1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.

Ann Coulter - Fast & Furious Part 2

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by Brian in Oregon, Jul 11, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    17,384
    FAST AND FURIOUS IS NOT A D.C. LAW FIRM

    July 11, 2012

    Most Americans don't care about whether Attorney General Eric Holder is hiding Fast and Furious documents because they don't understand the story.

    Until someone can tell us otherwise, there is only one explanation for why President Obama's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives gave thousands of guns to Mexican drug dealers: It put guns in their hands to strengthen liberals' argument for gun control.

    Precisely because this is such a jaw-dropping accusation -- criminality at the highest level of government to score a political point -- Republicans refuse to make it.

    But the problem with Republican rectitude in discussing this scandal is that as soon as they start talking about subpoenas and dates and documents, TV channels change across America. They're never going to get answers unless they first explain to the American people why it matters.

    Liberals have been dying to reinstate the so-called "assault weapons" ban, but they haven't been able to for political reasons. (For more information on this, see the 1994 congressional elections.)

    A typically idiotic Democratic scheme, the "assault weapons" ban prohibited the sale of semiautomatics that are operationally indistinguishable from deer rifles, but which looked scary to liberal women.

    First, the Democrats tried lying about how American guns were being found in the hands of Mexican drug dealers -- while demanding a renewal of the assault weapons ban.

    Obama had barely unpacked at the White House, when he and high-level administration officials and Senate Democrats -- Holder, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Sen. Chuck Schumer -- started railing about how our lax gun control laws were putting guns in the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

    In 2010, even Mexico's President Felipe Calderon demanded that the U.S. reinstate the assault weapons ban -- on the grounds that Mexican drug violence was directly linked to the law's repeal.


    The claim was preposterous for many reasons, including the fact that the type and quantity of armaments being used by Mexican drug cartels can be obtained only from places such as North Korea, China, Russia, Venezuela and Guatemala.

    The notion that most guns used by Mexican drug gangs came from the U.S. was a lie -- exposed on about 1 million gun blogs and on Fox News.

    So, then the Obama administration did exactly what Democrats had been falsely accusing American gun sellers of doing: They put American guns in the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

    The only explanation for Fast and Furious is that it was a program to prop up a losing gun control argument. The Waco and Ruby Ridge raids were monstrous, but they at least made sense as simple screw-ups: (1) ATF's budget was about to be cut and it needed some showy raids; and (2) law enforcement officials detest private gun ownership on principle.

    There is no conceivable law enforcement objective to giving Mexican drug dealers thousands of untrackable guns. It's not even fun for the agents, like an armed raid on a private home. If there's some other explanation, Holder isn't telling.

    Republicans refuse to state this clearly because they can't prove it. Instead, they just keep chattering about the documents that haven't been turned over and subpoenas that haven't been answered.

    Did Democrats wait for a smoking gun to accuse Karl Rove of treason for revealing Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA agent? It turned out Rove didn't reveal it, and it wouldn't have been a crime if he had.

    Did they wait for proof to accuse Sen. John McCain of committing adultery? They had none, and yet that story ran on the front page of The New York Times.

    Did they have any evidence before accusing the entire Republican House leadership of complicity in Mark Foley's creepy emails to young male interns? See if you can guess. Take all the time you need. Feel free to call one of your "lifelines" if necessary.

    Liberals just make wild-eyed accusations and demand Republicans prove themselves innocent. (Say, whatever happened to Karl Rove's trial for treason for outing Valerie Plame? Can somebody call Lawrence O'Donnell and check on that?)

    If conservatives were our only source of information about 9/11, no one would care about that, either. Somehow they'd make it about Osama bin Laden not answering a subpoena.

    This isn't just another government program gone bad -- a $300 ashtray, stimulus money fraud, Solyndra or Van Jones.

    It isn't just a story about some government official refusing to testify.

    It isn't even a story about an American dying as a result of a government program, as outrageous as that is. Yes, Brian Terry died at the hands of a Mexican using a Holder-provided American gun. Pat Tillman died. Ron Brown died. People sometimes die as a result of government screw-ups. Fast and Furious is worse.

    Innocent people dying was the objective of Fast and Furious, not collateral damage.

    It would be as if the Bush administration had implemented a covert operation to dump a dangerous abortifacient in Planned Parenthood clinics, resulting in hundreds of women dying -- just to give pro-lifers an argument about how dangerous abortion clinics are.

    That's what Fast and Furious is about.

    COPYRIGHT 2012 ANN COULTER

    DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK
  2. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    17,384
    "People died when Holder lied."
  3. RobertT

    RobertT Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,229
    Ann is stating facts that became obvious when F&F was first exposed. Sad how short our memories and gutless our politicians.

    Robert
  4. Johnny

    Johnny Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,054
    Speaking of short memories, Ann should do a piece on the people who died as a result of Operation Wide Receiver.
  5. John Galt

    John Galt TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Messages:
    2,788
    Why don't libs have anything to say other than: "It's all Bush's fault?"
  6. timberfaller

    timberfaller Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,811
    Location:
    Eastern Washington
    Why don't libs have anything to say other than: "It's all Bush's fault?"

    because, They are so open minded, their brains fell out!!
  7. bill1949

    bill1949 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,189
  8. Johnny

    Johnny Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,054
    Who's blaming Bush? These operations originated from the same people through both administrations. Fast and Furious is just an extension of Wide Receiver. The world doesn't begin and end with each administration.

    I'm surprised she mentioned Pat Tillman. By her reasoning, we should hold Bush accountable for the cover-up. He was in charge.
  9. TOOLMAKER 251

    TOOLMAKER 251 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,399
    Johnny, read up some and you'll know the difference between both operations.


    http://lonelyconservative.com/2011/11/the-difference-between-bushs-wide-receiver-and-obamas-fast-and-furious/
  10. TinMan88

    TinMan88 TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    979
    And so we have a Senator and a Congressman who take their job seriously. They must be asking themselves "why bother?"
  11. Johnny

    Johnny Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,054
    toolmaker, I never said they were the same. Operation Wide Receiver and Fast & Furious both came from the ATF's "Project Gunrunner" started in 2005.
  12. halfmile

    halfmile Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    13,832
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    Johnny you are truly an uninformed bloviator. If you knew the difference and still made that statement you are worse, you are just another liberal progressive commie sympathizing puke liar.

    Just my opinion of course.

    HM
  13. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    17,384
    Johnny, quote: <i>"Speaking of short memories, Ann should do a piece on the people who died as a result of Operation Wide Receiver."</i>

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/the-5-biggest-differences-between-operation-fast-and-furious-and-operation-wide-receiver/

    From the link:

    (1) First and foremost, operation Wide Receiver did not result in the death of a U.S. Border Patrol agent or an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer. Fast and Furious did. The guns that ultimately killed Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and ICE officer Jamie Zapata were traced back to straw purchasers related to Fast and Furious. Zapata’s family filed a wrongful death suit against the U.S. Justice Department last week.

    Further, officials have confirmed that the guns from Fast and Furious have already killed hundreds of Mexican citizens and Holder has said on the record that they will likely kill many more. The total number of confirmed deaths so far from Wide Receiver: Zero.
  14. bill1949

    bill1949 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,189
    Up For The Truth
  15. Johnny

    Johnny Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,054
    B n O, do you honestly think that no deaths occurred because of Operation Wide Receiver? I would wager that it resulted in hundreds of Mexican deaths. Of course they won't be confirmed.

    halfmile, where is my lie?
  16. Johnny

    Johnny Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,054
    What lie?
  17. TinMan88

    TinMan88 TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    979
    Q. what are the (real) products the cartels work with?


    Jul

    17

    09:55
    HSBC chief quits in front of US Senate committee as bank is accused of ‘letting Mexican gangs launder $7 billion
    The report into HSBC, released ahead of a Senate hearing on Tuesday, says huge sums of Mexican drug money almost certainly passed through the bank.

    Suspicious funds from Syria, the Cayman Islands, Iran and Saudi Arabia also passed through the British bank.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HSBC 'sorry' for aiding Mexican drugs lords, rogue states and ...www.guardian.co.uk › Business › HSBCYou +1'd this publicly. Undo
    6 hours ago – Executive quits in front of US Senate as bank faces massive fines for 'horrific' lapses that ... A report compiled for the committee detailed how HSBC's ....

    Now I ask, What is F&F got to do with (7) BILLION$ Dollars?
  18. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    17,384
    <i>"B n O, do you honestly think that no deaths occurred because of Operation Wide Receiver? I would wager that it resulted in hundreds of Mexican deaths. Of course they won't be confirmed."</i>

    Pure conjecture.

    You should consider that proving the Bush operation also resulted in deaths would be advantageous to Holder. They're trying to claim Bush did the same thing, and if deaths occurred under his watch then they'd be shouting that as loud as they could.
  19. TinMan88

    TinMan88 TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    979
    Photo of then-First Lady Hillary Clinton posed before the White House Christmas tree with known cocaine smuggler and Clinton donor Jorge Cabreras.
    [​IMG]
  20. Johnny

    Johnny Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,054
    B n O, pure conjecture? I would call it pure reasoning. Surely you don't believe deaths occurred under one operation but not the other. Both operations were a bad idea that should never have happened.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.