Reply With Quote
"headwinds"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_16...-10391695.html
WASHINGTON - New do ents obtained by CBS News show Attorney General Eric Holder was sent briefings on the controversial Fast and Furious operation as far back as July 2010. That directly contradicts his statement to Congress.
On May 3, 2011, Holder told a Judiciary Committee hearing, "I'm not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks."
Yet internal Justice Department do ents show that at least ten months before that hearing, Holder began receiving frequent memos discussing Fast and Furious.
The do ents came from the head of the National Drug Intelligence Center and Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer.
In Fast and Furious, ATF agents allegedly allowed thousands of weapons to cross the border and fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.
It's called letting guns "walk," and it remained secret to the public until Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered last December. Two guns from Fast and Furious were found at the scene, and ATF agent John Dodson blew the whistle on the operation.
Ever since, the Justice Department has publicly tried to distance itself. But the new do ents leave no doubt that high level Justice officials knew guns were being "walked."
Two Justice Department officials mulled it over in an email exchange Oct. 18, 2010. "It's a tricky case given the number of guns that have walked but is a significant set of prosecutions," says Jason Weinstein, Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division. Deputy Chief of the National Gang Unit James Trusty replies "I'm not sure how much grief we get for 'guns walking.' It may be more like, "Finally they're going after people who sent guns down there."
The Justice Department told CBS News that the officials in those emails were talking about a different case started before Eric Holder became Attorney General. And tonight they tell CBS News, Holder misunderstood that question from the committee - he did know about Fast and Furious - just not the details.
"headwinds"
Did you mean Roger Clemmens?
Did you mean Bill Clinton?
i guess he could use the "i don't recall" defense.
Yeah, Clemens.
oops
Steroids in baseball is SO much more important than our Federal government giving thousands of guns to the Mexican drug cartels.
I think we can all agree the government made WAY too big a deal out of steroids in baseball
back in the day...americans ed and moaned about the east germans.
"thousands of guns"
probably bought those guns from NRA members, it's all about the $$$.
I could have sworn a previous administration received a memo about planes flying into buidlings prior to planes flying into buildings...
then the administration claimed it had no prior warning when in fact they had
..and the same right wingers were silent back then...and now they are outraged by memos and stuff..
just sayin
What a ing idiot
lol Nolan Ryan
lol nolan ryan..
"The weekly reports (100 + pages) are provided to the office of the AG and (deputy attorney general) each week from approximately 24 offices and components. These are routine reports that provide general overviews and status updates on issues, policies, cases and investigations from offices and components across the country. None of these reports referenced the controversial tactics of that allowed guns to cross the border," the official said.
lol idiot
lol gullible koolaid drinking idiot
I like Nolan Ryan. He was a great home run hitter.
While I don't agree with anyone lying, I'd say his "I'm not sure of the exact date" covers him.
Especially since Abu Gonzalez was able to say, "I don't recall" four thousand times and get away scot-free.
It was the part, following that statement, where he said; "...a few weeks ago," when, in fact, it had been ten months.
So, AG Gonzalez is smarter than AG Holder. Your point?
Hence the statement, "I'm not sure", and then the further, "probably heard about it".
Highly debatable. Anyways, "I'm not sure" is nearly the same as saying, "I don't recall" in this instance. If you ask me what my wife had for breakfast a week ago, and I say, "Eggs" when it happened to be pancakes, it doesn't mean I'm deliberately lying.
All that said, Holder probably was lying. I just don't think you could use any statement that says, "I'm not sure" and then try to convict him on it, anymore than you could convict Abu for saying, "I don't recall" a hundred times.
At least Gonzalez didn't qualify the remark with a time frame. There's the stupidity.
Only if you genuinely thought it was eggs. If you didn't know and said, "eggs" because you didn't think it mattered and, in fact, it turned out to be "pancakes." I say you lied.
I don't think all the facts are out. It appears the July 2010 memorandum that put the lie to his "few weeks ago" qualifier was just the beginning of a long run of updates and briefings in which the Fast and Furious "gunwalking" practice was mentioned.
In other words, if you establish "Fast and Furious" was something that routinely crossed the AG's desk for a period of 10 months, I'd say claiming you'd only heard about it a "few weeks ago," is a blatant lie.
How do you prove, "I don't recall," is a lie?
I wonder if yoni or CC has ever told a lie? Nah, their conservative views will not allow them to lie.
Sure I lie; but, I don't do it under oath.
But you are a liar. Hypocrite.
If only Yoni had been all over the Repug lies before the Iraq war with the intensity he brings to sleuthing the Dems, he'd be able to say that he discovered the lies rather than defending his sorry ass by saying there were no lies and the Iraq was fully justified.
I think "lying" in this case requires a deliberate attempt at falsification.
Note: I think Holder lied above, I just don't think it's enough "proof" to get him. It's not like he said, "Definitely X time".
I don't think all the facts are out. It appears the July 2010 memorandum that put the lie to his "few weeks ago" qualifier was just the beginning of a long run of updates and briefings in which the Fast and Furious "gunwalking" practice was mentioned.
Fair enough.
Well, one could use common sense. If one was an attorney general, you'd think they had some idea of what was actually going on in his office. That said, it IS hard to say he's lying without direct proof he "remembered" in another instance.
So instead of a liar, he just looks like a bumbling incompetent fool.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
