Drug War

Screw Executive Privilege: House Panel Cites Holder for Contempt Anyway

|

From USA Today:

A House oversight committee voted Wednesday to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt, marking an escalation of the long-running dispute between Republicans and the Justice Department over internal administration documents related to Operation Fast and Furious.

The 23-17 vote to hold Holder in contempt of Congress came as President Obama on Wednesday morning invoked executive privilege of certain documents related to the controversial botched gun-trafficking sting.

Don't expect much to come of it, though:

The contempt resolution will have little practical effect on Holder or the Obama administration. The Democratic-controlled Senate will not take action on a contempt resolution. The issue has been percolating in Congress since Republicans took control of Congress in 2011, but the timing of the vote in an election year has further injected politics into the debate.

Yes, it's all politics, the administration supporters are saying. Republicans are just trying to find any route to attack the president on an election year. You'd think somebody got killed or something:

The parents of Brian Terry, the Border Patrol officer whose death put the spotlight on the gun-walking program, also criticized the Obama administration.

"Our son lost his life protecting this nation, and it is very disappointing that we are now faced with an administration that seems more concerned with protecting themselves rather than revealing the truth behind Operation Fast and Furious," Josephine Terry and Kent Terry Sr. said in a statement issued by the family's attorney.

Oh right. That.

Read more of our coverage of the "Fast and Furious" scandal.

NEXT: Scalia Changes His Tune on Wickard and the Commerce Clause. Will It Matter for ObamaCare?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Too bad Eric isn’t in contempt of cop…

  2. Can’t it be an election year and a corpse?

  3. Well, they couldn’t gin up a controversy with the Black Panther fake “intimidation”, the Solyndra $500 million pissed away, the Joe Sestak “job” to take a dive for Arlen, etc.

    Its all the GOP has left this cycle – crumbs. Hey, Bush/Cheney lied us into a disastrous war and got reelected – this is a gnat on a boar’s ass in comparison.

    1. Shorter Shrike: It doesn’t matter how many people die when it’s my team!

      1. Mexican gang members killed Brian Terry.

        Hey, guns don’t kill people, people do!

        1. Holder’s minions armed people that they publicly call enemies of the country. But who gives a fuck, cause they’re on the right team, right shrike?

        2. Using guns (sometimes).

        3. What is like to be retarded and evil?

          1. Chris Matthews’ Buttplug.

          2. Are you from Khazakstan?

            You people are not pro-gun or free-trade. If you were you would applaud the Mexican gun deals.

            1. There is literally nothing you (allegedly) will not say. If you weren’t a sock (meat) puppet, I would be offended.

              1. It’s a troll that posts regularly on the DU boards.

                Ordinary, baseline honesty — intellectual or otherwise — simply isn’t in the poor, dumb thing, ultimately.

    2. Palin’s Buttplug|6.20.12 @ 7:03PM|#
      “Its all the GOP has left this cycle – crumbs. Hey, Bush/Cheney lied us into a disastrous war and got reelected – this is a gnat on a boar’s ass in comparison.

      What a detestable piece of shit you are.

      1. A thing has to amount to something to be hated.

      2. Do you not recall the lies that they told to get Congress to back that shitty war?

        Dickless Cheney working night and day at Langley to create “evidence” that Saddam had WMD? The Mushroom cloud fearmongering? Colin Powell lying to the UN on command? Bush lying about Niger yellowcake?

        What a fucking stooge for the GOP you are.

        1. If CNN had a video of Obama raping and killing immigrant kindergarteners, shrike’s only response would be that Bush killed more brown people.

        2. Even if we supported Bush, it would still be a total non-sequitur, you disingenuous little shit.

        3. You mean the same lies the Clinton administration was telling when they wanted to get a war going with Iraq. Bush could never have gotten the traction he did without all the preparation that had come before.

          Oh, of course it was a brilliant idea when your team was for it, right?

    3. Hey, Bush/Cheney lied us into a disastrous war and got reelected – this is a gnat on a boar’s ass in comparison.

      Is Shrike still trying to win the 2004 election?

      hey shrike give it up man…you are becoming a libertarian now…you have to get use to losing every election.

    4. Well, they couldn’t gin up a controversy with the Black Panther fake “intimidation”, the Solyndra $500 million pissed away, the Joe Sestak “job” to take a dive for Arlen, etc.

      Don’t forget that Barry murdered an American citizen without due process based on secret evidence.

      Hey, Bush/Cheney lied us into a disastrous war and got reelected – this is a gnat on a boar’s ass in comparison.

      Bush ended the war on his way out the door. Barry has managed to escalate Afghanistan, start another war in Libya, sent “military advisers” to the Congo, and by the by, has been butchering people in Africa and Asia via Drone Process.

      Shrike, you are the embodiment of an argument in favor poll taxes and voting tests.

  4. I love divided government. Not only does nothing major get through, but we can count on partisan bickering to provide something like sanctioning wrongdoing in the government.

  5. How piss-poor is BO at financial management? His campaign is already running a deficit 4.5 months before the election, before he even has an official opponent.

    To which “a senior Obama campaign strategist, briefing reporters on condition of anonymity” replies… EEEEEEEVIL SUPERPACS! It’s easy to see why (s)he needed anonymity to repeat administration talking points.

    Try to untangle this logical pretzel:

    “Given Sen. Kerry outraised Bush two to one in the first couple of months after he won the nomination, I think Romney is going to continue to have big months. Combined with that with the super PAC stuff, we’re going to be the first incumbent outspent,” the strategist said.

    1. What’s baffling is, if this is going to be your line of argument, why not seek exactly equal amounts of money for both candidates? I’d still be against it, but it would have the virtue of logical consistency.

      If they’re bitching about Romney outspending them, why would it not equally be a stain on democracy when the incumbent massively out-raises and out-spends his challenger?

      1. Because you’re racist. /msnbc

      2. The funny thing of course is that BO’s existing war chest is much larger than Romney’s. Romney would have to outraise him by a ton month after month to be able to outspend him.

        For Christ’s sake, every commercial break during the local news here in PA has an Obama campaign ad or a union/enviro group ad against Romney. Bush wasn’t running ads against Kerry in flerking June 2004. THAT’s what’s unprecedented.

        There’s a reason that “strategist” had to be anonymous, because (s)he’s peddling absolute horse manure.

      3. This is nothing new. In 2008 Obama said he supported public financing of elections, then broke his promise to accept matching funds, and then he had the audacity to accuse of John McCain, the one Republican that supported CFR, of having his campaign funded by PACs and special interests when the opposite was true.

        I’ll give Barry this: he knows how retarded his followers are and the amount of bullshit they will swallow from him.

        1. He is an amazingly convincing liar.

        2. he knows how retarded his followers are and the amount of bullshit they will swallow from him.

          There’s nothing in this world more genuinely pitiful, ultimately, than some cravenly servile Tina, whimpering and pleading for her beloved Ike to “Smack me right in my worthless bitch mouth just one more time, baby! Please! PLEASE!”

      4. because its the death of democracy /michael moore clone, cnn

    2. Given Sen. Kerry outraised Bush two to one in the first couple of months after he won the nomination, I think Romney is going to continue to have big months. Combined with that with the super PAC stuff, we’re going to be the first incumbent outspent[.]

      Translation: Bush is evil and teh evul SUPER PAXX are only a problem because we’re NOT spending more than they are.

    3. Don’t be a dumbass, Tulpa. That’s Stimulus!

      His campaign is creating and saving jobs. It’s recovery summer for the Obama campaign! Multiplier effect!

  6. “the timing of the vote in an election year has further injected politics into the debate.”

    Of course, every even numbered year there is a national election, and campaigns commence as early as a 18 months prior to the election. So, by definition, every year is pretty much an “election year”.

    But, hey, who has the time to push politics aside with all this campaigning people have to do?

    1. Apparently during an election year, executive branch officials are supposed to be immune to any legislative sanctions.

      1. “Obama might be bad, but the other side is worse, yadda yadda, blah blah blah.”

        1. Why shrike, you’ve suddenly become much more coherent.

  7. Isn’t this a textbook false flag op? DOJ sets up FFLs and facilitates armed gangs. Both done so DOJ can ride to the rescue and save the world from the evil guns.

    1. The cartel gangs are engaging in real attacks designed to serve their own purposes, so it’s not technically false flag.

  8. During any other election, whenever I would hear ‘our guy sucks and has no principles but you have to support him because the other guy is Hitler’ I would shit on them with my words. I’ve done about as much with Tulpa and other Romneypologists. I’m going to stop being so harsh. I can’t vote, and I doubt I’d vote for Romney if I could, but if there was ever a president to vote against with little or no consideration to the failing of his lame opponent, Obama is it. I don’t necessarily agree with voting for Romney, but I’m not going to get all righteous about it. This administration is abnormally evil. It is really something else.

    1. Dude, Romney won’t change jack shit. He build upon what Obama left behind.

      This voting for “the lesser of two evils” bullshit is nauseating. People, don’t ever underestimate the ability of Team Red to out-clusterfuck Team Blue.

      1. Romney’s presidency will be a hapless thing. he won’t accomplish much with his certified Mormon goofy lack of charm and anti-charaisma. It will be somewhat better than Obama. He’d probably remove some of the worst policies of this president, like the Keystone pipeblock.

        Sometimes, the lesser evil is the right choice if the difference is great enough. I don’t know if this is one of those times but it is increasingly hard to dismiss the possibility.

        1. Here’s how I predict the Romney administration turning.

          1) If he wins, he’ll win with GOP control of Congress.

          2) GOP, taking the landslide as a “mandate” to do whatever they want, will engage in some activity to appease their most loyal constituency, southern conservatives…

          3) AMENDMENT TO BAN GAY MARRIAGE

          4) 2014, Democrats win back Congress

          5) Romney, in an effort to copy Clinton’s post-1994 strategy and appeal to a broader base, moves to the Left.

          6) Return of 2006-2008-era Bush years ineptitude.

          1. Fiscal armageddon is gonna sideline all that shit. The gay marriage amendment will get nowhere. I’m sure Romney will suck don’t get me wrong. But this is getting really fucking bad.

            I believe a Romney presidency would allow the TP-Ronulian alliance to distinguish in interesting ways. It could be their moment.

            1. Maybe I’m wrong,

              I actually had high hopes for Bush in 2005. But they pissed down all of that optimism with the Terri Shiavo distraction.

              Sheeit. The first president to win a majority of the vote in 16 years, and he fucked it all up terribly by March.

              1. I actually had high hopes for Bush in 2005.

                David Brooks?

                The salivating over TheManInCharge certainly fits.

                1. Maybe characterizing them as “high” hopes is a bit much, but the focus Bush placed on Social Security reform (whatever one thinks of the accounts his envisioned) seemed to indicate at least a turning point from the America of 20th-Century Big Government Institutions that Kerry stood for in the 2004 campaign.

                  1. Katrina and quagmire in Iraq is what killed Bush in ’05, Schiavo was just icing on the cake.

                    Romney won’t face either of those and the small government faction of the republicans is infinitely stronger now than it was in ’05.

            2. Why would you ally yourself with the Romulans? When have they ever stood for freedom? Don’t let their cloaking technology seduce you.

          2. Return of 2006-2008-era Bush years ineptitude.

            Return? We’re still living with it, the name on the door is just different.

          3. CockGobbla|6.20.12 @ 8:17PM|#
            “Here’s how I predict the Romney administration turning.
            1) If he wins, he’ll win with GOP control of Congress.”

            GJ has my vote, unless:
            It looks like either team red or blue looks to win the POTUS and congress. In which case, I’ll hold my nose and vote for ‘other’ POTUS candidate.
            If you’re considering ‘lesser of two evils’, you can’t do better than a divided government.
            Of course the real hope (absent GJ) is that:
            1) Team red wins congress.
            2) Obama wins POTUS,
            3) And is mired in congressional action over the bogus claim of EP.
            THAT would get my vote!

            1. 4) 2014, Democrats win back Congress

              That scenario is the one I presented to my brother last weekend. Given Romney’s flexibility what happens next in such a case. He said is was worth the risk because you already know where an Obama Administration will go if that were to happen.

              Whatever happens, the number one priority is this: Democrats, sober the fuck up. Snap out of it. Krugman is selling snake oil that wasn’t even that good in its unadulterated form that maybe pepped you up a bit if you already had reserves of unused pep to begin with, but useless and counterproductive if your problem is a few broken bones.

        2. Romney’s presidency will be a hapless thing. he won’t accomplish much with his certified Mormon goofy lack of charm and anti-charaisma. It will be somewhat better than Obama.

          Plus the legacy media will be all over his ass. Heads would be rolling if Romney pulled this fast and furious crap.

          1. Not to mention the “conservative base”, I don’t see Romney getting away with TARP II, National Romneycare or a VAT w/o a huge rebellion from TEAM RED.

            I expect he hopes to get all three.

      2. The GOP has never done anything as bad as the shit BO is doing right now.

        Back in 2004-07, the Bush administration was terrible. Now they’re just amateurs. Literally every bad Bush policy has been extended by the BO admin, along with a few new outrages of his own creation.

      3. No way Romney is running guns to Mexico to try to push gun control at home. No way Romney is pushing EPA regulations on CO2 if Congress doesn’t pass the regs he wants. No way Romney is forbidding companies to build plants in RTW states.

        Maybe you can posit a policy that Romney is likely to pursue that would be worse than what BO is doing already.

        1. There is that ridiculous increase in military spending, but I doubt Obo would be much better and I doubt hypothetical president Romney actually does it.

          1. That would be a problem for me too. Of course it depends on what it’s being spent on. If it’s being spent on bases here at home and stuff, that’s not as bad as on foreign adventures.

            1. I want certain specific foreign adventures and none of them require an increase in military spending.

              1. Keep your Secret Service fantasies out of this!

              2. Still fronting for the Iranian Pantswetters. eh Cyto?

                1. Still acknowledging Iran’s decades of aggression and other facts inconvenient to your narrative yes yes I am.

                  1. Gee, cyto, how would you feel about a country that organizes a coup to overthrow your democratically elected leaders.

                    Seems to me whatever the fuck we got from Iran we fucking asked for.

                    But then your like the bully’s dad who gets all pissed off when the kid his brat has been picking on for years finally takes a swing at him.

                    1. IOW, how many times has the Iranian government overthrown the US government?

                    2. Shut the fuck up. You are ignorant and full of shit like every other historical guilt tripper on this board.

                      1) Mossadegh was an autocrat who sucked at his job and was increasingly reliant on Tudah commies who looked up to the USSR.

                      2) The Mullahs cheered his removal.

                      3) The extent and necessity of American involvement in Mossies removal is unknown. The CIA coup failed it was the masses that threw his ass out.

                      4) All this aside, how would any of this justify collective punishment of Americans? I never asked for anything fuck you very much. Other countries where America removed bad leaders like Peru aren’t sending suicide bombers and funding global jihad. Maybe they move on or better yet accept the favor America did them.

                    3. Sooo, where are the Iranian invasions again? And where are the advocates for “punishing” America? Delusional much, Cyto?

          2. Mitt’s warboner is a problem, but this is where you hope Rand Paul’s endorsement and the Paul takeover of the GOP will come into play and possibly they could temper that. Mitt doesn’t strike me as ideologically committed to anything, hence with the right people around him he might do some good things.

            1. The mistake I made with W in 2000, the last time I voted for a non LP candidate, was assuming he had some prudence about him, similar to his old man who refused to take the Gulf War further than the limited goal he set for it. Gore was the one with a twenty year record of hawkish rhetoric at the time, so I went with the lesser evil in terms of the information available. Who really knows? Maybe President Gary Johnson is actually Martin Sheen’s presidential character from the Dead Zone.

              1. Not to mention all the things he said about Clinton’s merry meddling in all the random shit that happened around the world in the 90s.

                Hell, I thought even the Iraq war was going to be a topple the regime, break all their military hardware, and leave.

              2. Poppy Bush stopping Gulf War I in progress to appease the “International Coalition” was the worst possible thing he could have done.

                1. SIV is absolutely right. I would have preferred no Gulf War I, but once again compromise made everything a hundred times worse-and necessitated Gulf War II, which was really one and the same as GWI.

                  1. Poppy made promises to the coalition, and he really did owe him his word, and he kept those promises. I have no problem with that. Would have preferred to have made a preferential arrangement with Hussein for that Kuwaiti oil just to show Margaret who she can’t push around, but in the conduct of that war, George H. was nothing short of a master politician.

                    1. hundred times worse-and necessitated Gulf War II

                      Hussein was boxed in just as GHW intended, and remained so even in the Clinton years. He wasn’t going anywhere and he had no power to exert beyond Iraqi borders. There was no necessity involved, and that is why it was a war of necessity and not of choice.

                    2. There was no necessity involved, and tThat is why it was a war of necessity and not of choice.

                    3. WTF! The correction worded even worse! You win, okay, Cyto. You win!
                      Taking my marbles. home.

                    1. Fucking threading. I was agreeing with cyto who expanded on exactly my position on the Gulf Wars.

                      Hell NO ! to GWI
                      Very reluctant yes to GWII

              3. The mistake I made with W in 2000, the last time I voted for a non LP candidate, was assuming he had some prudence about him, similar to his old man who refused to take the Gulf War further than the limited goal he set for it.

                Well in fairness to Bush, he did have the worst attack on US soil since at least WWII and maybe the Civil War.

                He freaked the fuck out and went way to far, but it’s hard to say that he would have been a warmonger without 9-11.

                Remember that it was the republican that opposed the Kosovo war, to a limited extent, and Bush ran on a humble foreign policy and against nation building in 00.

                1. If he had ONLY attacked Afghanistan, you would have a point.

                  But he didnt, so you dont.

                  1. We were already at War with Iraq. We never should have been, or it should have been over but Poppy Bush “pulled out” too soon. If only he’d done the same with Babs 45 years or so earlier…

                    1. *cough* Korea *cough*

        2. No way Romney is forbidding companies to build plants in RTW states.

          That is about as outrageous as anything anyone has gotten away with domestically since FDR, but hardly gets a mention anywhere. I recall seeing the e-mails from the labor board responsible; the people on it and working for them were juvenile and lacked any intellectual capacity to understand the immorality of the power they were abusing.

  9. How can Executive Privilege apply to docs and discussions that by Clown’s admission the Executive never knew about or had any part in or even crossed through his Office?

    Bizarre this most transparent administration is.

    1. That’s because the administration is asserting the deliberative process form of the privilege, and not the presidential communication form of the privilege.

      It’s a weaker form of the privilege (it arises out of the common law, rather than the separation of powers), but broader in scope.

      1. I would be curious as to an example of this common law and the legal precedent of it. Even Shrub never tried this shit.

        Whole concept must be from one of these convenient ‘memos’ that are now favorite legal tool (written by legal tools) of corrupt administrations.

        1. See United States v. Nixon.

          1. I believe Nixster lost that one. Lemme check the Wiki…he did!

    2. TheZeitgeist|6.20.12 @ 8:14PM|#
      “How can Executive Privilege apply to docs and discussions that by Clown’s admission the Executive never knew about or had any part in or even crossed through his Office?”

      That was Nixon’s claim.

    3. How can Executive Privilege apply to docs and discussions that by Clown’s admission the Executive never knew about

      Wow, that is a great question! I think I’ll go ask right now… oh hey, is that Kim Kardashian over there? Kim! Kim! Can you answer a few questions for your adoring fans? How’s Kanye doing?

  10. A nitpick:

    The Democratic-controlled Senate will not take action on a contempt resolution.

    That’s true, but irrelevant. The House doesn’t require the Senate’s assent in order to proceed.

    1. The Democrat-controlled DOJ is however relevant to enforcing the contempt citation….

      1. For the fifteen minutes between when the citation arrives on the U.S. attorney’s desk, and he declines to pursue it. At that point the House can vote to authorize Issa to sue Holder in civil court on the House’s behalf.

        1. Given Gov. Brewer’s dislike of the Prez and aptitude for grandstanding, perhaps the law could branch in a new direction and Arizona could file a criminal complaint against Holder regarding its own investigation etc.

          All they need is one dead illegal immigrant and a Fast n’ Furious gun, there’s one in those parts somewhere by now for sure.

  11. A nitpick:

    The Democratic-controlled Senate will not take action on a contempt resolution.

    That’s true, but irrelevant. The House doesn’t require the Senate’s assent in order to proceed.

    1. Fucking squirrels.

      1. It’s always the squirrels’ fault, isn’t it, BC?

        1. Or Epi’s. But my understanding is that Warty has him tied up in the gimp closet today.

  12. Let’s re-elect the Obamessiah and give the Republicans a super-majority in both houses of congress so he can be impeached; tried; convicted; and imprisoned.

    1. That would be pretty awesome actually…

      If BO and Biden got impeached and tossed out…and Rand Paul got into Boner’s positions beforehand…

      1. Rand Paul is moving to the House?

        1. Yeah, he’d have to stage an “accident” for Boehner, then whack every Senator in front of him in terms of seniority to get to be president in that scenario.

          Speaking of which, who the hell thought it would be a good idea to have the President Pro Tempore of the Senate be 4th in line to the presidency?

        2. Dammit stop ruining my fantasies Tulpa!

          Replace ‘Rand Paul’ with Ron Paul and my fantasy holds.

          1. Ron Paul will be retired, so another fantasy ruined I guess. Amash perhaps?

            1. I’ll take just about anything we got.

              1. So what you’re saying is… you’ll take it all… like a… like a good girl?

                1. As long as it’s libertarian-shaped. No Warty put it away NO WARTY N-

  13. Nancy Pelosi, national treasure?

    Via Drudge earlier today:

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/06…..given-day/

    1. From the link:
      “It’s unclear if Pelosi is aware Rove did not serve in a Bush administration position that’s identical to Holder’s in the Obama administration.”

      It’s also unclear whether she is intelligent enough to understand the difference.
      Well, really it isn’t. She’s not.

      1. I remember very dinstinctly how they grilled Alberto Gonzales over the firing of US Attorneys, which, while undeniably shady and politicall motivated, doesn’t come close to faciltiating the murder of a US Border Patrol agent. How do these people sleep at night?

        1. How do these people sleep at night?

          You’d be amazed how well you sleep after a nice cup of baby’s blood.

        2. I remember very dinstinctly how they grilled Alberto Gonzales over the firing of US Attorneys

          Why is firing an employee for any reason ever shady?

          Oh yeah that’s right bureaucrats have a god given ‘right’ to their ‘jobs’.

          1. This “scandal” was my introduction to TEAM BLUE bullshit. It came out just as I started college and I wondered how exactly a new administration replacing people could be at all out of the ordinary. Bunch of bullshit. Fortunately I realized TEAM RED was full of the same bullshit soon after.

      2. Pelosi’s also incompetent. She is a hapless shit in opposition, even when the majority throws her softballs to hit all day (remember the Bush years?).

        And when she’s in the majority? Well, it took about twelve months of her antics to throw a historic (and unearned by her) majority into legislative cryostasis that converted into a historic turnover twelve months after that.

        And the Donktards gave her another shot. Pathetic.

        1. TheZeitgeist|6.20.12 @ 8:53PM|#
          “Pelosi’s also incompetent.

          When the Chron runs one of the regular puff-pieces about the hag, the common (complimentary) refrain is that she’s ‘anti-repub’! This from a rag editorially opposed to ‘partisanship’. You would be correct to assume that means anything team red supports.
          The best the Chron can come up with was a piece of pork she drug home, spending $Xm on bike paths.
          That woman is despicable.

      3. letter:words::atoms:?

        a) solutions
        b) matter
        c) molecules
        d) KARL ROVE

    2. Jezus, what a fucking hag.

      She’s basically admitting that there is a silent agreement among the parties that all the illegal shit they do won’t have any consequences. Not that she would have been able to arrest Rove on anything.

      And you gotta love that ‘jobs’ shit. I got yer job right here.

      *grabs crotch, shakes vigorously*

      Look lady, every time you fumbling nincompoops try to create jobs you get about a million Americans laid off. How about you fuckers give it a rest for a while. Seriously, I don’t think we can take any more of your ‘help’.

      1. She wants you to be able to play your guitar on the side street collecting tips while not having to worry about your health insurance, food, shelter, condoms and every other material need. You don’t want to play guitar on the street? You have other plans for your life? How else does she get to relive the Height-Ashburry culture she moved into in the 60’s and found to be so lovely she never wanted to leave if you don’t cooperate with her plan for you?

        1. I don’t know. That assumes there is some sort of idealism fueling her sort and not just craven politicking and ham-fisted power grabs.

          1. Her brain is so mushed it all runs together. Not so much idealism, but wistful sentiment.

      2. “It’s just the irresponsibility of the Republicans,” Pelosi said. “We want jobs. Why are they spending this time doing this?”

        I can feel my brain start to fail here. There needs to be and LD50 established with warnings for this level of contempt/stupid. Christ I don’t even

        I JUST FIGURED OUT WHO TONY IS

        1. Tony is a Reason editor.

          1. “Original” Tony anyways.

          2. Pelosi is a Reason editor????

            It’s all starting to make sense.

            1. Sadly, that would actually go some ways towards explaining why so many Reason staffers bumbled and stumbled over themselves in the rush to endorse OBomber, four years ago.

              A genuinely low moment, that.

        2. Yes, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform needs to stop engaging in all that oversight and government reform related crap.

      3. “We want jobs” = “Let’s do another trillion dollar stimulus!”

  14. What’s this bullshit about all the jobs that will be lost and/or not created by the GoP because this I keep seeing on Twitter from all the liberals?

    1. Examples:

      “How many jobs does this create?”
      “This sort of hate wont help you in November.”
      “Wasting tax dollars on this shit wont help you create jobs.”
      etc.

    2. Pretty simple:
      Misdirection and spin.

    3. Dead border guards = open positions at immigration = jobs!

      Makes more sense than Krugabe.

  15. I don’t hold out any hope that anything will come of this. But it’s fun to watch the Kos Kiddies shit themselves. H.L. Mencken was right: politics is a carnival of buncombe, and its primary value is as entertainment.

    1. It is fun to watch these guys twist and spin on why their special heroes should be able to hide their dirty laundry. Most. Transparent. Administration. Ever.

      1. Most. Transparent. Administration. Ever.

        That bore repeating. And honestly, I think they are pretty fucking transparent – just not the way the adoring retards expected.

        1. The Obama Administration is the most transparent administration in history. The most transparently imperial; the most transparently opposed to the Constitution; the most transparently incompetent; And the most transparent in its disdain for liberty.

    2. So have the plain folk reached their heart’s desire? And what do we do if they have?

    3. What will come of it is Holder will be held in contempt, the House will sue in federal court, and a judge will order him to turn over the documents. Then BO will refuse and he will be at odds with two of the three branches.

      1. Doesn’t the Senate have to vote on a contempt charge once passed by the house? Never will it happen.

        1. No the Senate does not. The House can sue him directly.

  16. Rep. Patrick Meehan (R-PA) addresses the House Oversight Committee during a meeting to vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in Contempt

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..plpp_video

  17. I was thinking back to the good ole days with Edwin Meese. What is it about the nation’s highest cop that attracts such scumbags.

    1. You answered your own question…

      C-O-P

  18. Is it me or does Holder look just weird? That face isn’t punchable…but…it looks…just like a sloth’s face. Really.

    1. He’s more punchable than any of the other punchable douches when you actually see him in action. He is so fucking smug, like a murderer who knows for a fact his lawyers are going to destroy the prosecution.

    2. I’ve heard rumors that he’s clinically depressed over a family member’s death, wanted to resign a while back and was basically ordered not to by Obama – Jarrett.

      Don’t know if there is anything to it and have not seen any reports to that effect in the media but it does fit his overall performance and disposition.

      1. Or the people starting the rumors are just laying the groundwork for a potential “suicide”.

  19. http://www.washingtonpost.com/….._blog.html

    The stupid in these comments is just breath taking. If Obama decided to start locking people in camps and gassing them, these people would go along. I really am starting to fear for the future. There is nothing these toadies won’t defend and support, nothing. It is just a matter of time before someone takes advantage of that and starts killing people.

    1. There’s a list for that.

      1. The reason that it bugs me so much is I’m familiar with enough history to know the pattern.

        When a officer in the theater makes the decision it is all about the war.

        When a general one removed from the theater makes the decisions, it is half about the war and half about the politics.

        When it is the president, the decision made is all about the politics.

          1. It is just a matter of time before someone takes advantage of that and starts killing people.

            1. Ok. Yeah. The only thing that stops a President is when his own people turn on him. Nixon would have gotten away with Watergate had the Republicans in Congress stayed loyal. At this point there is nothing that Obama or really any Democratic President can do that will alienate liberals. They will defend him no matter what. And that is very dangerous.

              1. He is their messiah. When they do eventually come to their senses it will last for only a moment, and then they will swing to vicious anger that he failed to be their messiah. That will be even worse.

                1. So, JFK all over again?

                2. He is their messiah. When they do eventually come to their senses it will last for only a moment, and then they will swing to vicious anger that he failed to be their messiah. That will be even worse.

                  Life imitates art. Wasn’t that the storyline for The Who’s Tommy?

              2. It makes me actually glad for the kooky militias in America. We could use a few in Canada. We might well need them.

              3. John|6.20.12 @ 9:58PM|#
                “Ok. Yeah. The only thing that stops a President is when his own people turn on him.”

                If you mean other politicos, they’re trailing indicators.
                Nixon had to give it up since even the general population wouldn’t support him or those who supported him.
                The other politicos bailed on him as a result of self-preservation.

                1. Yep, the same thing is already happening to Obama – see Clinton, WV democrats, Cory Booker etc. The thing is that we are just starting to see the ice crack from under O. It will not only continue but accelerate.

    2. The things some people can make themselves believe. From those comments:

      raywilliams
      8:41 PM EDT
      I assume the Administration believed over 1,000 documents would provide the information they were seeking. Clearly a witch hunt designed to take the public eye off Romney’s support of Bush Economic policies.

      Yeah, it’s Romney who needs to distract voters from his economic policies. What a dope.

      1. And this whole thing is over Holder’s honest mistake that he had already answered the request. If you can convince yourself of that, what won’t you believe?

  20. In the wake of President Barack Obama asserting executive privilege to withhold Operation Fast and Furious documents from Congress, the Department of Justice has withdrawn a second statement made to Congress because it was inaccurate.

    During last week’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Holder had alleged that former Attorney General Michael Mukasey knew of gunwalking during the George W. Bush administration.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/06…..z1yO9SyZgG

    So much for this being a “Bush Program”.

    1. I would be really curious about the social network of the guys closest to both Wide Receiver and FF — McAllister, Voth, and especially Newell, who from the Dobyns story sounds like a truly vile piece of work.

      Who hired them? Who in the leadership is looking out for them, and why? That sort of thing. It might still go back to Holder or Janet Napolitano, who were US Attorneys under Clinton, but I think any real answer to what was going on and whether there was some sort of malicious conspiracy has to tackle that angle.

  21. In Louisiana sex offenders must now put their crimes on their facebook pages.

    Here’s the story.

    Wow.

    1. Is it just me or does the guy who sponsored it look like a sex offender?

      1. That’s exactly what I thought, damn.

        I was thinking maybe the law was written after some fat-faced bastard lured some kiddies using his pinterest posts, or something

        1. He looks like a junior high girls soccer coach who tries to feel up your daughter.

    2. Yeah, because the peeps caught peeing in public should have their entire life wrecked…

  22. The law states that sex offenders and child predators “shall includes in his profile for the networking website an indication that he is a sex offender or child predator and shall include notice of the crime for which he was convicted, the jurisdiction of conviction, a description of his physical characteristics… and his residential address.

    What purpose could the last serve but to stir violence?

    1. Look at it this way. If they made the same rule for cops or legislators, they would claim it was putting their lives in danger. So it doesn’t with child molesters?

      1. I had an acquaintance who got on the sex offender list for pissing behind a bowling alley. Arrested for ‘lewd behavior’ when the only other person behind the place was a nosey voyeuristic cop. Cop didn’t stop him in mid stream to make his presence known but waited until there was nothing to see.

  23. Of course Holder and his apologists are correct that this is all just politics. Team Blue came up with a plan to manufacture evidence which would support their politically based dream that American guns are arming Mexican drug gangs – by selling American guns directly to those drug gangs.

    Then an additional layer of politics was shoveled over that by using the above as a reason to unilaterally enact a regulation to require multiple sales of these types of firearms be reported (even in CA where they are already banned – WTF?) – which acts as a de facto curb on sales.

    Zero reality – 100% politics. Unless you count the dead Mexicans and an American here and there.

    Holder will simply wear this action as a badge of honor among his Team.

  24. Ignore the gun issue Shreek. Congress is exercising its oversight authority and the Justice Dept and Executive Branch are circumventing it.

  25. OT,

    I hadn’t read iowahawk for a while. This is via iowahawk from the Daily Mail.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ds-newsxml

    4th picture down. I couldn’t take my eyes off the microwave oven that’s fitted neatly into the kitchen cabinetry. How the fuck does that happen? Either these people have enough spare time to sort through microwave oven catalogs to find one that fits just right in their existing kitchen cabinets or they enough time and money to build the cabinetry that fits around it. Either way they don’t need any help from the government.

    1. It’s a newish house and the cabinetry is designed to fit standard appliances. It’s really not unusual at all. Or do you also the way that dishwashers, trash compactors, refrigerators and ovens fit snugly within kitchen cabinets?

      1. I knew floor mount appliances like a dishwasher had standard footprints, but I didn’t know microwave ovens did too. I only make $100k a year in Los Angeles, so I rent.

        1. I make well less than 60k in Seattle, I have a one of the nicer heating grate.

    2. He urged Congress to pass legislation so homeowners without government-backed loans also can take advantage of the savings when refinancing. The speech came with light audience cheers.

      President: It’s time to turn off the war macine, and turn on our children…*cough*… turn on our children.

      1. Jerry Sandusky turned on children.

  26. I bet that it’s illegal under Mexican law to engage in a conspiracy to smuggle weapons to Mexican criminals without even informing Mexican law enforcement you’re doing it.

    I note that there are at least 200 Mexicans who were killed with guns smuggled to Mexico by Fast Furious.

    I expect that a U.S. pardon doesn’t have any legal effect in Mexican law.

    I imagine being held in contempt of Congress is a lot less frightening to your average American official than the specter of being tried in Mexico for actions related to the deaths of over 200 Mexican citizens.

  27. The U.S. government would have to extradite him first, and somehow I don’t think that’s gonna happen. That would be pretty awesome though.

    1. I am curious how this story is playing out in Mexico though. Is it a big scandal with people demanding accountability, or does nobody care?

  28. lol, dude is clearly corrupt as the day is long.

    http://www.Anon-Ways.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.