OK...So Cain is a Monster....but what about....

Jarhead

Gold Member
Jan 11, 2010
20,670
2,378
245
I looked at the first 2 pages of of threads and there are no less than 10 threads about Cain...he is a primary candidate....not even a sitting politician right now. Has never written any law nor has he had any affect onm our lives as Americans.

Yet over those two pages of threads, I could not find a single thread on Holden and what he said yesterday....and I would like to know why no one in the media OR Congress is asking him to rationalize something he said.....and what he said speaks volumes to me...

When asked why he was not personally aware of Fast and Furious seeing as he is the AG he responded with a very acceptable answer...well....acceptable on the outside...

(paraphrased)

"I can not know the details of every action taken by the agencies I oversee"

I understand and agree....

But then I want to know something....

Why Did he not feel the need to be directly on top of and invoolved in decisions as it pertainsed to INTENTIONALLY smuggling arms across the borders of a neighboring sovereign nation......Especially seeing as the arms were being smuggled to ENEMIES of that nation, (the drug cartels are continually assasinating government officials)

Why did congress not ask him this......

If he does not find this activity worthy of his direct oversight and knowledge and involvement....what exactly does he deem worthy of his direct oversight, knowledge and involvement?

If I were at the hearing I would have asked..

So what do you tell your staffers is worthy of your direct knowledge of? What do they use as guidelines?
 
Oh look.......a thread that is actually nothing but deflection. Kewl. And....so unusual.

What about the Accusations that Barry did Cocaine with Larry Sinclair and had sex with him, and that 3 Outed Homosexuals @ Barry's Former Mentoring Church have been Killed since his Run for the White House?...

One of which was Claimed to have been Sexually Involved with Barry?...

Serious Claims.

Maybe he should Step down...

He and Cain go off and Cain can tell Barry what being Black is really like.

:)

peace...
 
Oh look.......a thread that is actually nothing but deflection. Kewl. And....so unusual.

deflection?

From what?

You are deliberately deflecting from the very real and incredibly important issue of a potential nominee by using some trivial bullshit about an actual political appointee lying under oath about an equally trivial issue about our federal government selling weapons to criminals which were then used to murder our law enforcement officers. Clearly, you are no more than a partisan hack.


Did I get that right, lefties? :lol::lol::lol:
 
Oh look.......a thread that is actually nothing but deflection. Kewl. And....so unusual.

deflection?

From what?

You are deliberately deflecting from the very real and incredibly important issue of a potential nominee by using some trivial bullshit about an actual political appointee lying under oath about an equally trivial issue about our federal government selling weapons to criminals which were then used to murder our law enforcement officers. Clearly, you are no more than a partisan hack.


Did I get that right, lefties? :lol::lol::lol:

Sadly...no one seems to give a fuck.

But I would like to know what Holder has told his "staffers" is worthy of his knowledge.

Apparently the US dept of justice compromising the borders of a sovereign nation without that nations governemnt knowing...and selling of high tech weapons to enemies of that nation doesnt make the cut...

So what does?
 
Oh look.......a thread that is actually nothing but deflection. Kewl. And....so unusual.

deflection?

From what?

You are deliberately deflecting from the very real and incredibly important issue of a potential nominee by using some trivial bullshit about an actual political appointee lying under oath about an equally trivial issue about our federal government selling weapons to criminals which were then used to murder our law enforcement officers. Clearly, you are no more than a partisan hack.


Did I get that right, lefties? :lol::lol::lol:


:clap2:
 
deflection?

From what?

You are deliberately deflecting from the very real and incredibly important issue of a potential nominee by using some trivial bullshit about an actual political appointee lying under oath about an equally trivial issue about our federal government selling weapons to criminals which were then used to murder our law enforcement officers. Clearly, you are no more than a partisan hack.


Did I get that right, lefties? :lol::lol::lol:

Sadly...no one seems to give a fuck.

But I would like to know what Holder has told his "staffers" is worthy of his knowledge.

Apparently the US dept of justice compromising the borders of a sovereign nation without that nations governemnt knowing...and selling of high tech weapons to enemies of that nation doesnt make the cut...

So what does?

I would as well. This entire debacle is totally unacceptable and so far we are getting nothing but bullcrap instead of holding people accountable.
 
Still...not a single comment about this...not even from the right.

Please...someone tellme...

What do you think Holder tells his staffers is worthy of his immediate attention if comrpomising the integrity of the border of a sovereihgn nation with high tech weapons doesnt?
 
Still...not a single comment about this...not even from the right.

Please...someone tellme...

What do you think Holder tells his staffers is worthy of his immediate attention if comrpomising the integrity of the border of a sovereihgn nation with high tech weapons doesnt?

Probably any behavior they can use to hurt Republicans.
 
Wait a minute...

Holder felt the need to get directly involved in a case against a few men who were accused of voter intimidation...

But...

He did not feel it was important that he be kept abreast of an operation that included compromising the integrity of a sovereign nation and the selling of high tech artillary to an enemy of that nation?

What the fuck is our congress doing? How can they let him get away with saying:

"I cant be on top of everything that goes on"
 
Still...not a single comment about this...not even from the right.

Please...someone tellme...

What do you think Holder tells his staffers is worthy of his immediate attention if comrpomising the integrity of the border of a sovereihgn nation with high tech weapons doesnt?

I havent heard enough news coverage to comment..... :tongue:



I know Holder lied yesterday, but who cares what us con$ervative$ say.

Why is The White House stonewalling the Solyndra investigation?

What about his ties to Franklin Raines, Antoin Tony Rezko, Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, etc etc.....
 
Wait a minute...

Holder felt the need to get directly involved in a case against a few men who were accused of voter intimidation...

But...

He did not feel it was important that he be kept abreast of an operation that included compromising the integrity of a sovereign nation and the selling of high tech artillary to an enemy of that nation?

What the fuck is our congress doing? How can they let him get away with saying:

"I cant be on top of everything that goes on"


Becoming irrellivant
 
Wait a minute...

Holder felt the need to get directly involved in a case against a few men who were accused of voter intimidation...

But...

He did not feel it was important that he be kept abreast of an operation that included compromising the integrity of a sovereign nation and the selling of high tech artillary to an enemy of that nation?

What the fuck is our congress doing? How can they let him get away with saying:

"I cant be on top of everything that goes on"


Becoming irrellivant

It's time we change that.
 
How could you not "feel the need to be on top of" something you didn't know about?

That question doesn't even make any sense.
 
How could you not "feel the need to be on top of" something you didn't know about?

That question doesn't even make any sense.

it does if you watched the hearing yesterday....

SO here is what was asked of him....
"When did you first hear of F andf F"
He answered...

We have emails to yoiu directly discussing F and F....so you must have known about it...

His answer...

"I dont read all of my emails...I have my staffers read them and they only fill me in on what is deemed important"

He then said..

"I can not be personal;ly on top of every action taken by the agencies that I oversee"

So my question is simple...

What does he tell his staffers are the guidelines as to what he SHOULD and should NOT kinow about?

and if the compromisig the border of a sovereign nation with high tech arms that are being offered up to enemies of that soveriegn nation that is not an enemy of ours is NOT worthy of his knowledge....then what the fuck would be?
 
How could you not "feel the need to be on top of" something you didn't know about?

That question doesn't even make any sense.

it does if you watched the hearing yesterday....

SO here is what was asked of him....
"When did you first hear of F andf F"
He answered...

We have emails to yoiu directly discussing F and F....so you must have known about it...

His answer...

"I dont read all of my emails...I have my staffers read them and they only fill me in on what is deemed important"

He then said..

"I can not be personal;ly on top of every action taken by the agencies that I oversee"

So my question is simple...

What does he tell his staffers are the guidelines as to what he SHOULD and should NOT kinow about?

and if the compromisig the border of a sovereign nation with high tech arms that are being offered up to enemies of that soveriegn nation that is not an enemy of ours is NOT worthy of his knowledge....then what the fuck would be?

It's definitely worthy of his knowledge, and he's not saying that it isn't.


That a staffer messed up and didn't tell him or that the Originators of the Operation didn't red flag it as a special case scenario doesn't contradict the answer that he gave, though.


It just means that people don't always have common sense.

It's an issue worthy of investigation and worthy of knowing who dropped the ball.
 
How could you not "feel the need to be on top of" something you didn't know about?

That question doesn't even make any sense.

it does if you watched the hearing yesterday....

SO here is what was asked of him....
"When did you first hear of F andf F"
He answered...

We have emails to yoiu directly discussing F and F....so you must have known about it...

His answer...

"I dont read all of my emails...I have my staffers read them and they only fill me in on what is deemed important"

He then said..

"I can not be personal;ly on top of every action taken by the agencies that I oversee"

So my question is simple...

What does he tell his staffers are the guidelines as to what he SHOULD and should NOT kinow about?

and if the compromisig the border of a sovereign nation with high tech arms that are being offered up to enemies of that soveriegn nation that is not an enemy of ours is NOT worthy of his knowledge....then what the fuck would be?

It's definitely worthy of his knowledge, and he's not saying that it isn't.


That a staffer messed up and didn't tell him or that the Originators of the Operation didn't red flag it as a special case scenario doesn't contradict the answer that he gave, though.


It just means that people don't always have common sense.

It's an issue worthy of investigation and worthy of knowing who dropped the ball.

if you read my original post...my complaint is with coingress....

When he said "I cant know of everything that goes on"...the questioner should have said..

"I agree....so are you saying that this is not worthy of your direct knowledge and involvement"

And he would have said...No..it IS worthy...and someone dropped the ball and I will find out who it is and how this happened.

But you see....Holder simply said "I cant know everything" and that was the end of it.

And between us?

Holder should have immediately said "I SHOULD HAVE known and something like this will never happen again.

Instead?

Hey, they didnt tell me...whatchagonnado?
 
I looked at the first 2 pages of of threads and there are no less than 10 threads about Cain...he is a primary candidate....not even a sitting politician right now. Has never written any law nor has he had any affect onm our lives as Americans.

Yet over those two pages of threads, I could not find a single thread on Holden and what he said yesterday....and I would like to know why no one in the media OR Congress is asking him to rationalize something he said.....and what he said speaks volumes to me...

When asked why he was not personally aware of Fast and Furious seeing as he is the AG he responded with a very acceptable answer...well....acceptable on the outside...

(paraphrased)

"I can not know the details of every action taken by the agencies I oversee"

I understand and agree....

But then I want to know something....

Why Did he not feel the need to be directly on top of and invoolved in decisions as it pertainsed to INTENTIONALLY smuggling arms across the borders of a neighboring sovereign nation......Especially seeing as the arms were being smuggled to ENEMIES of that nation, (the drug cartels are continually assasinating government officials)

Why did congress not ask him this......

If he does not find this activity worthy of his direct oversight and knowledge and involvement....what exactly does he deem worthy of his direct oversight, knowledge and involvement?

If I were at the hearing I would have asked..

So what do you tell your staffers is worthy of your direct knowledge of? What do they use as guidelines?

I agree. BUT this program was one of many instigated under the Bush administration. Holder was given this no-win situation to deal with. All of the initiators of this criminal enterprise should be tried in court and if found guilty of running a criminal enterprise convicted under the RICO statutes, spend significant time in prison. It is mind boggling how reluctant Obama has been to pursue criminal activity handed over from the Bush administration.
 
Last edited:
Sexual Harrassment vs. incompetence, is not a good moral comparison is basically all.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top