250Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI have only one question for this whole charade.
Will justice be served, or will it be pushed by the wayside?
Thats the bottom line.
This is a discussion on Rep. Issa Pushing Contempt Order Against Eric Holder within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I have only one question for this whole charade. Will justice be served, or will it be pushed by the wayside? Thats the bottom line....
I have only one question for this whole charade.
Will justice be served, or will it be pushed by the wayside?
Thats the bottom line.
Wow, you sure know how to mix all the controversial issues into one post; takes talent.Originally Posted by Spirit51
There is a need to get to the bottom of F&F; and that is why there are Inspector's General; that is why there
are whistleblower laws and an Office of Special Counsel. Congress should let these people whose job it is
to figure out what occurred, do their jobs. Instead, they have jumped to a conclusion, some as quite a few
here, are calling high officials liars, and not one wit of this theater of the absurd is going to move toward a resolution
of the core questions-- how did it happen and who should be held responsible.
From a Washington Times article of March 4 2012 we find this: "Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. asked the inspector general’s office at the Justice Department in February 2011 to investigate the operation" Grassley: Where's report on 'Fast and Furious'? - Washington Times
And further in the same story we find: "Jay Lerner, spokesman for the inspector general’s office, said “the review is ongoing,” but declined to elaborate."
Then if you read further, you find that a big part of the complaint by Grassley is that the revue by the IG
has not been completed, and if you read even further what comes clear is that there is a dispute over the fact
that the investigation is headed by an "acting inspector general" although The Senate has chosen to not
confirm the nominee for the IG position. (Can you say filibuster?)
What becomes apparent is that one side in this has concocted a bogus reason to cast aspersions on the
work of the IG simply on the ground that the position is "acting" while at the same time blocking confirmation
of an appointment to that position; then, having set up their bogus rational for not trusting the work of the IG,
and having created an obstacle to confirmation for one who is not acting, they complain that the process,
the investigation, is taking too long so Congress must get into it.
This whole business is about scoring partisan points instead of letting the normal routine work of the
Inspector General's Office proceed as it should.
Now, what is an IG and to whom do they report? "Within the federal agencies are politically independent individuals called Inspectors General who are responsible for ensuring that the agencies operate efficiently, effectively and legally."
"To help them carry out their investigative role, Inspector Generals have the authority to issue subpoenas for information and documents, administer oaths for taking testimony, and can hire and control their own staff and contract personnel. The investigative authority of Inspectors General is limited only by certain national security and law enforcement considerations."
"When an agency's Office of Inspector General (OIG) identifies cases of egregious and flagrant problems or abuses within the agency, the OIG immediately notifies the agency head of the findings. The agency head is then required to forward the OIG's report, along with any comments, explanations and corrective plans, to Congress within seven days.
The Inspectors General also send semiannual reports of all their activities for the past six months to Congress."
Inspector General – What is an Inspector General and What Do the Inspectors General of the US Government Do?
In short, Congress having created bogus objections to the work of the IG and blocked confirmation of one,
now has the audacity to want to insert itself into an ongoing investigation for partisan reasons.
If you bother to read the material at the url I provided, and the quoted material above, you will
see that Congress gets the reports of the investigations.
So, the real question is why are they interfering with the normal routine of the IG office?
That itself seems criminal to me on Congress's part. They are politicizing non-political investigatory
work, interfering with the IG's lawful work, and generally gumming up things solely to create
an election season issue. It is very very cynical.
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war."
John Adams. Second President of the United States.
IMO, if we stay on the present path Congress has chosen, justice can not be served. If they get the
heck out of the way of the Insepector General's Office, justice WILL be served. Its that simple.
Let the pros do it, or let the clowns play with it and get nowhere.
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war."
John Adams. Second President of the United States.
Array
So someone who's name we can not mention. Through a trump card today called Executive privilege to protect Holder or for other reasons.
We can not ask why either .
I don't care what side you fall on this stuff should bother you big time. F&F is scary stuff and there can be no doubt that it is real.
F&F was all about setting it up so the American public would demand a new thougher version of the Brady bill and 1 guess how would have stepped right up and provided it.
Hopyard, why does Holder not just provide the documents? The Committee asked for them, Holder refused. Holder, by refusing, is politicizing this matter just as you accuse the Committee. He is trying to galvanize the liberal/progressive base by vilifying those darn Republicans. It is political theater at worst, more probably a serious matter of separation of powers, (likely somewhere between) and the Committee certainly has the right and in my mind, the obligation to pursue the matter.
Personally I would not leave it to the Acting IG.
To suggest the Committee is acting criminally? That is cynical too.
It will be resolved by negotiation, the Courts, or time, but probably not before November. I know we will never resolve it here, but heck, what do I know?
Carry on.
NRA Life Member
"But if they don't exist, how can a man see them?"
"You may think I'm pompous, but actually I'm pedantic... let me explain the difference."
"Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
Good grief. IT was about breaking up the drug cartel violence in Mexico for heavens sake.
That is righteous law enforcement.
Why read conspiratorial anti-gun stuff into an ordinary criminal investigation about illegal gun sales and cross border gun traffic? You know, sometimes things really are exactly what they
seem and exactly about what they are supposed to be.
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war."
John Adams. Second President of the United States.
You dont provide guns to the enemy. Doing so got some good people killed on both sides of the fence. Providing aid to people that kill Americans is treason.Good grief. IT was about breaking up the drug catel violence in Mexico for heavens sake.
Giving guns to drug cartels to break up drug cartel violence? Come on, man that dosent even make sense, I dont care who you are.
The drug cartels have more guns than most National Guard units do.
I'm no spokesperson for either DOJ or the WH, here is the explanation given--
"Mr. Carney said the Justice Department had turned over all documents related to the initial subject of the House inquiry, a botched illegal-gun operation known as Fast and Furious. What is now at issue are papers stemming from the administration’s response to the Congressional investigation. “Our assertions are consistent with those of prior administrations,” Mr. Carney said."
To me it looks like the routine insistence on EP that all administrations would take in the same situation.
I can't find the exact words Jay Carney used today, but they were along the line of protecting future
presidents as well.
That is in dispute.The Committee asked for them, Holder refused.
That is true if and only if it is factually correct that he is withholding material related to Fast and FuriousHolder, by refusing, is politicizing this matter just as you accuse the Committee.
as opposed to withholding papers related to internal deliberations of the administration.
Maybe. But then the other side is sure providing the fertilizer needed for such an effort, if the notionHe is trying to galvanize the liberal/progressive base by vilifying those darn Republicans.
is even true.
I agree with what you wrote. Though, I think they should leave it to the IG if they actuallyIt is political theater at worst, more probably a serious matter of separation of powers, (likely somewhere between) and the Committee certainly has the right and in my mind, the obligation to pursue the matter.
want to know who screwed up.
Personally I have no quarrel with him.Personally I would not leave it to the Acting IG.
That isTo suggest the Committee is acting criminally? That is cynical too.
figuratively, not literally criminal. It is figuratively criminal to cause the IG's investigation to get
screwed up.
We won't resolve it here, and it will get resolved by negotiations, the courts, or time, but not before November.It will be resolved by negotiation, the Courts, or time, but probably not before November. I know we will never resolve it here, but heck, what do I know?
Carry on.
The last three words are how we know it is all political theater.
Anyway, R&G, since you know my recent reading habits, I'm about 1/3 of the way through Andrew Jackson by Brands.
They took their politics and their political insults much more seriously in his time and place and settled
them on "the field of honor." We are way ahead of the game these days. In a few months either someone
will remain in the position they hold or they will pack their bags and quietly leave, and in the interim if all
goes as planned there will be no dueling.
Last edited by Hopyard; June 21st, 2012 at 10:45 PM. Reason: fix html
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war."
John Adams. Second President of the United States.
Yes, and that is why the Inspector General is investigating the matter. Congress needs to let the IG's office
do its job instead of interfering with the investigation. Someone screwed up, and the IG is the proper
authority for determining who it was; and with the authority and legal requirement to turn that information
over to Congress.
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war."
John Adams. Second President of the United States.
Seriously, the Cartels have hundreds of millions of dollars, and can buy boatloads of full auto weapons directly from South American despots that want US Dollars. Why would the Cartels buy semi's from some schmoo running them across the border for pocket change?
The entire premise is flawed. Somebody in BATFE is stupid, ignorant, arrogant, looking for a promotion, camera time, or whatever, but the espoused premise shows about as much thought as is capable by a sack of rocks. The upstream actions appear to be based on arrogance and hubris. Ill conceived and poorly executed and now Congress critters want answers. I hope they get them.
I didn't believe or trust Carney before he took his current role. Nothing has changed.
My Congressman has already notified his constituency he will vote to hold Holder in contempt. My BIL has also mentioned to me he thinks the DOJ OIG is full of a bunch of political hacks. He is well connected on the outside, and has a vastly different world view however.
I am 10 or 15% into Alexander Hamilton. Just enough to really begin enjoying it. You're correct. Politics in the "old days" was rough and tumble on a whole different level.
NRA Life Member
"But if they don't exist, how can a man see them?"
"You may think I'm pompous, but actually I'm pedantic... let me explain the difference."
"Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
And the part in bold is where we agree. Enjoy Hamilton. It is a slog, but it is almost an essential prelude to Adams, Monroe and Jackson. I chose to skip Jefferson and Madison because Monroe and Adams bracket them in time, and the history get filled in from both ends by reading the other two. Peace.
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war."
John Adams. Second President of the United States.
Array
Excellent question!
Which will bring me to asking why you presented it in argument when you stated:
When the criminal trial of Mitchel originally did not indite Nixon till after Nixon was found to be intentionally withholding evidence.Chief Justice Burger, writing for the majority in US v. Nixon noted: "Whatever the nature of the privilege of confidentiality of Presidential communications in the exercise of Art. II powers, the privilege can be said to derive from the supremacy of each branch within its own assigned area of constitutional duties. Certain powers and privileges flow from the nature of enumerated powers; the protection of the confidentiality of Presidential communications has similar constitutional underpinnings.United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) (Supreme Court opinion at FindLaw)
Holder presently has not been charged or under indictment.
Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement.
Likewise.Peace.
NRA Life Member
"But if they don't exist, how can a man see them?"
"You may think I'm pompous, but actually I'm pedantic... let me explain the difference."
"Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
Array
Yet in 2009 Obama not only supported the program, he helped to provide/direct recovery funds toward the program. Here is a news conference held in March of 2009 where DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and others in the DOJ spoke to it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KloKRe0Qgs
Last edited by LkWd_Don; June 22nd, 2012 at 05:54 PM. Reason: fix a dead link
Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement.
Huh? I'm not following your reasoning. Nixon was not indicted. And the case mentioned was about the
judiciary's "right" to get papers from a prez for purposes of conducting a criminal trial.
It was not about Congress's right to meddle in an investigation being conducted by the proper authorities within the executive
branch; the IGs.
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war."
John Adams. Second President of the United States.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
