Rep. Issa Pushing Contempt Order Against Eric Holder

[Rock and Glock]

Here's some fresh fodder that focuses on the DOJ involvement rather than legal analysis. June 23, 2012. The EP matter is boring. Legal posturing to be solved later.

Bunk. In fact, Fast and Furious was an OCDETF case. That made it a Main Justice case, not the orphan Arizona debacle of media portrayal.

Fast and Furious and OCDETF - Andrew C. McCarthy - National Review Online

The classification of F&F as an OCDETF program was also referred to in Issa's memo of May 3,2012, and is probably a source for the article to which I link.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Spirit51]

If I were a betting lady I would bet that Hopyard will be here any minute to make a excuse for this one, but I don't think anyone would bet against me.

[LkWd_Don]

If I were a betting lady I would bet that Hopyard will be here any minute to make a excuse for this one, but I don't think anyone would bet against me.

I would not take that bet.

[Hopyard]

Here's some fresh fodder that focuses on the DOJ involvement rather than legal analysis. June 23, 2012. The EP matter is boring. Legal posturing to be solved later.



Fast and Furious and OCDETF - Andrew C. McCarthy - National Review Online

The classification of F&F as an OCDETF program was also referred to in Issa's memo of May 3,2012, and is probably a source for the article to which I link.

So let me make sure I understand this. Issa puts something in a memo which we don't have- nor
the basis for the memo. NR bases a story off an unsubstantiated allegation, and we are supposed
to swallow it? LkWd_... made a point of stating that he wanted his material to be credible and backed
by reliable sources; I doubt the he and I would agree the NR fits that corner of the Universe.

Even when Buckley was around, it was a Birch Society rag, worthy of reading only to build ones
vocabulary from Buckley's silver dollar word repertoire.

Its a hit piece. 'nuff said.

[DaveWorkman]

Have any of you guys been following my Examiner columns on Fast & Furious?

I've been writing about this fiasco for 18 months.

Here's a link:


Dave Workman - Seattle gun rights Examiner - Policy & Issues | Examiner.com


The contempt vote on Thursday -- if it goes off as scheduled -- could be half of the worst day of Obama's presidency, if the SCOTUS hammers down on Obamacare, as many are predicting.

[Doodle]

you can't ever argue a fact with a Liberal, you cant reason with a liberal based on common sense, you can only listen to their blatant disregard for reality, law, and common sense, and nod your head in a pleasant sheep keeper kind of way. There are sheep that go off the reservation all the time. Some of us simply need to rescue sheep from their own selves. There are Sheep (the masses of lame stream know nothings), Wolves (liberal, commie, socialist, Marxist, etc... who seek to destroy everything in the name of forced draconian utopia), and there are Wolf Hunters (those who know our BOR and Constitution and will fight to their last breath to defend liberty and happiness for all Americans).

Steeling this... Damn good quote!

[Rock and Glock]

So let me make sure I understand this. Issa puts something in a memo which we don't have- nor
the basis for the memo.

Its a hit piece. 'nuff said.

See page 4 on the memo:

http://oversight.house.gov/wp-conten...ment-FINAL.pdf

So..............A memo under Issa's signature is inadequate now?

I doubt the he and I would agree the NR fits that corner of the Universe.

Regardless of whether or not it is a "Hit Piece", it describes and explains the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) program parameters and what a OCDETF really is. Interestingly, I doubt that Issa really "invented" or "made up" this nomenclature, so it stands as an explanation that I find interesting, and the rational behind it as a program. While I cannot state with certainty who knew what when and where, it makes a compelling reasoned argument that this was a program that was approved in venues such as some corner slot in DC.

Give me awhile longer too...........

Here we go. Special attention need be paid footnotes, said testimony under threat of perjury:

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona led the Fast and Furious OCDETF Strike Force. Although ATF was the lead law enforcement agency for Fast and Furious, its agents took direction from prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office. The lead federal prosecutor for Fast and Furious was Assistant U.S. Attorney Emory Hurley, who played an integral role in the day-to-day, tactical management of the case.14

Many ATF agents working on Operation Fast and Furious came to believe that some of the most basic law enforcement techniques used to interdict weapons required the explicit approval of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and specifically from Hurley. On numerous occasions, Hurley and other federal prosecutors withheld this approval, to the mounting frustration of ATF agents.15 The U.S. Attorney’s Office chose not to use other available investigative tools common in gun trafficking cases, such as civil forfeitures and seizure warrants, during the seminal periods of Fast and Furious.

14 Transcribed Interview of Special Agent in Charge William Newell, at 32-33 (June 8, 2011).
15 Transcribed Interview of Special Agent Larry Alt, at 94 (Apr. 27, 2011).


The U.S. Attorney’s Office advised ATF that agents needed to meet unnecessarily strict evidentiary standards in order to speak with suspects, temporarily detain them, or interdict weapons. ATF’s reliance on this advice from the U.S. Attorney’s Office during Fast and Furious resulted in many lost opportunities to interdict weapons.

In addition to leading the Fast and Furious OCDETF task force, the U.S. Attorney’s Office was instrumental in preparing the wiretap applications that were submitted to the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. Federal prosecutors in Arizona filed at least six of these applications, each containing immense detail about operational tactics and specific information about straw purchasers, in federal court after Department headquarters authorized them.

So..........Now I shall go and independently learn what an OCDETF is. So here is is from the DOJ website:

DEA Programs, Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF)

Well, what have we learned:

• OCDETF is not a figment of an overactive conspiratorial editor at the National Review nor the author of the article;
• F&F was a OCDETF program; and
• The OCDETF has major resources as reasonable due to its' structure and member agencies

The principal mission of the OCDETF program is to identify, disrupt, and dismantle the most serious drug trafficking and money laundering organizations and those primarily responsible for the nation’s drug supply.

And:

OCDETF is the centerpiece of the Attorney General’s drug supply reduction strategy. In order to enhance the OCDETF Program’s ability to contribute to the President’s mandate to reduce the drug supply, the Program focuses its resources on coordinated, nationwide investigations, targeting the entire infrastructure of major drug trafficking. It also assisted in the development of the Attorney General’s Consolidated Priority Organization Target (CPOT) List, a unified agency target list of international “command and control” drug traffickers and money launderers.

So, where are we now? We are to believe that Holder was ignorant of all of this? Does this begin requiring the willing suspension of disbelief?

[LkWd_Don]

So let me make sure I understand this. Issa puts something in a memo which we don't have- nor
the basis for the memo.

I think that this is a point that we disagree on. Rep Issa has the benefit of having reviewed documents that we have not and listening to testimony that we have not, so he is not simply creating things from thin-air, there is substantiation to support the Memo and under the FOIA we can request disclosure/pay for copies of all that information when the process is over. If the Government does not put it on-line in a searchable format at that time.

NR bases a story off an unsubstantiated allegation, and we are supposed to swallow it?

If you are referring to the Memo as being the unsubstantiated allegation, I would direct you to my comment above.

LkWd_... made a point of stating that he wanted his material to be credible and backed by reliable sources; I doubt the he and I would agree the NR fits that corner of the Universe.

I agree that I do not care for NR as a source. It is Highly political and (in my opinion) fails to look at the whole story. I also consider FOX news as being in the same politically bent reporting mode, but will on occasion use them as a source when I have found other competing News Corporations reporting the same event, especially if not in the same way, to provide a more accurate all around idea of what I am finding.

The truth is out there and it will come out, we just have to allow it time without closing our minds to it in advance.

[LkWd_Don]

A memo under Issa's signature is inadequate now?

Not in my mind. With the stacks of papers and hours of Hearings recordings supporting it, that Memo is a legal and valid document.

Regardless of whether or not it is a "Hit Piece", it describes and explains the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) program parameters and what a OCDETF really is.

Good Point!

Give me awhile longer too...........

Here we go. Special attention need be paid footnotes, said testimony under threat of perjury:



So..........Now I shall go and independently learn what an OCDETF is. So here is is from the DOJ website:

DEA Programs, Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF)

Excellent source! Straight from the horses mouth, so to say!

Well, what have we learned:

• OCDETF is not a figment of an overactive conspiratorial editor at the National Review nor the author of the article;
• F&F was a OCDETF program; and
• The OCDETF has major resources as reasonable due to its' structure and member agencies

And:

So, where are we now? We are to believe that Holder was ignorant of all of this? Does this begin requiring the willing suspension of disbelief?

To me the mere fact that Holder never fired any of his underlings when he supposedly found out about this program is very telling in and of itself. Followed by the fact that historically EP has been used to impotently try to shield wrong doers from justice.

The numbers are adding up and they are not in Holders favor.

[LkWd_Don]

you can't ever argue a fact with a Liberal, you cant reason with a liberal based on common sense, you can only listen to their blatant disregard for reality, law, and common sense, and nod your head in a pleasant sheep keeper kind of way. There are sheep that go off the reservation all the time. Some of us simply need to rescue sheep from their own selves. There are Sheep (the masses of lame stream know nothings), Wolves (liberal, commie, socialist, Marxist, etc... who seek to destroy everything in the name of forced draconian utopia), and there are Wolf Hunters (those who know our BOR and Constitution and will fight to their last breath to defend liberty and happiness for all Americans)

Steeling this... Damn good quote!

I concur and am taking it too.

[Rock and Glock]

The numbers are adding up and they are not in Holders favor.

An old saying...........

If the Law is in your favor, argue the Law;
If the Facts are in your favor, argue the Facts; and
If Neither are in your favor, pound your shoe on the desk...........

Tell me what the Facts are, and the Law will be self-evident. I prefer the facts. I do not want to hear a bunch of whining DC attorneys and mouthpieces torture the English language beyond comprehension. Too many folks in DC have a low opinion of those of us outside the Beltway. Hubris.

[Hopyard]

I think that this is a point that we disagree on. Rep Issa has the benefit of having reviewed documents that we have not and listening to testimony that we have not, so he is not simply creating things from thin-air, there is substantiation to support the Memo and under the FOIA we can request disclosure/pay for copies of all that information when the process is over. If the Government does not put it on-line in a searchable format at that time.

Part in bold might be rephrased, "so 'IF' he is not simply ...." Whether or not he is believable hinges
in my mind on two things; the electoral benefits to be derived by a partisan witch hunt; his own past personal
history, including arrests, indictments, and other sordid matters which leave his credibility highly questionable.
I choose to be very skeptical of this stuff coming from that committee precisely for these
reasons. Headed up by almost anyone else on that committee than Issa, I would start to
pay some attention to what is being hinted at--though obviously by his own words, not asserted.

If you are referring to the Memo as being the unsubstantiated allegation, I would direct you to my comment above.

I understand your point, I think, but as to, "there is substantiation to support the Memo." Maybe I'm not following your
argument, but there is plenty of documentation and testimony from the IG too, and from DOJ, and I think they
deserve considerably more of the benefit of the doubt on veracity than Issa does, given his history
and his motives.

I agree that I do not care for NR as a source. It is Highly political and (in my opinion) fails to look at the whole story. I also consider FOX news as being in the same politically bent reporting mode, but will on occasion use them as a source when I have found other competing News Corporations reporting the same event, especially if not in the same way, to provide a more accurate all around idea of what I am finding.

GOOD.

The truth is out there and it will come out, we just have to allow it time without closing our minds to it in advance.

I couldn't agree more; but would add that one side of the truth might be the DOJ did nothing wrong
and we should not close our minds to that as well.

If I may comment on the parallels with the Watergate investigation: Issa is no Sam Irvin, nor is he
the intellectual equivalent of the young Arlen Specter when he was on top of his game.

Oh, one last point since we have been going back and forth on EP; I found this comment
for those who seek literalist authority for EP within Constitutional text:

"The explicit words of the Constitution itself don’t provide clear answers. The terse text nowhere explicitly provides for “executive privilege”—and also nowhere explicitly provides for congressional “oversight” as such. The text does not even say that Congress has power to subpoena witnesses or punish no-shows." Rep. Issa Pushing Contempt Order Against Eric Holder

I'm not putting that up to refute their authority in such matters, but to illustrate that not everything
done routinely by Congress or by The Executive is based on clear textual authority.
Same too of course for the MvM assertions by Marshall.

Things are the way they are, and when players move outside the norms, they do so at considerable
peril to us all.

Directed at LkWd... Ever hear of the novels written by Colleen McCullough? If so, have you
ever read the trilogy she wrote about Rome-- starting with the novel, "The Grass Crown." Every
calamity which befell Rome throughout that long series of historical fiction was the result of
someone doing "that which is not done"-- that is, tampering with Rome's unwritten constitution.
We too have an unwritten constitution; and it includes EP. It also includes the House's right to
oversight and to investigation, even though that is not specified in our Constitution. So long as
everyone stays within the established boundary lines, written, judicial, historical, it will all turn out
OK. And yes, to use your words, "The truth is out there and it will come out."

[Rock and Glock]

"The truth is out there and it will come out."

Agent Scully?

Director: The reason you're here, Agent Scully, is we want you to assist Agent Mulder on these X-Files. You will write field reports on your activities along with your observations on the validity of the work.

Scully: Am I to understand that you want me to de-bunk the X-Files project, sir?

Director: Agent Scully, we trust you'll make the proper scientific analysis. You'll want to contact Agent Mulder shortly. We look forward to seeing your reports.

The facts will tell us what the answer is. I for one am content to wait.

[Hopyard]

Agent Scully?



The facts will tell us what the answer is. I for one am content to wait.

I clicked the like button, and too, I fully concur with what you wrote. I am content to watch this
play out and see what happens. I can't pretend neutrality, but I am more than willing to see
where real and true facts lead.

[LkWd_Don]

An old saying...........

If the Law is in your favor, argue the Law;
If the Facts are in your favor, argue the Facts; and
If Neither are in your favor, pound your shoe on the desk............

Are you sure about those? Me thinks you have them backaswards.
They make more sense as:
If the Law is NOT in your favor, argue the Law;
If the Facts are NOT in your favor, argue the Facts; the last is correct..