• 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!

House holds holder in contempt [W:140

Shady is putting it lightly in my view. No one investigating this believed that Obama had anything to do with it on a level that suggests that Obama was "in the loop" per se. But now? EP has everything to do with the President being in the loop, so that is another lie that Holder told over, and over.

j-mac

The president does not have to be in the loop for the privelege to apply. Just ask George Bush.
 
They spent tax payer dollars to do a little political theater kabuki for the benefit of the far-right base?

How do you see that as a positive?

I would like to see them do what they're paid to do and not put on meaningless performances.

Later in the summer, Teatards mean to waste more of your money pretending to 'repeal' ACA.


You mean like Conyers holding his little show in the senate office broom closet during the Bush years? Give me a break.
 
It is a racial matter.

Holder and the Obama administration clearly have no respect for the lives of those living south of the border.

Right, trying to stop the flow of guns to the cartels, who are responsible for 50,000 Mexican deaths, is a clear sign of contempt for life south of the border.

Or perhaps the people who are really showing contempt for life are the people who are using those who are trying to stop the gun smugglers as political pawns? :roll:
 
Last edited:
Right, trying to stop the flow of guns to the cartels, who are responsible for 50,000 Mexican deaths, is a clear sign of contempt for life south of the border.

Or perhaps the people who are really showing contempt for life are the people who are using those who are trying to stop it as political pawns? :roll:


Are you kidding here? They didn't try to stop anything, they let them go!
 
Wrong. As usual.

Tell it to the Supreme Court, Bubba. And wake up and realize that there is a presidential communications privelege and a deliberative process privelege and the both fall under the rubric of executive privelege. The former is exclusive to Presidential communications and the latter is not.
 
Are you kidding here? They didn't try to stop anything, they let them go!

The only agents who intentionally let guns go were the so-called whisleblowers. :roll:
 
The only agents who intentionally let guns go were the so-called whisleblowers. :roll:

If the Mexican government was never told that the weapons were allowed to illegally cross the border, who was going to follow them?
 
actually glad they did this
now what?
more political games that will end in nothing more than another exorbitant waste of taxpayer dollars


and holder brought much of this on himself when he initially misled the congress
so, let issa and his gang chase holder while he enjoys the protection of executive privilege
it's not like they are going to spend their time actually doing something for the country's benefit
 
The only agents who intentionally let guns go were the so-called whisleblowers. :roll:

So you've gotten to read the 80,000 documents !

Your above is a crock. Guns walked all over. The ATF doesn't even know how many with any accuracy. They couldn't stop them once they opened the floodgates. Clearly some lower level folks wanted to stop it, but apparently the Prosecuters, for reasons good or bad, said they could not or would not bring the cases. The ATF field agents were used by folks above them. All the way up to Holder.

The agents had some air-tight cases. Slam dunks. And higher ups, especially in Justice, said "Nope". Rebut that.

So more guns walked than ever before. At least 5 times more. And unlike with Bush when they stopped once it was seen as a bad plan, this spigot was left wide open until almost two months after Terry was killed and the crap hit the fan.
 
Last edited:
They spent tax payer dollars to do a little political theater kabuki for the benefit of the far-right base?

How do you see that as a positive?

I would like to see them do what they're paid to do and not put on meaningless performances.

Later in the summer, Teatards mean to waste more of your money pretending to 'repeal' ACA.
Teatards, hmm, thats nice. Anyway, how is it wasting my money when they are supporting, promoting, and legislating what I believe in? I believe AG Holder should have been held in contempt. What citizen in this country can do what he did with no repercussion? The Congress says hand it over, you do it. No matter what party, race, etc you are.
 
The civil contempt also passed with 21 Dems voting in favor.

Now goes to a court, judge orders documents released or an explanation, in detail for each document as to why it falls under E.P..
 
You mean Bush and his AG, right?


The program was started under them.

Inaccurate. Wide Receiver was started under President Bush and discontinued under President Bush due to the realization that it didn't work. Fast and Furious is a new program that was started during this adminstration.
 
The president does not have to be in the loop for the privelege to apply. Just ask George Bush.

I think what he means is that President Obama has now brought himself into question becuase there is only two reasons I can think of that he would do this A) His name is involved (I don't believe that personally) B) He is playing politics and interfering with a Congressional investigation. President Obama rails against the Congress about "getting nothing done" and then, when they are getting something done, he shoots it down because he doesn't like it.
 
If the Mexican government was never told that the weapons were allowed to illegally cross the border, who was going to follow them?

The weapons weren't allowed to illegally cross the border. Thanks to Arizona's insanely lax gun laws, ATF had no legal grounds to interdict them.
 
The weapons weren't allowed to illegally cross the border. Thanks to Arizona's insanely lax gun laws, ATF had no legal grounds to interdict them.

Gun laws merely regulate the individuals trying to legally own them. Criminals that want guns will get them no matter how many or how little gun laws there are.
 
I think what he means is that President Obama has now brought himself into question becuase there is only two reasons I can think of that he would do this A) His name is involved (I don't believe that personally) B) He is playing politics and interfering with a Congressional investigation. President Obama rails against the Congress about "getting nothing done" and then, when they are getting something done, he shoots it down because he doesn't like it.

C) it's his constitutional responsibility to safeguard the independence of the executive branch from legislative branch overreaching.
 
The 17 Dems that voted with Republicans must be racist crackers. :roll:
 
The weapons weren't allowed to illegally cross the border. Thanks to Arizona's insanely lax gun laws, ATF had no legal grounds to interdict them.

CBS, among others, reported months ago that ATF agents testified that they were ordered by their superiors to allow the weapons to cross. This was a federal plan, Arizona laws did not apply. The Mexican government was and still is outraged that the weapons were allowed to cross without their knowledge and cooperation. Prior to the implementation of operation Wide Receiver during the Bush administration the Mexican government's cooperation was enlisted as their agents were the ones who followed the weapons to the cartels. US agents were not allowed to cross the border to pursue. The Obama administration never coordinated with the Mexicans. US agents are not allowed to violate Mexican soverignity so how were they ever going to follow the weapons? This is one of many unanswered questions.
***********************************************************************************************************

The Office of Mexico's Attorney General has issued strong, new comments in response to ATF Gunwalking allegations exposed in an ongoing CBS News investigation.


As we have reported, agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms say over the course of a year and a half, superiors ordered them to allow thousands of weapons to cross into Mexico as part of a failed plan to gain intelligence and take down a major drug cartel.


Over the weekend, the Mexican attorney general stated: "The controlled trafficking of weapons is not authorized under the Mexican national legislation. An operation that would contemplate this would not have been acceptable to the Mexican government, and it will never be under any circumstance." The Mexican Attorney General also stated that it's conducting its own investigation to identify "the crimes that could have been carried out on Mexican territory."
CBS News Investigates - Page 9 - CBS News
 
In a vote like this, where the House Minority Leadership played the race card and flung all the bull**** they could to derail it, even 5 Democrats voting in favor of the Resolution would have been a lot.

17 Democrats Joining the Republicans is a Tsunami

17 who put honor over party.

The top cop is a crook.

Provide the documents.

Those Democrats should be re-elected!
 
C) it's his constitutional responsibility to safeguard the independence of the executive branch from legislative branch overreaching.

Bull****. The President is not empowered to draw that line where he or she thinks it is to be drawn. Further, the HOuse DOES have a Constitutional duty to over-sight.

As previously defined by the Courts, EP is to be very specific and finite. Not this crap nonsense you have submitted as fact.
 
Gun laws merely regulate the individuals trying to legally own them. Criminals that want guns will get them no matter how many or how little gun laws there are.

Thanks for the bumper sticker. But if Arizona had stricter gun laws -- like not allowing unlimited same-day purchases, the ATF would at least have a fighting chance.
 
Bull****. The President is not empowered to draw that line where he or she thinks it is to be drawn. Further, the HOuse DOES have a Constitutional duty to over-sight.

As previously defined by the Courts, EP is to be very specific and finite. Not this crap nonsense you have submitted as fact.

Of course it's the presidents prerogative to invoke EP, just as it's Congress' to try to overreach. Ultimately they either work it out or the courts decide.
 
Seems to be more of them not liking his crackdown on voter suppression laws than anything else :shrug:

It only too until post 4 to hear one of todays left wing talking heads talking points thrown out. That was quick.
 
Of course it's the presidents prerogative to invoke EP,

When it has to do with him.... that is the precedent, EP is for the president and stuff he is involved in. Are you suggesting that by him using it WRT FF, he has shown he DID know about the whole thing? (aka, another lie to the public from him)
 
Back
Top Bottom