Do You Think The Fast & Furious Scandal Is Worse Than Watergate Scandal?

[Vast LWC]

Murdered by your own Government. Damn, that's just plain sad. God Bless Brian Terry and his Family. They'll have their Justice one day. I truly believe that.

What's sad is the amount of slander you're perfectly willing to use to serve your political ends.

Tell me Paul, what employee of the US government shot Brian Terry? (murder)

No?

Well then, what employee of the US government physically handed the guns to the Mexicans in question and told them to shoot Brian Terry? (Conspiracy to commit murder)

Still nothing eh?

OK, let's go a step further. What law did a government employee break that inadvertently may have caused the death of Brian Terry? (Reckless endangerment, possibly manslaughter)

Still, nothing.

So, here's an idea:

Before you go accusing innocent people of a VERY serious criminal charge like murder, why don't you shut your damn trap for a minute first, and think about it before you speak.

 

[Foxfyre]

In Fast and Furious, we had an agent--basically a law enforcer officer--killed by federal ineptness. Something that happens alot. federal ineptness should not be excused, but it happens because we have inept elected officials and their idiot but wealthy cronies telling them what to do.


In Watergate, a precedent for stealing elections to the highest offices of the land was discovered and stopped.

I say Watergate. Yes, their is death and destruction caused by Fast and Furious, but if Nixon got away with his election "techniques" then our right to select our elected officials would be comprised beyond repair. Death and destruction can result from this as well plus we citizens lose power.

But nobody has died in Watergate.

And many hundreds, including Brian Terry, may have died as a result of Fast and Furious.

Of course the Watergate burglary was absolutely indefensible, and certainly all involved with it deserved maximum prosecution under the law, but it is what it is. Not all that much different than the electronic espionage, etc. that goes on all the time now to dig up dirt on somebody to use against them in a campaign. That was the motive behind the Watergate burglary after all.

But using a government agency or operation for personal gain in a way that is killlng people absolutely deserves and must have Congressional oversight. And to try to excuse F & F or blow it off as being unimportant or insignificant because it wasn't as juicy or flashy as the Watergate scandal is just dumb.

 

[BlindBoo]

If you remember it, then you remember that it was long before there WAS a Fox News.

I was saying that North works for FoxNews NOW, as an indication of how Republicans still back him to this day.

And you might have even read some of the many books, including, his that were written about it. And you might also remember that the Democratic Congress did request the the AG appoint a special prosecutor and spent $43 million--that was a LOT of money back in the 80's--who was able to convict and sentence quite a few people found guilty of illegal operations during Iran Contra. The special prosecutor was not able to find anything that carried any kind of penalty to hang Oliver North or President Reagan or any of his staff re Iran Contra though.

Congress had to look elsewhere for somethng to convict Oliver North. And, as I said, a federal judge subsequently threw even that out.

But would you have accused Congress of conducting a witch hunt re Oliver North? Or Ronald Reagan? Or any of the investigations of the Bush administration re Iraq?

Or is it only your heroes that you resent anybody questioning or asking questions of?

I do not call the investigation of Col North a "witch hunt", because there were actual, PROVEN illegal acts, and a PROVEN conspiracy to commit said illegal acts.

The question that Congress was pursuing was who exactly was involved in said ILLEGAL ACTS.

In this case, there is no proof of illegal acts at all.

None, nada, zip, zero.

There is in fact, no evidence of any wrongdoing at all.

The only thing that has been proven in any of the investigation has been that it was a failed operation, and that is not a crime.

If it was, Bush and company would be serving multiple life sentences for their operational failures during the Iraq War. But it is not.

There was no proof of illegal acts in Iran Contra either prior to the Congressional hearings and prior to the investigation by a special prosecutor.

News Flash: The PURPOSE of Congressional hearings is to determine the circumstances of any given actions of government and to determine whether there are inproprieties, wrong doings, things that need correcting, or illegal activities. If there is a possibility of wrong doing, then a special prosecutor is requested.

Or perhaps you think Congress should not exercise its constitutional responsibility to exercise oversight UNLESS there is PROOF of illegal activities?

And perhaps you think that contradictory testimony and/or refusal to release certain unclassified documents subpoenaed by Congress should not raise questions as to whether there are illegal activities. At least if the subjects are Democrats. Okay if they are Republicans, yes?

It was illegal to sell anything, much less weapons like missiles, to Iran at the time. The President admitted it before the investigations began. Congress had also banned the WhiteHouse and CIA from funding the Costa Rican based terrorist sometimes call the Contra Rebels (but were really paid mercinaries). A charge the Whitehouse admitted to before any invesitgation was even started. Not to mention the CIA was letting the terrorist group import so much cocaine into the country the price dropped from over 100 per gram to less than 40, and gave rise to a new street product, FreeBase became "Crack" Thanks Ronnie!

Look up Eugene Hasenfus for more on why your claim holds no water.

 

[Vast LWC]

But nobody has died in Watergate.

And many hundreds, including Brian Terry, may have died as a result of Fast and Furious.

NO ma'am, they have not.

No-one has died "as a result of" Fast and Furious. Not one single person.

Of course the Watergate burglary was absolutely indefensible, and certainly all involved with it deserved maximum prosecution under the law, but it is what it is. Not all that much different than the electronic espionage, etc. that goes on all the time now to dig up dirt on somebody to use against them in a campaign. That was the motive behind the Watergate burglary after all.

Several crimes were committed in Watergate, as has already been pointed out, separate from the withholding of information from Congress.

No crimes were committed in Fast and Furious. Not one.

But using a government agency or operation for personal gain in a way that is killlng people absolutely deserves and must have Congressional oversight. And to try to excuse F & F or blow it off as being unimportant or insignificant because it wasn't as juicy or flashy as the Watergate scandal is just dumb.

Using a government agency for personal gain?

That's a new one.

Was Eric Holder skimming off the profits of the perfectly legal sales from the gun shops?

I imagine you must have some evidence of that.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Murdered by your own Government. Damn, that's just plain sad. God Bless Brian Terry and his Family. They'll have their Justice one day. I truly believe that.

What's sad is the amount of slander you're perfectly willing to use to serve your political ends.

Tell me Paul, what employee of the US government shot Brian Terry? (murder)

No?

Well then, what employee of the US government physically handed the guns to the Mexicans in question and told them to shoot Brian Terry? (Conspiracy to commit murder)

Still nothing eh?

OK, let's go a step further. What law did a government employee break that inadvertently may have caused the death of Brian Terry? (Reckless endangerment, possibly manslaughter)

Still, nothing.

So, here's an idea:

Before you go accusing innocent people of a VERY serious criminal charge like murder, why don't you shut your damn trap for a minute first, and think about it before you speak.

You HONESTLY think there are no laws against providing firearms to known felons and to foreign nationals?

Or is it that you simply view Obama and Holder above the laws that govern commoners and Republicans?

 

[Foxfyre]

I was saying that North works for FoxNews NOW, as an indication of how Republicans still back him to this day.



I do not call the investigation of Col North a "witch hunt", because there were actual, PROVEN illegal acts, and a PROVEN conspiracy to commit said illegal acts.

The question that Congress was pursuing was who exactly was involved in said ILLEGAL ACTS.

In this case, there is no proof of illegal acts at all.

None, nada, zip, zero.

There is in fact, no evidence of any wrongdoing at all.

The only thing that has been proven in any of the investigation has been that it was a failed operation, and that is not a crime.

If it was, Bush and company would be serving multiple life sentences for their operational failures during the Iraq War. But it is not.

There was no proof of illegal acts in Iran Contra either prior to the Congressional hearings and prior to the investigation by a special prosecutor.

News Flash: The PURPOSE of Congressional hearings is to determine the circumstances of any given actions of government and to determine whether there are inproprieties, wrong doings, things that need correcting, or illegal activities. If there is a possibility of wrong doing, then a special prosecutor is requested.

Or perhaps you think Congress should not exercise its constitutional responsibility to exercise oversight UNLESS there is PROOF of illegal activities?

And perhaps you think that contradictory testimony and/or refusal to release certain unclassified documents subpoenaed by Congress should not raise questions as to whether there are illegal activities. At least if the subjects are Democrats. Okay if they are Republicans, yes?

It was illegal to sell anything, much less weapons like missiles, to Iran at the time. The President admitted it before the investigations began. Congress had also banned the WhiteHouse and CIA from funding the Costa Rican based terrorist sometimes call the Contra Rebels (but were really paid mercinaries). A charge the Whitehouse admitted to before any invesitgation was even started. Not to mention the CIA was letting the terrorist group import so much cocaine into the country the price dropped from over 100 per gram to less than 40, and gave rise to a new street product, FreeBase became "Crack" Thanks Ronnie!

Look up Eugene Hasenfus for more on why your claim holds no water.

Certainly there was appearance of wrong doing in Iran Contra. That is what prompted the hearings. But there was NO PROOF that the Reagan Administration or others in high office knew of or was complicent in that wrong doing and the subsequent coverup and that is what the special prosecutor and the Congression hearings were launched to determine. The eventual verdict: some minor violations of law but nothing that carried any penalty so far as Reagan was concerned. There were a number of indictments and convictions in the wake of all that.

Certainly there was wrong doing in Watergate but there was NO PROOF that the Nixon Administration knew of or was complicent in that wrong doing and the subsequent coverup. That is what the Special Prosecutor and the Congressional Hearings were launched to determine. The ultimate verdict: Nixon was innocent in knowledge of or planning of Watergate prior to the incident but was culpable in a coverup of the incident after the fact. There were a number of indictments and convictions in the wake of all that and Nixon was forced to resign in disgrace to avoid an inevitable impeachment.

Certainly we have graphic proof of wrong doing in Fast and Furious now. And it is just as important that we know whether Obama or Holder or anybody else in high office was involved in any of that or any coverup as it was important to know that in those other scandals.

 

[BlindBoo]

Obama & Holder's weapons are still in the hands of brutal drug gangs. More will be slaughtered. Shame on the Democrat Bootlickers.

Remingtons, Winchesters......

Category:Firearms manufacturers in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Vast LWC]

It very well may be that neither Holder nor Obama did anything wrong re Fast and Furious, most especially as related to Biran Terry. Just as Nixon did nothing wrong related to the Watergate burglary incident.

In both cases, suspicions were aroused when the Nixon administration and now the Obama administration proposed to do any investigation themselves, resisted appointment of a special investigator/prosecutor, and appeared to be covering up something. It took a lot of investigation by the special prosecutor and a lot of Congressional hearings to get to the bottom of Watergate, plus a lot of tell all books written by participants later, but I think we did probably eventually get most of the whole story there.

It took many months of efforts by an appointed special prosecutor/investigator and countless Congressional hearings plus a few 'tell all' books written after the fact to get to the bottom of the Iran Contra affair. But I think we eventuallu did get most of the whole story there.

And now there are many many unanswered questions re Fast and Furious, and had Obama and Holder come clean on that from the get go, it would probably never have escalated into a major bruhaha. But because of the appearance of a coverup, it is now major news and a story that is not going to go away easily. Obama and Holder refuse to apppoint a special prosecutor/investigator. And probably for political reasons, Congress isn't going to do that once there is blood in the water and they can use it for ammnunition this close to the Presidential election.

But those who object to the Congressional hearings and/or contempt citation are abvsolutely playing just as much pure politics for their own purposes.

Incorrect.

As I pointed out not 3 pages ago, in the case of Watergate, there was evidence of crimes committed, and a high level conspiracy in the Republican Party to commit said crimes, before the Congressional hearings took place.

There is no such justification here.

There is no standing for hearings, and no causation to implicate Holder or Obama in the death of Brian Terry.

Therefore, these hearings are a waste of the taxpayer's money.

Your implication that this is just some sort of routine check of an operation is also a fallacy, as the data being requested of Holder has no relation to operational procedures. They are simply fishing for places where they can nail a member of the administration on unrelated charges, like perjury.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It was illegal to sell anything, much less weapons like missiles, to Iran at the time.

There were no missiles sold, as you know full well. There were no actual weapons sold, as you know full well.

The President admitted it before the investigations began. Congress had also banned the WhiteHouse and CIA from funding the Costa Rican based terrorist sometimes call the Contra Rebels (but were really paid mercinaries).

The anti-Communist rebels were hardly "terrorists." In fact, the Communists that you and Wright supported and promoted would be accurately called terrorist, with the organized murder, democide, of the Mesquite Indians to force collective farming. It was Stalin all over again, on a smaller scale. Y'all were living the dream, Communists engaged in mass murder, just the way you like it...

A charge the Whitehouse admitted to before any invesitgation was even started. Not to mention the CIA was letting the terrorist group import so much cocaine into the country the price dropped from over 100 per gram to less than 40, and gave rise to a new street product, FreeBase became "Crack" Thanks Ronnie!

Right, you're a tinfoil hat type - got it.

Say sparky, that conspiracy theory of yours, where was this cocaine smuggled to? Would that be "Mena Arkansas?"

But you ******* whack jobs stop there, don't ya? I mean, there is no evidence Bill Clinton was involved - since there is no evidence this occurred, it's a fantasy you fucknuts cooked up while whining about the loss of your beloved USSR.

Look up Eugene Hasenfus for more on why your claim holds no water.

You'll be bitter about the failure of the Soviets to create a permanent base in North America until the day you die. The dream died with the Sandinista regime, the workers paradise would never be part of the United States. The hatred you have for Reagan will fester, based on a gulag dreamed of, but lost....

 

[Vast LWC]

Sorry, but you do sound like a loyal Goose Stepper. Seriously, what do you owe Obama, Holder, and the Democratic Party? Why such loyalty? How can you condone and dismiss what the Government did on this? I'm actually very disappointed in you. You've lost a lot of credibility over this one.

So, let me get this straight...

You're going around accusing people of murder, with no evidence.

And he's the one who's "lost credibility".

Now, THAT is some of the best Orwellian double-speak I've seen in a while.

Well done sir. You win today's award for "Having the largest set of brass balls in a Kettle-Pot scenario".

 

[BlindBoo]

You vote and support those who are hellbent on arresting as many people as they can for using drugs and doing their best to suppress state's rights on the subject, even if that person is a former drug user himself.

You see what you want to see.

For the record I've vote straight libertarian in every single election and every single race except one. Living in Texas the onlr reason I do that is not because I think they will win but because I support their overall cause and to keep a third party on the ballot.

The last thing I want to see is someone fawning over Obama.

Well I'm glad to hear that, but that just makes it even more confusing that you voice nothing but support for Obama on this board.

Someone bashing Obama shouldn't cause you to support him more, shouldn't have any impact on whether or not you support him.

I choose to participate in threads like this that has absurd and wild accuations like the President and/or Holder murdered the agent in the desert or are directly responsible for his death.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I choose to participate in threads like this that has absurd and wild accuations like the President and/or Holder murdered the agent in the desert or are directly responsible for his death.

ROFL

While you through wild accusations of Reagan smuggling cocaine..

Irony....

 

[Vast LWC]

You HONESTLY think there are no laws against providing firearms to known felons and to foreign nationals?

Or is it that you simply view Obama and Holder above the laws that govern commoners and Republicans?

And I'm sure you can point out where government officials sold or gave arms to known felons or foreign nationals?

The gun shops that were under surveillance sold arms to non-criminal American citizens.

Even when the ATF was able to find out who those American citizens were selling the arms to, they still didn't have enough proof to arrest them by Arizona law. The district prosecutors wouldn't give them indictments because of that.

And when the prosecutors finally did give them indictments, the suspects were only charged with "selling guns without a license". A charge they probably served a very small amount of time for, if any.

 

[BlindBoo]

He pretends to take a principled stance against the drug war, all while coming on here and playing virtual tonsil hockey with Obama and the democrat party hours a day.



I don't understand why he just isn't honest about it, he's cool with the drug war as long as someone he voted for is supplying the tyranny.

Defending President Obama against the hysterical hyperbole of some on the wacky posters here is not playing tonsil hockey.

I was ridiculed here by the wacky posters when I called into question the Presidents response just days into his presidency on ignoring or snickering at the most sought after internet question....

You didn't address my point about the drug war. If you truly are against it in principle your "hysterical hyperbole" should be every bit as loud and obvious as the Romneybots.

Your accusation is completely unfounded. And it's not really a War on Drugs, it's a war on American citizens who use non-government approved recreational substances. Every instance of President Obama furtherence of that war has been meet with criticism by me. It is a fascist war supported by both parties. End it now and end the violence at our southern border. No more Border Agents or Mexican citizens need to die in that war.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And I'm sure you can point out where government officials sold or gave arms to known felons or foreign nationals?

Oh, I see.

So you aren't even familiar with the basics of the case and are here to blindly support Obama.

Okay, I understand.

The gun shops that were under surveillance sold arms to non-criminal American citizens.

False.

First off, the shops weren't "under surveillance." They were working with the DOJ and under the guidance of the criminal organization, BATF.

Further, Holder et al deliberately sold weapons to known felons and to Mexican nationals.

{"Contrary to the Attorney General's statements, the enclosed wiretap affidavit contains clear information that agents were willfully allowing known straw buyers to acquire firearms for drug cartels and failing to interdict them-in some cases even allowing them to walk to Mexico. In particular, the affidavit explicitly describes the most controversial tactic of all: abandoning surveillance of known straw purchasers, resulting in the failure to interdict firearms," }

Fast and Furious: GOP says wiretaps revealed 'Gunwalking' early on - CBS News Investigates - CBS News

Even when the ATF was able to find out who those American citizens were selling the arms to, they still didn't have enough proof to arrest them by Arizona law. The district prosecutors wouldn't give them indictments because of that.

So, you're just making this up as you go?

The ATF directed the sales, they knew exactly who the guns were being sold to, since they were ordering the sales.

Seriously dude, do at least a little research.

And when the prosecutors finally did give them indictments, the suspects were only charged with "selling guns without a license". A charge they probably served a very small amount of time for, if any.

Uh no, the gun store owners have not been indicted, they were acting on behalf of the DOJ.

You are concocting a complete fabrication that is entirely at odds with the actual case.


Get the basic facts;

A primer on the "Fast and Furious" scandal - CBS News Investigates - CBS News

 

[Dr.Drock]

Defending President Obama against the hysterical hyperbole of some on the wacky posters here is not playing tonsil hockey.

I was ridiculed here by the wacky posters when I called into question the Presidents response just days into his presidency on ignoring or snickering at the most sought after internet question....

You didn't address my point about the drug war. If you truly are against it in principle your "hysterical hyperbole" should be every bit as loud and obvious as the Romneybots.

Your accusation is completely unfounded. And it's not really a War on Drugs, it's a war on American citizens who use non-government approved recrational substances. Every instance of President Obama furtherence of that war has been meet with criticism by me. It is a fascist war supported by both parties. End it now and end the violence at our southern border. No more Border Agents or Mexican citizens need to die in that war.

But how can you defend a man, on any subject, when you know his base principles include destroying american liberties so a basically evil government program can be continued?

That's like defending a mass murderer because he regularly takes his dog to the vet.

 

[Foxfyre]

It very well may be that neither Holder nor Obama did anything wrong re Fast and Furious, most especially as related to Biran Terry. Just as Nixon did nothing wrong related to the Watergate burglary incident.

In both cases, suspicions were aroused when the Nixon administration and now the Obama administration proposed to do any investigation themselves, resisted appointment of a special investigator/prosecutor, and appeared to be covering up something. It took a lot of investigation by the special prosecutor and a lot of Congressional hearings to get to the bottom of Watergate, plus a lot of tell all books written by participants later, but I think we did probably eventually get most of the whole story there.

It took many months of efforts by an appointed special prosecutor/investigator and countless Congressional hearings plus a few 'tell all' books written after the fact to get to the bottom of the Iran Contra affair. But I think we eventuallu did get most of the whole story there.

And now there are many many unanswered questions re Fast and Furious, and had Obama and Holder come clean on that from the get go, it would probably never have escalated into a major bruhaha. But because of the appearance of a coverup, it is now major news and a story that is not going to go away easily. Obama and Holder refuse to apppoint a special prosecutor/investigator. And probably for political reasons, Congress isn't going to do that once there is blood in the water and they can use it for ammnunition this close to the Presidential election.

But those who object to the Congressional hearings and/or contempt citation are abvsolutely playing just as much pure politics for their own purposes.

Incorrect.

As I pointed out not 3 pages ago, in the case of Watergate, there was evidence of crimes committed, and a high level conspiracy in the Republican Party to commit said crimes, before the Congressional hearings took place.

There is no such justification here.

There is no standing for hearings, and no causation to implicate Holder or Obama in the death of Brian Terry.

Therefore, these hearings are a waste of the taxpayer's money.

Your implication that this is just some sort of routine check of an operation is also a fallacy, as the data being requested of Holder has no relation to operational procedures. They are simply fishing for places where they can nail a member of the administration on unrelated charges, like perjury.

The purpose of the Watergate hearings was not to "get" the Republican Party. The purpose was to determine if the Nixon or his Administration was involved. They DID NOT know that prior to the investigations and hearings.

I have already posted evidence of indictments and other proof of wrong doing in F & F. Which of course you blew off.

But given your deepfelt defense of Obama and the Democrats and your assertion that none have done any wrong, you want us to believe that your strong resistance to any investigation of F & F is not politically motivated?

May I show you some nice bridges I have to sell?

 

[Vast LWC]

Oh, I see.

So you aren't even familiar with the basics of the case and are here to blindly support Obama.

Okay, I understand.

Clear avoidance of the question. Please show evidence of US Officials selling or giving weapons to people that were legally ineligible to buy them.

False.

First off, the shops weren't "under surveillance." They were working with the DOJ and under the guidance of the criminal organization, BATF.

Were there ATF employees posing as gun-sellers in said shops, selling the weapons themselves?

No?

Then they were "under surveillance". Sure, the gun shop owners were aware that they were under surveillance, and the owners themselves were not in danger of criminal charges being levied against them, but that makes not a whit of difference to the terminology.

The ATF was not supplying the guns to the shop owners, nor were they profiting from the proceeds, and your accusation that the BATF is a "criminal organization" is unfounded and needlessly confrontational.

Further, Holder et al deliberately sold weapons to known felons and to Mexican nationals.

{"Contrary to the Attorney General's statements, the enclosed wiretap affidavit contains clear information that agents were willfully allowing known straw buyers to acquire firearms for drug cartels and failing to interdict them-in some cases even allowing them to walk to Mexico. In particular, the affidavit explicitly describes the most controversial tactic of all: abandoning surveillance of known straw purchasers, resulting in the failure to interdict firearms," }

Your quote does not back up your claim. "Straw Buyers" are legal purchasers of firearms. Thus Holder did not in fact "deliberately sell weapons to known felons and to Mexican nationals". He did nothing of the sort.

The weapons were "allowed to walk into mexico" because the ATF could not procure the proper indictments from the prosecutor.

Quite simply, there's a fundamental misconception at the heart of the Fast and Furious scandal. Nobody disputes that suspected straw purchasers under surveillance by the ATF repeatedly bought guns that eventually fell into criminal hands. Issa and others charge that the ATF intentionally allowed guns to walk as an operational tactic. But five law-enforcement agents directly involved in Fast and Furious tell Fortune that the ATF had no such tactic. They insist they never purposefully allowed guns to be illegally trafficked. Just the opposite: They say they seized weapons whenever they could but were hamstrung by prosecutors and weak laws, which stymied them at every turn.

The truth about the Fast and Furious scandal - Fortune Features

So, you're just making this up as you go?

The ATF directed the sales, they knew exactly who the guns were being sold to, since they were ordering the sales.

No sir.

It was nearly impossible in Arizona to bring a case against a straw purchaser. The federal prosecutors there did not consider the purchase of a huge volume of guns, or their handoff to a third party, sufficient evidence to seize them. A buyer who certified that the guns were for himself, then handed them off minutes later, hadn't necessarily lied and was free to change his mind. Even if a suspect bought 10 guns that were recovered days later at a Mexican crime scene, this didn't mean the initial purchase had been illegal. To these prosecutors, the pattern proved little. Instead, agents needed to link specific evidence of intent to commit a crime to each gun they wanted to seize.

None of the ATF agents doubted that the Fast and Furious guns were being purchased to commit crimes in Mexico. But that was nearly impossible to prove to prosecutors' satisfaction. And agents could not seize guns or arrest suspects after being directed not to do so by a prosecutor.

The truth about the Fast and Furious scandal - Fortune Features

Seriously dude, do at least a little research.

Uh no, the gun store owners have not been indicted, they were acting on behalf of the DOJ.

You are concocting a complete fabrication that is entirely at odds with the actual case.

I didn't say the gun store owners had been indicted, I was referring to the Straw Purchasers.

Get the basic facts;

A primer on the "Fast and Furious" scandal - CBS News Investigates - CBS News

Apparently, your "basic facts" consist entirely of one interview, with one disaffected person involved in the case, with no investigation into any other sources, or the documentation involved itself.

I would highly suggest that you follow your own advice.

 

[Vast LWC]

The purpose of the Watergate hearings was not to "get" the Republican Party. The purpose was to determine if the Nixon or his Administration was involved. They DID NOT know that prior to the investigations and hearings.

I have already posted evidence of indictments and other proof of wrong doing in F & F. Which of course you blew off.

But given your deepfelt defense of Obama and the Democrats and your assertion that none have done any wrong, you want us to believe that your strong resistance to any investigation of F & F is not politically motivated?

May I show you some nice bridges I have to sell?

Was Richard Nixon not in fact a high-ranking member of the Republican Party?

Is not the President in fact considered the highest-ranking member of the party that they are a part of?

Therefore, since there was actual clear evidence of criminal activity, and testimony and evidence (bank checks from the RNC to the burglars, as well as the fact that they were all associated with, or employees of the RNC) that there was a conspiracy with the RNC, an investigation the Nixon administration was clearly in order.

I posted this in post #1867, but let me post it again:

From the Wiki:

On June 19, 1972, it was publicly revealed that one of the Watergate burglars was a Republican Party security aide.

On August 1, a $25,000 cashier's check earmarked for the Nixon re-election campaign was found in the bank account of one of the Watergate burglars.

All five of the Watergate burglars were directly or indirectly tied to the 1972 CRP, causing Judge Sirica to suspect a conspiracy involving higher-echelon government officials.

On March 23, 1973, Judge Sirica read the court a letter from Watergate burglar James McCord alleging perjury had been committed in the Watergate trial, and defendants had been pressured to remain silent. Trying to make them talk, Sirica gave Hunt and two burglars provisional sentences of up to 40 years. On March 28 on Nixon's orders, aide John Ehrlichman told Attorney General Richard Kleindienst that nobody in the White House had prior knowledge of the burglary. On April 13, Magruder told U.S. attorneys that he had perjured himself during the burglars' trial, and implicated John Dean and John Mitchell.
Two days later, Dean told Nixon that he had been cooperating with the U.S. attorneys. On that same day, U.S. attorneys told Nixon that Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Dean and other White House officials were implicated in the coverup.
On April 30, Nixon asked for the resignation of H. R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman, two of his most influential aides, both of whom were indicted, convicted and ultimately sentenced to prison. He fired White House Counsel John Dean, who went on to testify before the Senate and became the key witness against the president.

To this point, you have posted NO evidence of criminal activity on the part of government officials in this thread in the case of F&F.

You have posted proof that a weapon that was associated with the case was used by Mexican criminals to shoot a border agents, but that is all.

But you have not proven any link between said assassins and government agents, nor proof of wrongdoing by said government agents, other than their inability to prosecute their case due to the weakness of the laws surrounding such gun sales.

 

[BlindBoo]

You didn't address my point about the drug war. If you truly are against it in principle your "hysterical hyperbole" should be every bit as loud and obvious as the Romneybots.

Your accusation is completely unfounded. And it's not really a War on Drugs, it's a war on American citizens who use non-government approved recrational substances. Every instance of President Obama furtherence of that war has been meet with criticism by me. It is a fascist war supported by both parties. End it now and end the violence at our southern border. No more Border Agents or Mexican citizens need to die in that war.

But how can you defend a man, on any subject, when you know his base principles include destroying american liberties so a basically evil government program can be continued?

That's like defending a mass murderer because he regularly takes his dog to the vet.

How can you blame just one man for overall prinicples that have been in play for both parties for the better part of a 100 years?

Isn't that throwing out the baby with the bath water.