Presidential Executive Privilege

[UncleBuck]

Hes still trying to figure out how to twist this to make his lord and savior look good. Give him a few.

i can't tell who's taking this whole rawn pawl is a loser thing worse, you or your big bruvva deprave.

deprave is chanting creepily about how much rawn won, while you are manically fail trolling like an autistic third grader with tourettes.

either way, i'm deriving great entertainment value put of it all, knowing what you must be going through with the defeat of your lord and savior, glorious king turtle fucker supreme.

 

[beenthere]

The power of the exec vs. the power of Congress, this is an old battle. Recall Cheney's refusal to issue energy policy meeting notes and attendees, this could be along the same lines. Now it could indeed be that Obama is covering his ass but that is not the only explaination. Presidents do have a stake in keeping the exec on top of the heap.

Dick Cheney was part of the executive branch.
Obama injected himself into this by invoking executive privilege, what other reason would he have than to cover his ass. The AG is a cabinet member, he's not protected under the privilege unless he is claiming he had executive communication with the president. Holder and Obama have both been on record disputing this!

 

[chrishydro]

They are no doubt ordering in at the Romney Camp today. This will spin like crazy by the end of the week... I think unless a statment is issued by the WH soon they pretty much have given away the Election.


Flat out cover up, flat out lies, put that together with Russia, Syria, The Economy and the Press leaks. They are done. Oh did I mention that in the middle of this the Supreme Court is soon going to render verdict on Health Care.

I bet they are rolling up fat ones at the White House now. lol

 

[canndo]

The practice of walking contraband to bad guys while undercover, and then busting them right there on the spot when they exchange money for it, began a long time ago. Lots of people have done it, in many law enforcement organizations, all over America, for a long long time, including the Bush DOJ.

That's not what Obama and Holder did. They gave them guns, and let them go. They made gun dealers work with them. They stopped people from busting the bad guys. This is not what everyone else throughout history has done, thus the problem.

Um, no. Wide receiver put rfid tracking devices on the guns and allowed them to "walk" across the border.


"The Times reported from Washington on Monday that the Bush administration managed a program similar to Fast and Furious in 2006-07. Mexican President Felipe Calderon took office in December 2006.
In that program, dubbed Wide Receiver, weapons were allowed into Mexico, just as later occurred in Operation Fast and Furious in 2009 and 2010, The Times reported. About 2,000 weapons were "walked" in Mexico and later showed up at scores of crime scenes, Mexican officials have said. "

LA Times

 

[chrishydro]

I watched the Comunist News Network (CNN) for a while and not a damm word about this. Switch over to FOX and they are live on the floor.

CNN has Jimmy Carter (the other worst president) on the phone giving his opinion of what Obama should do about Egypt.


Best example of the blind leading the blind I have ever seen.

 

[canndo]

You nailed it. Be prepared, your factual argument will now be dismissed, disparaged or ignored because you're not a liberal cheerleading this train wreck of an administration.

I wish I had a meme of Obama on a horse labeled "Obama's Presidency", already ridden off a cliff, while he spurs and whips it, screaming maniacally "Faster...Faster".

And when his "factual argument" is demonstrated not to be factual? Would you claim my response as a dismisal a disparagement or - well, it certainly wasn't ignored.

 

[Truncheon]

LA Times

Pardon me while I reject anything about this incident, that comes from the LA Times, the NY Times, Huffington Post, or MSNBC. There's no distinction between the LA Times, and Jay Carney.

When you start accepting Rush Limbaugh as "factual authority", I'll consider accepting the LA Times...

Oh, and by the way, Operation Wide Receiver only involved a total of 500 guns. That would make the LA Time's claim just a bit suspicious...

 

[canndo]

Dick Cheney was part of the executive branch.
Obama injected himself into this by invoking executive privilege, what other reason would he have than to cover his ass. The AG is a cabinet member, he's not protected under the privilege unless he is claiming he had executive communication with the president. Holder and Obama have both been on record disputing this!

You aren't saying that the AG is not a member of the exectutive are you Beenthere?

 

[londonfog]

Pardon me while I reject anything about this incident, that comes from the LA Times, the NY Times, Huffington Post, or MSNBC. There's no distinction between the LA Times, and Jay Carney.

When you start accepting Rush Limbaugh as "factual authority", I'll consider accepting the LA Times...

Did someone own you in a conversation to make you change your account name?? LOL

 

[canndo]

Pardon me while I reject anything about this incident, that comes from the LA Times, the NY Times, Huffington Post, or MSNBC. There's no distinction between the LA Times, and Jay Carney.

When you start accepting Rush Limbaugh as "factual authority", I'll consider accepting the LA Times...

Oh, and by the way, Operation Wide Receiver only involved a total of 500 guns. That would make the LA Time's claim just a bit suspicious...

And we are off. MuylocoNC, you watching? No information is correct unless it comes from the right source, thus Truncheon preserves his version of reality. Sir, I posted one source, I will post more. Much as you dismiss legitimate news sources you cannot compare them to a self avowed "entertainer".


so how about "human events" - powerful conservative voices, um.... the place I found the LA Times Quote BTW. Seems they believe the L A Times, at least in this situation.

http://www.humanevents.com/2011/10/07/no-operation-wide-receiver-does-not-excuse-obama-or-holder/


Of course I seriously doubt you will admit you were wrong, conservatives are incapable of such things. MuyLocoNC? you watching?

 

[StevenSD420]

The guy who was wrong, and who now has to correct himself, thinks *I* (the guy who has been unfailingly correct) needs to do more research. How funny.

whatever man click the link, i'm posting while there is down time at work right now, so i'm not even double checking what i type; damn you want to bounce on liberals for trying to correct people and how they post on forums? look in the mirror; you're all the same in a failing two party system

 

[Justin00]

Lol of course not.

Bush isnt a black Kenyan Muslim imperialist

Funny how the opinions of many change when a black dude becomes president.

You dont remember all the protests about spending, deficits and liberty when we had a white president?

really? i remember A LOT of people complaining and protesting about Bush spending, deficits, and liberty..... seems like you guys are forgetting intentionally to try and pin more racists.

Is everything racial to you guys?

 

[Truncheon]

so how about "human events" - powerful conservative voices, um.... the place I found the LA Times Quote BTW. Seems they believe the L A Times, at least in this situation.

Do they? Let's read your citation....

"Of course, “some” emails referring to Wide Receiver has absolutely no logical bearing on other emails referring specifically to Fast and Furious. I’m sure the next Republican Attorney General can count on the same kind of helpful spin and misdirection from the Washington Post ... Wide Receiver was less than one-quarter the size of Fast and Furious, involving about 500 guns ... Operation Wide Receiver was, by all accounts, shut down after its weapons dropped off the grid, and the ATF realized it had blundered.
...
Far from letting the Obama Administration “off the hook” because “Bush did it too,” an understanding of the full Operation Wide Receiver story makes the Obama scandal worse."

It would behoove you to actually *read* your citations, before you go shooting your mouth off at other people. LA Times says "2,000" guns got to Mexico, I said only 500 total guns were even involved. Human Events agrees with me, and disagrees with you and the LA Times.

Any questions? No, I didn't think so. Now I hope you understand why no thinking person accepts anything written in the LA Times at face value. The LA Times is a wholly owned subsidiary of the DNC.

 

[UncleBuck]

really? i remember A LOT of people complaining and protesting about Bush spending...

our archives go back to 2006, and i scanned them hard.

not a single thread about the debt ceiling, spending, etc.

nothing, not a peep.

the archives are there, prove me wrong!

 

[beenthere]

You aren't saying that the AG is not a member of the exectutive are you Beenthere?

The AG is an appointed cabinet member and must be confirmed by the senate, the AG works for the executive branch.

 

[Justin00]

I hope you'll have the same anger at Obama for doing it, as you had with Bush.

But somehow I don't suppose you will.

Bush had to invoke executive privilege because the Democrats in Congress were obstructing the execution of a frigging war, for crying out loud. This isn't about war, or national security, or diplomatic secrets, it's about a crummy law enforcement operation at the DOJ.

I'm afraid that "Bush did it, it's Bush's fault" just ain't making it anymore, pal.

What we have is an anti-gun extremist as president, who attempted to create a scandal by sending American guns to Mexican cartels. The idea was that the Mexicans would *kill Americans* with the guns, then Obama could say, "See? We need gun control!". And that's what Holder and Obama don't want being investigated.

It's all thoroughly researched and documented in journalist Katie Pavlich's "Fast and Furious: Barack Obama's Bloodiest Scandal and Its Shameless Cover-Up"

You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Furious-Bloodiest-Shameless-Cover-Up/dp/1596983213

Then again, that is a big part of the reason we have a congress. Its weird how people look at things isnt it? all the reps are pissed Obama is cheating the system and says its fine when bush did it, and all the dims are pissed about Bush doing it and say Obama is justified.....

it kinda makes us look dumb...... a little

 

[Justin00]

our archives go back to 2006, and i scanned them hard.

not a single thread about the debt ceiling, spending, etc.

nothing, not a peep.

the archives are there, prove me wrong!

my bad i was talking about nationally, i didn't realize you guys were talking about just on here. misunderstanding soz.

 

[CharlieBud]

Is all about being "the most transparent Administration in US history".

 

[UncleBuck]

my bad i was talking about nationally, i didn't realize you guys were talking about just on here. misunderstanding soz.

it's fine, no worries. but it still stands nationally. righties were not having apoplectic conniptions over the spending and debt until obama got in.

another thing you'll notice around here is that there are few if any liberals popping up every day with 3 posts and delving right into politics.

the righties get owned so often they resort to making up sock puppets.

 

[Truncheon]

Then again, that is a big part of the reason we have a congress.

Everybody in Congress, both parties, voted to authorize the war with the exception of like five people. Congress continued to fund the war, every budget cycle. The Congress is empowered to defund a war, that is its check on the Executive.

The Democrats voted to fund the war in vast majority, and then sought to pander to their base with a bunch of frivolous inquiries, threats of war crimes indictments, and other such laughable nonsense. To the point the Executive had to invoke privilege on a number of ocassions.

What we have with Obama is totally different. Bush *was* justified. Obama is *not* justified.