles (was that you in another thread?). However, even if it were true, the right wing argument is based upon the laughable premise that if F and F had never happened, the thugs that Agent Terry stumbled across would have been unarmed. Please :roll:

That straw-man has no straw. The argument isn't that the man would have been unarmed...the argument is that the man may not have been as well armed. However, it is a certainty that there would have been fewer fire arms in the cartel's hands had the JD not sold them the weapons. That is an undeniable fact.

Next, the right wing argument depends on ignoring similar gunwalking activity that occurred under the Bush administration, to the point -- if I have been correctly informed -- that they refuse to even call any Bush-administration witnesses to get to the bottom of how all this gunwalking began and how it progressed to the point where it was terminated under the Obama administration. So, in this race to find out who knew what and when (while no crime has been alleged, making those questions curious), the race does not start with the origins of the program, but with the origin of the Obama administration. Odd how that happened, eh?

You are misinformed. The gun walking activity in the Bush administration ended with arrests. There is a reason that all of the agents involved are outraged, they were expecting a raid and confiscation of the weapons before the bad guys left and it did not come. They were caught with their pants down, and that was a direct result of the Obama administration.

This administration is going to face calls for impeachment. Whether or not that comes may not matter. I don't see a President regaining office when the majority of Americans will want to see him impeached for what amounts to covering up a law enforcement error. And that is the real outrage...had the Obama administration been up front about the whole deal when it first happened, there would have been outrage that would have died out years ago. Now, it will hurt his chances for reelection. No doubt.

Ockham · Jun 20, 2012

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

Karl said:
I asked for an F and F crime. Since you can't come up with one, you have to substitute something else.... a manufactured crime.

So manufactured that the Congressional Committee voted Holder in contempt of Congress. Good to know 400 murders of Mexican citizens doesn't matter to you or Terry's murder here in the U.S.

Karl said:
You see, if the whole F and F investigation is a partisan sham (no basis in law), then the only crime Issa can come up with is refusal to submit to unreasonable demands (unreasonable subpoenas, as the initial ones have already proven to be).

It's difficult to find the facts when the person who's been subpoenaed doesn't cooperate. That's what happens in a court of law too you see... if you refuse a subpoena you're held in contempt. No sham about it.

Karl said:
So I again ask -- what Holder crime prompted the F and F investigation?

Holders crime right now is obstruction of an investigation of a possible crime - ie., Contempt of Congress.

nota bene · Jun 20, 2012

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

teamosil said:
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

Μολὼν λαβέ · Jun 20, 2012

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

rocket88 said:
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.

Μολὼν λαβέ · Jun 20, 2012

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

Karl said:
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.

Karl · Jun 20, 2012

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

Ockham said:
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).

Ockham said:
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).

Ockham said:
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.

teamosil · Jun 20, 2012

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

nota bene said:
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.

donsutherland1 · Jun 20, 2012

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.

teamosil · Jun 20, 2012

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

donsutherland1 said:
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.

donsutherland1 said:
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.

Ockham · Jun 20, 2012

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

Karl said:
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.

Karl said:
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.

Karl said:
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.

Karl said:
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.

Karl said:
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.

donsutherland1 · Jun 20, 2012

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

teamosil said:
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]

mtlhdtodd · Jun 20, 2012

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

Μολὼν λαβέ;1060611684 said:
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.

Karl · Jun 20, 2012

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

Ockham said:
[...] 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. [...] If Holder came to him 14 months ago and claimed responsibility, took action, cleaned house - it'd be over. [...]

:lamo . . . . . . . .

11/8/10 5:13 PM EST -- Rep. Darrell Issa is already eyeing a massive expansion of oversight for next year, including hundreds of hearings; creating new subcommittees; and launching fresh investigations into the bank bailout, the stimulus and, potentially, health care reform.

Issa told POLITICO in an interview that he wants each of his seven subcommittees to hold “one or two hearings each week.”

“I want seven hearings a week, times 40 weeks,” Issa said.

Read more: Darrell Issa plans hundreds of hearings - Jake Sherman and Richard E. Cohen - POLITICO.com

rocket88 · Jun 20, 2012

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

Μολὼν λαβέ;1060611672 said:
And they should if he/she lies to and/or stonewalls a congressional investigation.

Which happened in 2007, when Dems held Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten in contempt of Congress for stonewalling their investigations of politically motivated firings in the DoJ.

And when the full House voted on the two contempt votes in 2008, then-Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) led a Republican protest by walking off the House floor during the vote, and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) called the investigation at issue, regarding the firing of seven U.S. attorneys, a “witch hunt.”

During Bush Era, Parties Were Reversed on Contempt : Roll Call

By the way, neither Miers or Bolten was actually prosecuted, which is why it's unlikely Holder will be.

Karl · Jun 21, 2012

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

Fox and Friends just reported (falsely) that Agent Terry was "gunned down by some of those Fast and Furious weapons".

Only a few minutes after falsely reporting that Holder was held in contempt (the committee recommended a contempt citation).

The IV drip of right wing propaganda continues . . . . (or maybe the Fox personalities are just stupid :shrug: )

hazlnut · Jun 21, 2012

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

ReverendHellh0und said:
[/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

Bigger article coming as this just happened.

i find it amazing how this administration is avoiding the government process to investigate the fast and furious debacle. Given this move, I am curious as to the opinions of others on this matter.

What's to investigate? We know what happened. They botched an investigation and an agent lost his life. It's not like the DOJ invaded a country based on a lie.

This is how the GOP avoids creating jobs and continues to deliberately tank the country.

Born Free · Jun 21, 2012

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

teamosil said:
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.

The war against the cartel. What war? Who has declared war? Has this war been sanctioned by congress? The cartel is a bunch of thugs. And what do we do, we send then guns, we arm the cartel that's how much we are at war with the cartel. We are at war, yeah right, and while we're at war we send them guns. Now tell me again who we're at war with.

The facts are that our stupid government directed under Obama, gave guns to the cartel, and never followed one gun to see in who's hands they ended up in. Except they found one at the scene of one of our agents murdered. And you could care less who authorized this stupidity, you could care less if that person is fired, you could care less if Holder has lied to congress etc etc. In fact you want their stupidly to go unchallenged, as though nothing happened and no one got killed. That's right you have such blind faith in our government that you want to completely ignore stupidity, incompetence, and coverups for that stupidity and incompetence. Just let the dumb bastards do what they want.

Last, you talk about releasing sensitive documents, yet this administration releases (leaks) on every sensitive thing they do. Have you not heard

hazlnut · Jun 21, 2012

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

Karl said:
Fox and Friends just reported (falsely) that Agent Terry was "gunned down by some of those Fast and Furious weapons".

Only a few minutes after falsely reporting that Holder was held in contempt (the committee recommended a contempt citation).

The IV drip of right wing propaganda continues . . . . (or maybe the Fox personalities are just stupid :shrug: )

Oh, Fox is gonna open the Kool Aide flood gates on this one. Plenty of red juice for the far-right base. And it's so easy for them when the face of 'contempt' is black.

Grant · Jun 21, 2012

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

Karl said:
Ah. I know that is lie. What else do you know that is false?

You know it is a lie? How do you know that?

We do know that two of the weapons found at the shooting site were from F 'n' F. Where is the weapon which killed the US border guard and who fired the shot?

Erod · Jun 21, 2012

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

Isn't it funny how liberals celebrate Watergate at every turn, yet this is so vastly more serious than Watergate?

Most liberals don't even know what Watergate was about. They think it was some grand national-security threat or organized crime spree.

Grant · Jun 21, 2012

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

rocket88 said:
Which happened in 2007, when Dems held Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten in contempt of Congress for stonewalling their investigations of politically motivated firings in the DoJ.

The democrats wanted an investigation into "politically motivated firings"??

This is a natural occurrence in politics yet the Dems wasted taxpayers time and money and got their base all excited by "politically motivated firings"!

Now lives have been lost, there is an obvious coverup now reaching to the highest levels, but the Leftists get more excited about "politically motivated firtings.

Hard to believe.

By the way, neither Miers or Bolten was actually prosecuted, which is why it's unlikely Holder will be.

They weren't prosecuted for firing someone? That's hard to believe as well.

Grant · Jun 21, 2012

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

Karl said:
Fox and Friends just reported (falsely) that Agent Terry was "gunned down by some of those Fast and Furious weapons".

Only a few minutes after falsely reporting that Holder was held in contempt (the committee recommended a contempt citation).

The IV drip of right wing propaganda continues . . . . (or maybe the Fox personalities are just stupid :shrug: )

Fast and Furious: Eric Holder held in contempt - The Washington Post

Eric Holder Held In Comtempt By House Committee | Breaking News for Black America

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

teamosil

Karl

Karl

ksu_aviator

Democrats are the fascists

Ockham

Noblesse oblige

nota bene

Μολὼν λαβέ

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Μολὼν λαβέ

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Karl

teamosil

donsutherland1

teamosil

Ockham

Noblesse oblige

donsutherland1

mtlhdtodd

Karl

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist

Karl

hazlnut

Born Free

hazlnut

Grant

Erod

Grant

Grant