A few weeks ago someone in the admin apparently said that “fast and furious” wasn’t referring to “Fast and Furious” … I gues the dif is using the words as adjectives/adverbs vs proper nouns. That’s all I got… couldn’t find it on the front page the next day.
I don’t really recall that… I guess there is “front page news” and then there is “FRONT PAGE NEWS”.
I assume the story and clusterfuck you are referring to is the gunwalking and death of the agent. Actually the main issue relative to the executive privilege assertion now is the false letter that the DOJ put out in February 2011 and didn’t admit was wrong or make any effort to correct until September 2011.
They are claiming executive privilege because they feel Darrel Issa is demanding documents that are not related to the fast and furious indecent. They offered to show the documents they feel could be related in exchange for not holding Holder in contempt, this offer was rejected. They have already turned over thousands of documents relating to the incident. Issa hasn’t really justified why he needs to see many of the documents he’s requesting.
Their reasons for claiming executive privilege are a much more simple ‘our communications are private, you don’t get to read through our diary just because you feel like it’ Take your witch hunt and shove it.
Among the general public, I suspect the only people who care deeply about this are the ones already inclined to vote against Obama to begin with. A few independents may be swayed by it, but many of them understand that executive privilege is something Obama has used but once, fairly minimally compared to his predecessors. But no doubt it will get the Obama bashers into an even greater huff than they were already in. Can they blow Obama’s house down? I’m guessing that it will take more than this to put Mitt in the driver’s seat.
Neither BATFE or DEA bothered to notify Mexican officials that the “Feds” were allowing illegally purchased firearms under the F&F program were entering Mexico. How did they expect Mexican authorities to track the guns to higher ups or to anyone, if the Mexican authorities didn’t know the weapons were comeing? Were the “Feds” just waiting for the guns to be found at crime scenes and then be turned over to U.S. authorities to complete the investigation?
U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry was killed in Peck Canyon, Santa Cruz County, Arizona, which is over 10 mi INSIDE the U.S.. The “Feds” originally lost track of the weapons when the weapons entered Mexico. The weapons were then carried back into the U.S. by five suspected illegal immigrants. The F&F purchased weapons were found at the scene of the shooting. Inside the U.S..
I think you’re way over-estimating that 20% of Americans could tell you what the original scandal was about. Maybe 20% could when the story first broke but many of them have forgotten. Of the handful who paid attention a good portion are probably still paying attention. But I just do not believe enough people care or are paying attention for it to matter regardless of whether it means anything in some objective sense.
Yeah, it’s one of those things that is okee-dokey when your side does it, and treasonous and impeachable when the other side does it.
So what? Perfect ground to shape their perceptions, then. Most people don’t even really start paying attention to the November election itself until the preceding summer. And just in time for the summer media coverage, where there’s not much happening in Washington ordinarily until the conventions, John Q. Public and Jane Q. Public see this 30 second spot during prime time:
"Three years ago an American border patrol agent was murdered on American soil [pics of Brian Terry, his parents] with a weapon that Holder’s Justice Dept. had deliberately placed in the hands of Mexican gangs. [Suitable images here, varying by market]
"Ever since then, Holder has been engaged in a coverup to prevent Officer Brian Terry’s parents, and the American people, from learning what really happened. [Cut to Holder’s congressional testimony]
A coverup now endorsed by Barack Obama. Minutes before Holder faced contempt charges before congress, Barack Obama asserted the following: [More sound bites, and quotes from from the assertion of executive privilege]
[For added bonus, use creative editing to insert some semi-subliminal Watergate images; juxtapose some defensive statement by a notoriously testy Obama with Nixon’s “I am not a crook.”]
Smash cut to black. Pause. Then on the screen and on voiceover:
“What do you have to hide, Mr. President?”
Be careful with the b-word. Holder is on record claiming that his critics are doing it because he looks like Obama.
If Holder goes it will be done based on the political calculation that it will motivate the black vote.
I was wrong… it wasn’t until December that the Obama admin admitted the February letter was wrong. When does not correcting a simple mistake, when you are obligated to, become a lie?
I recall it as the top story on the New York Times site at least. But I admit I’d have trouble citing that: I’m not sure which disclosure that was or where I’d find a cite for where it ran.
Yes, I was referring to the entire program (or at least the part where they lost track of 2,000 guns).
Depends on what the “lie” pertains to. The original question was, “Who was responsible for the F&F operation?” That’s not a difficult question to answer. The answer could be very embareassing to someone but it’s not a difficult question to answer.
No answers or vague answers point to an internal screw up.
Holder and Napalitano said they didn’t know about the F&F operation. That’s been proven to be untrue. Or an outright lie? Holder and O’bama say O’bama wasn’t involved. If it’s true that the President wasn’t involved, at any level, in F&F, then O’bama can’t use EP to withhold/protect information that should only apply to non-Presidential conversations and operations.
The President can only use EP to protect direct Presidential involvements. If O’bama had requested Just-Us to conduct a F&F-type operation or if O’bama OK’d a F&F-type operation or if O’bama was regularly updated on F&F or if O’bama directed or requested Holder to run a F&F-type operation or if O’bama had directed that Holder and Napalitano deny involvement in/knowledge of F&F, or some other direct Presidential involvement with F&F, the O’bama could invoke EP protection.
By issuing EP, O’bama is admitting that the President’s office was involved in F&F or the cover up of F&F.
Obama. He’s not Irish.
Is “O’bama” some weird new thing the kids in the conservative blog comment sections are doing these days or what? It’s hard to take someone seriously when they can’t spell a five letter name correctly.
No, I remember seeing it in 2007 and 2008. Usually it’s just a typo of the hard-to-understand variety. Sometimes it’s a friendly joke and I’ve understood it as derogatory.
Personally I think the head of the ATF is the one most responsible. Since he/she hasn’t been doing their job since 2006. Maybe congress should put someone new in that position.
Sorry. That was a typo. However, Obama does claim Irish ancestral heritage.
Obama visits family roots in Ireland
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/23/us-obama-ireland-idUSTRE74M09F20110523
Yes, I know. But the name Obama is decidedly non-Irish.
And “Just-Us” department?
Marley23: Tell that to all the proud relatives of Barry Obama in Moneygall.