Getting Rid of Holder

[JJIII]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Should the Executive Branch be required to hand over any documents the Legislative Branch demands of it? Even if a: they're not relevant to the investigation and/or b: it would run the risk of compromising ongoing operations, thereby risking both national security and individual lives?

John

A. See my post in answer to Rob.

B. You and Don and I are in agreement on this. Is there any protocol that would make it possible for the committee to see the documents and maintain security and safety?

[piece-itpete]

I think a sargeant at arms / executive security showdown would be very entertaining. Then possibly US Marshals would get involved.... all three branches.

Pete

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by JJIII

A. See my post in answer to Rob.

B. You and Don and I are in agreement on this. Is there any protocol that would make it possible for the committee to see the documents and maintain security and safety?

Frankly, I don't think anything less than full release would satisfy Issa's agenda. In legal proceedings, there is a review process called in camera review which permits a judge to review documents to determine whether the privilege asserted applies. If the White Office would offer a restricted disclosure of the documents in closed session, with no public disclosure, I doubt that Issa would give up his hope of publicly embarrassing the President.

Regards,

D-Ray

[finnbow]

While I wholeheartedly agree that Issa is a prick who wants to embarrass Obama during an election year, the fact remains that Holder (knowingly or not) sent a letter saying the program didn't exist. Several thousand guns entered Mexico without the knowledge of the Mexican government, a border agent was killed with one of them, and the administration denied, in writing, that any program existed that facilitated the loss of these weapons and the subsequent shooting.

Do I think that Holder was trying to conceal DOJ's involvement or knowledge of the affair? I don't know. Do I think it's fair for Congress, within its Constitutional authority for oversight, to ask? Yes.

Might this lead to embarrassment for Obama? Maybe. It's not my job, however, to support him sidestepping Congressional oversight to ensure he doesn't get embarrassed. Solution? Lay everything out there, take your lumps and move on. Similarly, I supported investigation into the military's coverup of Pat Tillman's death. Investigating f*ck-ups, regardless of whose ox gets gored, is simply the right thing to do, even if Issa is doing it for the wrong reasons.

[icenine]

Can you post link to said letter? I want to read it too

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Several thousand guns entered Mexico without the knowledge of the Mexican government, a border agent was killed with one of them,

Actually, I don't believe that's never been established. Two guns traced to the F&F shipments were found near the body but neither was identified as the actual murder weapon. I don't know how much difference that makes.

John

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by icenine

Can you post link to said letter? I want to read it too

http://oversight.house.gov/wp-conten...to_CEG_ATF.pdf

It was actually from the Ass't. AG

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by finnbow

While I wholeheartedly agree that Issa is a prick who wants to embarrass Obama during an election year, the fact remains that Holder (knowingly or not) sent a letter saying the program didn't exist. Several thousand guns entered Mexico without the knowledge of the Mexican government, a border agent was killed with one of them, and the administration denied, in writing, that any program existed that facilitated the loss of these weapons and the subsequent shooting.

Do I think that Holder was trying to conceal DOJ's involvement or knowledge of the affair? I don't know. Do I think it's fair for Congress, within its Constitutional authority for oversight, to ask? Yes.

Might this lead to embarrassment for Obama? Maybe. It's not my job, however, to support him sidestepping Congressional oversight to ensure he doesn't get embarrassed. Solution? Lay everything out there, take your lumps and move on. Similarly, I supported investigation into the military's coverup of Pat Tillman's death. Investigating f*ck-ups, regardless of whose ox gets gored, is simply the right thing to do, even if Issa is doing it for the wrong reasons.

My point was, that to the extent that there are legitimate reasons to assert privilege or to protect the identity of those involved in an criminal investigation, a confidential submission of information to an oversight committee would not be palatable to Issa.

Regards,

D-Ray

[bobabode]

I keep reading that one of these weapons was used to kill a Border Patrol agent as the basis for the outrage. All that I have found says simply that the bullet taken from his body was too damaged to be attributed to either Fast and Furious weapon found at the scene.
So, why does this factual error keep getting repeated?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by bobabode

I keep reading that one of these weapons was used to kill a Border Patrol agent as the basis for the outrage. All that I have found says simply that the bullet taken from his body was too damaged to be attributed to either Fast and Furious weapon found at the scene.
So, why does this factual error keep getting repeated?

It really doesn't matter that much IMHO. It opened the door to the fact that 2,000 weapons walked. The media and the GOP have to put a face on the incident to make it compelling.