Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Fast and FuriousFollow

#52 Jun 21 2012 at 6:01 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,748 posts
Allegory wrote:
You are utterly a tool. This was in my local paper, The Dallas Morning News, just today.


Of course it's there, today. It was not there last month. Or the month before that. Or that. Or for the last 18+ months that this has been an ongoing story. What part of me saying that it's received very little coverage (past tense) makes you think that the fact that it finally gets some significant coverage after a major action is finally taken somehow nullifies this?

Quote:
People are even discussing it in the op-ed section of the Dallas Morning News in the section reserved for reader opinions, because apparently everyone seems to know and care about it.


Yes. And for many of them, the news over the last week is probably the first time they heard of this. That's why the sudden buzz. People woke up one day and saw news reports about some committee voting on whether to find the Attorney General in contempt and went "what's going on?". It should be "we've been seeing this coming for a year now", but most people's reactions are "why is this suddenly happening out of the blue?". Which, I suppose, conveniently plays into the current Dem talking point that this is just Republicans playing election year politics. You get that said talking point doesn't work well on anyone who knows that this has been building for over a year and a half, right?

The Left's approach to this banks on most of the average folks whose primary source of news comes on after their favorite prime time shows thinking this is some new thing the GOP just sprang on them and represents an unfair attack on the President and his administration and they should all be ashamed of themselves for their gross partisanship. Is that not what the Dems and their mouthpieces are saying right now? Why say that if the audience was informed enough to know that this isn't new news?

Edited, Jun 21st 2012 5:02pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#53 Jun 21 2012 at 6:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I know you hear the term "strawman" used at you all the time but I don't think you've figured out yet what it means.

Your "proof!" links admit that CBS has covered the story, admit that ABC has covered the story and is reduced to whining about a singular NBC program (ignoring any other news programming on NBC). You reject mention of print, internet or radio as not really counting. You completely neglect the cable networks.

Now, if you thought "strawman" meant "Wow, Jophiel sure did show where I keep crying about the media even though it's abundantly clear that I'm wrong", then I understand why you used the term. Sadly, that's not what it means though.

While you're looking up "strawman", keep flipping around until you find another fallacy called "No True Scotsman". I think you'll find it enlightening, assuming you can comprehend it.

Edited, Jun 21st 2012 7:02pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#54 Jun 21 2012 at 6:14 PM Rating: Good
******
43,931 posts
For someone that cries all the time that the media is trying to brainwash him, I'm amused at how much he's crying about the media not trying to brainwash him.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#55 Jun 21 2012 at 6:16 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,748 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I know you hear the term "strawman" used at you all the time but I don't think you've figured out yet what it means.


Did I ever say that there was "No media coverage!"? You claiming that (in quotes no less!) and then arguing against that false claim is exactly what a strawman is. WTF?


You can sit there and point at dribbles and drabs of reporting, and insist that lack of coverage during primetime television news shows really doesn't matter, but nothing you're saying supports your original claim that it received "extensive coverage" (note how I quote what you actually said). Are you still really going to claim that the coverage of this was "extensive"? And how do you measure that? Relative to other similar political scandals, how does the media coverage stack up? More or less than Plame? More or less than NSA wiretapping? More or less than a GOP congressman allegedly having *** with pages? More or less than Bush faking his flight records? Less, right? Want to know what all of those have in common? All big (huge in a couple cases) stories. All alleging some wrongdoing or scandal by someone on the right. All false.


Forgive me if I laugh out loud at the blatant projection when Dems decry this as some kind of politically driven witch hunt. Cause they're the experts on it apparently. And yeah. The media helps them with this quite frequently and blatantly.

Edited, Jun 21st 2012 5:17pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#56 Jun 21 2012 at 6:21 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,748 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
For someone that cries all the time that the media is trying to brainwash him, I'm amused at how much he's crying about the media not trying to brainwash him.


It's about inconsistency which is consistently and blatantly biased in a single political direction. And this story really highlights that. Big time. If this had happened under a GOP president's watch, the media would have been hounding the White House from day one. People would be marching in the streets. You'd have bumperstickers and mobs of angry people. That happens *because* the media chooses to cover a story. When they don't, you don't get marches and protests, and you don't get people talking about it, and you don't get political pressure applied.

Joph mentioned earlier about Obama being able to get away with some serious expansions of executive power in the past few years. But how much of that is made possible because the media doesn't raise any kind of outcry? Like I mentioned earlier, this should not be about political party. But unfortunately, for many it is. For many, they'll look the other way if it's "my guy" stretching the law. But the reality is that we all lose when this happens. It's not about sides. Or at least, it shouldn't be.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#57 Jun 21 2012 at 6:22 PM Rating: Decent
******
43,931 posts
gbaji wrote:
It's not about sides.
Sure it isn't.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#58 Jun 21 2012 at 6:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Did I ever say that there was "No media coverage!"?
gbaji previously wrote:
it's taken well over a year for the media to provide any coverage

This is where you start spinning desperately saying that claiming the media hasn't provided any coverage in the past year isn't the same as saying there's been no media coverage.

Ready... Set.... GO!!!!!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#59 Jun 21 2012 at 8:13 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,581 posts
gbaji wrote:
Of course it's there, today. It was not there last month. Or the month before that. Or that.

No, it was there last year. That my local paper has not decided run a monthly section devoted to this story does not make it ignored.

The problem is that it was news a year ago. The TDS clip I posted showing coverage from FOX, CNN, C-span, etc. was a year old. People heard about it, through a fit fora week, and then got bored like most of these scandals.
gbaji wrote:
Is that not what the Dems and their mouthpieces are saying right now?

But it isn't. Pretty much everyone agrees this was a huge failure. The left leaning TDS clip I linked was far from apologetic.

You're not mad that liberals are ignoring the issue. You're mad that they were outraged before you wanted them to be and not as long as you wanted them to be.
#60 Jun 21 2012 at 8:16 PM Rating: Good
******
43,931 posts
Allegory wrote:
That my local paper has not decided run a monthly section devoted to this story does not make it ignored.
NO! IF IT ISN'T FRONT PAGE NEWS ON EVERY PAPER, IN EVERY CITY, IN EVERY STATE, IN EVERY COUNTRY IN EVERY WORLD, IN EVERY UNIVERSE, BOTH EARLY AND LATE EDITION, AND BROUGHT UP AT LEAST FOUR TIMES EVERY HALF HOUR ON EVERY FREQUENCY FROM RADIO TO COLOR AND A NEW BLOG ARTICLE ABOUT IT EVERY TWENTY ONE POINT SEVEN SECONDS THEN THAT MEANS THERE IS A DEMOCRATIC LIBERAL MEDIA CONSPIRACY TO IGNORE IT!

God, it's just that obvious.

Edited, Jun 21st 2012 10:53pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#61 Jun 21 2012 at 8:20 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,979 posts
gbaji wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Does it blow a hole in gbaji's lack of media argument if I heard this exact story on ABC's nighttime news as I was reading this thread?


And on All Things Considered on my way home in the car.


Yes. Now tell me how many times you saw this on TV or heard about it on any non-conservative talk radio show prior to the last couple weeks?

I've known about it for months, maybe even a year - I can't remember specifically when or where, but I listen to NPR, CBS news radio-NYC and BBC World News regularly.

It's just fairly amusing that you brought up this whole issue only as the story re-surfaced with the recent events, bringing it back into the mass-media spotlight. Almost as if *you* hadn't known about it until now, then suddenly jumped up and proclaimed "Look what's been going on all this time! And nobody knew about it!"
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#62 Jun 21 2012 at 8:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The short version is that if everyone doesn't follow the party line on how huge this is, it's all the media's fault. Not, you know, because people didn't find it to be as huge as the GOP insists.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#63 Jun 21 2012 at 8:55 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,979 posts
Considering the state of affairs with Mexican drug cartels staging full-scale war on each other, the police and the Mexican army, I would want to keep our meddling under wraps until there was some sort of control established down there. Regardless of who on which side of the aisle did what up here.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#64 Jun 21 2012 at 10:00 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,584 posts
Jophiel wrote:
...Everyone doesn't follow the party line on how huge this is. ...People didn't find it to be as huge as the GOP insists.


The water was freezing! Don't you know about shrinkage?!?
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#65 Jun 22 2012 at 8:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,868 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Not, you know, because people didn't find it to be as huge as the GOP insists.


Selling guns to Mexican gangs, naming oversees operatives, mercenary soldiers gone wild, personal time with your intern, shady real estate deals... meh. It fits nicely into the overall narrative at least. Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#66 Jun 22 2012 at 9:04 AM Rating: Decent
******
43,931 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
mercenary soldiers gone wild,
******* and SG550s, whoo!
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#67 Jun 22 2012 at 9:07 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Clinton only left office with a 70% approval rating because the media refused to cover than Lewinsky thing.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#68 Jun 22 2012 at 9:08 AM Rating: Decent
******
43,931 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Clinton only left office with a 70% approval rating because the media refused to cover than Lewinsky thing.
Yeah, and when's the last time the lame stream media has had a story about that? Way to prove gbaji right about media blackouts.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#69 Jun 22 2012 at 4:12 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
644 posts
gbaji wrote:
I keep becoming more and more ashamed of the media we have in this country. They used to at least attempt to pretend to cover the news fairly and leave their own biases at the door. But that time seems to be in the past now.

Don't you like to quote Fox News whenever you think you have a point to make?

#70 Jun 22 2012 at 5:42 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,717 posts
xantav wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I keep becoming more and more ashamed of the media we have in this country. They used to at least attempt to pretend to cover the news fairly and leave their own biases at the door. But that time seems to be in the past now.

Don't you like to quote Fox News whenever you think you have a point to make?


He doesn't have any points to make. They too come from Fox News.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#71 Jun 22 2012 at 11:45 PM Rating: Good
Fast & Furious, a Brief Summary for Those whom get their News from Nowhere:

Fast & Furious describes an ATF program where guns bought in the US were tracked to see which Mexican cartels they ended up with. These guns were not bought & given to cartels & without Fast & Furious tracking said guns, the guns would have ended up in the same places they ended up at even with Fast & Furious tracking them.

A border patrol agent was killed in a firefight with cartel members & 2 guns that were tracked by Fast & Furious were found at the scene. Due to the degradation of the bullet that killed the agent, it is unknown if either of those tracked guns killed him.

The DOJ has released 7K+ documents to the committee investigating Fast & Furious. Obama has asserted executive privilege over documents related to F&F after February 4, 2011, which is when congress began their investigation. The reason he says he has done so, is those documents deal with "the department's response to congressional oversight and related media inquiries,". Any "gotcha" documents, they'd be found before the investigation began, when F&F was actually running.

While invoking Executive Privilege pretty much always implies guilt, just like when you do so for firing 7 JD attorneys for partisan reasons & your AG resigns over it, at this time there are zero "crimes" that have come to light in any or all of the investigation related to F&F thus far. Holder's contempt vote is in regards to not turning over documents congress wants for some reason that do not relate to the F&F program at all, as the documents they want (which deal with the DOJs response to the investigation) are dated after F&F was shut down.



Edited, Jun 23rd 2012 6:58am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#73 Jun 23 2012 at 7:21 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,798 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Fast & Furious, a Brief Summary for Those whom get their News from Nowhere:

Fast & Furious describes an ATF program where guns bought in the US were tracked to see which Mexican cartels they ended up with. These guns were not bought & given to cartels & without Fast & Furious tracking said guns, the guns would have ended up in the same places they ended up at even with Fast & Furious tracking them.

A border patrol agent was killed in a firefight with cartel members & 2 guns that were tracked by Fast & Furious were found at the scene. Due to the degradation of the bullet that killed the agent, it is unknown if either of those tracked guns killed him.

The DOJ has released 7K+ documents to the committee investigating Fast & Furious. Obama has asserted executive privilege over documents related to F&F after February 4, 2011, which is when congress began their investigation. The reason he says he has done so, is those documents deal with "the department's response to congressional oversight and related media inquiries,". Any "gotcha" documents, they'd be found before the investigation began, when F&F was actually running.

While invoking Executive Privilege pretty much always implies guilt, just like when you do so for firing 7 JD attorneys for partisan reasons & your AG resigns over it, at this time there are zero "crimes" that have come to light in any or all of the investigation related to F&F thus far. Holder's contempt vote is in regards to not turning over documents congress wants for some reason that do not relate to the F&F program at all, as the documents they want (which deal with the DOJs response to the investigation) are dated after F&F was shut down.



Edited, Jun 23rd 2012 6:58am by Omegavegeta


Everything you said was correct until you started defending the administration.

Edited, Jun 23rd 2012 8:27am by Bigdaddyjug
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#74 Jun 23 2012 at 7:49 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,259 posts
Saying it twice doesn't make it true. Cite, please.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#75 Jun 23 2012 at 7:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
It was all bereft and stuff.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#76 Jun 23 2012 at 8:02 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,798 posts
Samira wrote:
Saying it twice doesn't make it true. Cite, please.


Well, since he decided to go with "Crimes", the extremely poorly run operation was a "crime" that led to the death of 2 federal agents. The AG also stonewalled Congress for almost a year before hiding behind the, possibly, wrongfully used executive privelige.

Oh, and the Congressional investigation is more into the cover-up rather than the actual F&F operation, so those documents being dated after F&F was shut down is irrelevant as they could still apply to the cover-up.

Edited, Jun 23rd 2012 9:16am by Bigdaddyjug
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#78 Jun 23 2012 at 8:41 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
the extremely poorly run operation was a "crime" that led to the death of 2 federal agents.

Was it? Is there a law against poorly run operations? Or was "crime" in quotes intentionally in that you realize that it's not an actual crime?

Quote:
Oh, and the Congressional investigation is more into the cover-up rather than the actual F&F operation
House Committee on Oversight's calendar back in June 2011 wrote:
This hearing will examine the tragic consequences of Operation Fast and Furious, started by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives in the fall of 2009. In Fast and Furious, ATF encouraged gun store owners to sell weapons to straw buyers suspected of working on behalf of Mexican drug cartels. ATF allowed known criminals to purchase guns and traffic them into Mexico. Operation Fast and Furious has been linked to deaths and other crimes in both the U.S. and Mexico, including the December 2010 killing of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
“The reckless decisions of ATF and Justice Department officials in Operation Fast and Furious have devastated lives and put fear into communities on both sides of the border,” said Chairman Issa. “By exploring this Justice Department sanctioned program, we can better understand the flawed process surrounding the genesis and implementation of an operation that put guns into the hands of criminals.”

Nothing there about "cover-up" but lots about it being directly about the actual operation. It was about "the genesis and implementation of an operation”. After that was a bust, Issa moved on to deeper fishing trying to find something, anything to get the administration on. Hence his moving on to all the response documents, well after the actual operation occurred.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#79 Jun 23 2012 at 8:41 AM Rating: Good
Will swallow your soul
******
28,259 posts
Incompetence, if that is what happened, is not criminal. And investigating a "coverup" that you manufactured yourself by starting an investigation of something else (necessitating legal maneuvers and discovery and all that) is not proof of either a crime or guilty knowledge of a crime.

You remind me of people who assume that a person is guilty because otherwise the cops wouldn't have questioned him.

The documents relative to F&F have been released. If more documentation about that action is required, then those documents will be requested and provided. There's probably about as much of a coverup going on now as there was during the Lewinsky scandal, when everything possible was done to embarrass and discredit a sitting President when the original charge got zero traction with the public.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#80 Jun 23 2012 at 11:45 AM Rating: Default
***
2,798 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
the extremely poorly run operation was a "crime" that led to the death of 2 federal agents.

Was it? Is there a law against poorly run operations? Or was "crime" in quotes intentionally in that you realize that it's not an actual crime?

Quote:
Oh, and the Congressional investigation is more into the cover-up rather than the actual F&F operation
House Committee on Oversight's calendar back in June 2011 wrote:
This hearing will examine the tragic consequences of Operation Fast and Furious, started by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives in the fall of 2009. In Fast and Furious, ATF encouraged gun store owners to sell weapons to straw buyers suspected of working on behalf of Mexican drug cartels. ATF allowed known criminals to purchase guns and traffic them into Mexico. Operation Fast and Furious has been linked to deaths and other crimes in both the U.S. and Mexico, including the December 2010 killing of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
“The reckless decisions of ATF and Justice Department officials in Operation Fast and Furious have devastated lives and put fear into communities on both sides of the border,” said Chairman Issa. “By exploring this Justice Department sanctioned program, we can better understand the flawed process surrounding the genesis and implementation of an operation that put guns into the hands of criminals.”

Nothing there about "cover-up" but lots about it being directly about the actual operation. After that was a bust, Issa moved on to deeper fishing trying to find something, anything to get the administration on.


I put crime in quotes because the person I was responding to had it in quotes. Sorry if you were so quick to criticize my post you failed to actually read it and the post it was in response to. Don't know why I would expect anything more from you, though.

And really Joph? There was no cover-up? Hasn't it been proven that Holder lied about when he initially found out about the operation and then he stonewalled on providing documents that would have outed his lie. That sure as **** sounds like a cover-up to me.

Edited, Jun 23rd 2012 12:48pm by Bigdaddyjug
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#81 Jun 23 2012 at 1:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
You said the hearings were ABOUT a cover-up more so than the operation. They weren't. Not until Issa didn't get the results he wanted. I posted exactly what the investigation was about, in the words of the Committee.

I'm not even going to get into the naivety of the whole "Why wouldn't someone give a hostile committee anything they ask for when they're trying to string you up for political gain? Must be a cover-up!" bit.

Edited, Jun 23rd 2012 2:22pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#82 Jun 23 2012 at 1:57 PM Rating: Default
***
2,798 posts
Jophiel wrote:
You said the hearings were ABOUT a cover-up more so than the operation. They weren't. Not until Issa didn't get the results he wanted. I posted exactly what the investigation was about, in the words of the Committee.

I'm not even going to get into the naivety of the whole "Why wouldn't someone give a hostile committee anything they ask for when they're trying to string you up for political gain? Must be a cover-up!" bit.

Edited, Jun 23rd 2012 2:22pm by Jophiel


Whatever his reasons for doing it, he lied to Congress then refused to give them the documents they requested when he was supposed to. Sounds like a textbook cover-up to me. And of course I wouldn't expect you to admit to it. Gotta toe the party line and whatnot, right?

Oh, and you are partially correct. The initial hearings were about exactly what you said they were. That all changed when the committee found out he lied and then refused to provide the documents they requested.
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#83 Jun 23 2012 at 2:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Don't know why I would expect anything more from you, though. [...] Gotta toe the party line and whatnot, right?

Gbaji's been making ham-handed attempts to "shame" me into agreeing for over a decade. Ask him how well it's been going.
Quote:
That all changed when the committee found out he lied and then refused to provide the documents they requested.

I think that was the cover story for Lewinsky as well. Well, if Plan A didn't get you the political score you wanted, you can always declare a cover-up and hope to win in overtime, right?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#84 Jun 23 2012 at 2:22 PM Rating: Default
***
2,798 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Don't know why I would expect anything more from you, though. [...] Gotta toe the party line and whatnot, right?

Gbaji's been making ham-handed attempts to "shame" me into agreeing for over a decade. Ask him how well it's been going.
Quote:
That all changed when the committee found out he lied and then refused to provide the documents they requested.

I think that was the cover story for Lewinsky as well. Well, if Plan A didn't get you the political score you wanted, you can always declare a cover-up and hope to win in overtime, right?


I'm not trying to shame you into doing anything. And there's a huge difference between the president having an affair (he wasn't the first, won't be the last) and a case where there is documented proof that Holder lied to Congress. Or are you claiming that the documents are fabricated and this really is just a witch hunt?
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#85 Jun 23 2012 at 3:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Rather than me debating point A while you say you meant point B, if you'd like to lay out your best case for a cover up this would be the time.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#86 Jun 23 2012 at 6:03 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,798 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Rather than me debating point A while you say you meant point B, if you'd like to lay out your best case for a cover up this would be the time.


A. Holder lied to Congress about when he first learned of Operation Fast & Furious
B. Congressional committee investigating the operation learns there may be documents that prove Holder lied
C. Despite being legally entitled to review said documents, the committee is stonewalled by Holder
D. Obama wrongfully invokes executive privelege to prevent Holder from having to turn over all documents dealing with OFF and his office's response to it
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#87 Jun 23 2012 at 6:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
None of that was detailed to be worth responding to. You're of course welcome to not elaborate but there's nothing there to work with when all you're saying is "He lied!"

About what? When? How was it a lie? What was the evidence? If Holder knew about F&F throughout its operation in the capacity you claim, why aren't the documents from the time of the operation sufficient to show this? Wrongfully invokes EP according to who? Republicans? Because no one else has actually ruled on it yet outside of the GOP court of opinion. Do you really think Issa should be the sole determiner of what Issa gets to see?

And, yes, I'm aware Holder has changed some statements and issued retractions. That's why I'm asking for details. If you think something was a straight lie rather than an oversight or mistake over the course of numerous hearings and 7,000+ documents, you should be able to back it up. Or choose not to back it up but you can't expect anyone to care about your little "party line" remarks while you're essentially reciting Freeper posts.



Edited, Jun 23rd 2012 7:47pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#89 Jun 23 2012 at 8:24 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,798 posts
You can play ignorant all you want Jophiel. If that's the stance you're going to take, then it's not worth my time to argue it with you. You know **** well what he's been accused of and don't need me to go into any more detail. If you can't counter my argument then just say so.
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#90 Jun 23 2012 at 8:27 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
You can play ignorant all you want Jophiel. If that's the stance you're going to take, then it's not worth my time to argue it with you.

Thought so. I wouldn't want to make you work for your name-calling Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#91 Jun 23 2012 at 8:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
Stop hitting the post button twice, people.
#92 Jun 23 2012 at 9:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I've noticed that the double post protection doesn't work for squat on my Android devices.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#93 Jun 23 2012 at 11:58 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
And there's a huge difference between the president having an affair (he wasn't the first, won't be the last) and a case where there is documented proof that Holder lied to Congress.

A. Holder lied to Congress about when he first learned of Operation Fast & Furious


If he lied to congress, why wasn't he held in contempt for that lie? Maybe because you need evidence?

Quote:
B. Congressional committee investigating the operation learns there may be documents that prove Holder lied


This isn't true. Issa is hoping there's something else there, & again while executive privilege will always imply some sort of guilt, it doesn't mean there is anything in the documents post F&F that proves anything. He's fishing with subpoenas.

Quote:
C. Despite being legally entitled to review said documents, the committee is stonewalled by Holder


They're only legally entitled to view them if executive privilege doesn't apply. I haven't read the documents, so I can't say either way. Given that the documents requested deal with the response to the F&F investigation & not the F&F program itself, it seems a much "clearer" invocation of E.P. than say, not wanting to admit you fired 7 distract attorneys for partisan reasons.

Quote:
D. Obama wrongfully invokes executive privelege to prevent Holder from having to turn over all documents dealing with OFF and his office's response to it


See above.






Edited, Jun 24th 2012 1:58am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#94 Jun 24 2012 at 8:18 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,259 posts
Quote:
while executive privilege will always imply some sort of guilt


This is only true on an emotional level. Legally (and emotionally) it's like asserting the Fifth: people tend to assume guilty knowledge when in fact that assumption is supposed to be discounted (jurors, for example, are instructed to disregard a witness pleading the Fifth). Executive Privilege is intended to protect ongoing operations and procedure that it would be dangerous to release.

The first President to assert Executive Privilege was George Washington. Clearly guilty of partisan shenanigans, he was.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#95 Jun 24 2012 at 8:22 AM Rating: Good
******
43,931 posts
Yeah, well George Washington wasn't born in America, either.

Edited, Jun 24th 2012 10:23am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#96 Jun 24 2012 at 5:43 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,798 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Quote:
And there's a huge difference between the president having an affair (he wasn't the first, won't be the last) and a case where there is documented proof that Holder lied to Congress.

A. Holder lied to Congress about when he first learned of Operation Fast & Furious


If he lied to congress, why wasn't he held in contempt for that lie? Maybe because you need evidence?

Quote:
B. Congressional committee investigating the operation learns there may be documents that prove Holder lied


This isn't true. Issa is hoping there's something else there, & again while executive privilege will always imply some sort of guilt, it doesn't mean there is anything in the documents post F&F that proves anything. He's fishing with subpoenas.

Quote:
C. Despite being legally entitled to review said documents, the committee is stonewalled by Holder


They're only legally entitled to view them if executive privilege doesn't apply. I haven't read the documents, so I can't say either way. Given that the documents requested deal with the response to the F&F investigation & not the F&F program itself, it seems a much "clearer" invocation of E.P. than say, not wanting to admit you fired 7 distract attorneys for partisan reasons.

Quote:
D. Obama wrongfully invokes executive privelege to prevent Holder from having to turn over all documents dealing with OFF and his office's response to it


See above.


As far as I'm aware, contempt votes have to follow pretty much the same process as bills. Last I heard the contempt vote was in committee and was expected to pass. Not that any of you will admit he lied even if he gets held in contempt. It will just be a Republican witch hunt.

As far as what Issa thinks might be there, had Holder just turned over the requested documents like he is legally bound to do, there wouldn't be any speculation.

The executive privelege is supposed to apply only to the president, not cabinet members or anybody else Obama wants to put that umbrella over. Obama stated publicly recently that he heard about F&F on TV not too long ago, therefore none of the documents from last year can apply to him and executive privelege would not apply.

I'm not even trying to claim that Holder was personally involved in the F&F operation. I am claiming that he lied about when he found out about it and is not trying to cover his *** by not turning over documents that may have proof of that lie. Even if they don't have proof, the Oversight committee is still entitled to review them.

Oh, and earlier Gbaji was trying to list all of the times Obama just thumbed his nose at the law. He forgot appointing Hillary as Secretary of State, a position which she is not legally allowed to hold right now. But with everything else he's done, no reason why something minor like that should be remembered.

Also, sorry about the double posts. I have no clue what's going on with them because I am hitting post 1 time and then alt-tabbing to something else. I have been having some strange interwebz problems lately, maybe this is just another one of those.
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#97 Jun 24 2012 at 5:54 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Not that any of you will admit he lied even if he gets held in contempt. It will just be a Republican witch hunt.

Yeah, no reason to think that when Issa went into the job talking about how many investigations and subpoenas he was going to slap the administration with.

Quote:
As far as what Issa thinks might be there, had Holder just turned over the requested documents like he is legally bound to do, there wouldn't be any speculation.

"If Obama just gave up his birth certificate the issue would die forever! Why won't he always give the birthers exactly what they ask for?! He MUST be hiding things!"

Quote:
Obama stated publicly recently that he heard about F&F on TV not too long ago

Cite? I could see where he was unaware of it while it was occurring. When the administration was being subpoenaed for 7,000+ documents back a year ago, I'm going to guess he was informed.

Quote:
Oh, and earlier Gbaji was trying to list all of the times Obama just thumbed his nose at the law. He forgot appointing Hillary as Secretary of State, a position which she is not legally allowed to hold right now

Smiley: confused
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#98 Jun 24 2012 at 6:27 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,798 posts
I know you're not implying I was, but I was never a birther. My opinion as that if there was dirt like that to find on Obama the Clintons would have found it during the primaries. However, I do believe anybody who wants to run for president should be required to produce their birth certificate.

____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn
Midgarsormr realm
Eartha Kitty 30 BRD/12 MNK
#99 Jun 24 2012 at 6:27 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,931 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Oh, and earlier Gbaji was trying to list all of the times Obama just thumbed his nose at the law. He forgot appointing Hillary as Secretary of State, a position which she is not legally allowed to hold right now
Smiley: confused
While the title is Secretary of State, it is in fact not a secretarial job.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#100 Jun 24 2012 at 6:30 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
**
599 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Oh, and earlier Gbaji was trying to list all of the times Obama just thumbed his nose at the law. He forgot appointing Hillary as Secretary of State, a position which she is not legally allowed to hold right now

Smiley: confused


Article 1, Section 6, Clause 2 wrote:
No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.


Secretary of State had a salary increase in 2008 while Clinton was a senator. The usual fix is that the person's salary is lowered to what it was before the increase, and that's what happened here as well, but apparently it has never really been ruled on and some people are saying that it shouldn't be allowed.

Edited, Jun 24th 2012 8:34pm by Siesen
#101 Jun 24 2012 at 6:31 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,954 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Quote:
Oh, and earlier Gbaji was trying to list all of the times Obama just thumbed his nose at the law. He forgot appointing Hillary as Secretary of State, a position which she is not legally allowed to hold right now

Smiley: confused


A quick Google search yielded this:
http://www.good.is/post/is-hillary-clinton-serving-illegally/
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/02/birthers%E2%80%99-next-target-hillary-clinton

Almost two and a half years old now, apparently it didn't catch any wind.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 80 All times are in CDT