Fast and furious embarrassment

The Constitution, which sets forth the principle of rule of law, defines what is unconstitutional, and guarantees freedom of speech and other liberties of a Constitutional republic, and also describes the impeachment power. (How many know of the Jewish roots of this document?) Hypocrisy threatens Constitutional government. Could Israel use a constitution like this? More to the point: would a Convention of States save it, or destroy it? (Example: civil asset forfeiture violates the Constitution.) Quick fixes like Regulation Freedom Amendments weaken it. Furthermore: the Constitution provides for removing, and punishing, a judge who commits treason in his rulings. Furthermore, opponents who engage in lawfare against an elected President risk breaking the Constitution.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

An old news clip on Operation Fast and Furious catches Eric Holder in a Watergate-sized lie. What else have he and Obama lied about?

Fast and Furious on CNN

Actually, the video (embedded below) comes from CNN En Español. The man now holding office as President, Barack H. Obama, gave an interview with that CNN affiliate on March 22, 2011. At issue, of course, was not merely the death of a US Border Patrol agent. The deaths of hundreds of civilians and LEOs in Mexico in Mexico’s drug war were just as outrageous. Here is what Obama said then (transcript from RealClearPolitics):

There have been problems, you know. I heard on the news about this story that—Fast and Furious, where allegedly guns were being run into Mexico, and ATF knew about it, but didn’t apprehend those who had sent it.
Eric Holder has—the attorney general has been very clear that he knew nothing about this. We had assigned an IG, inspector general, to investigate it.

That was March. Then on May 3, 2011, Holder says this to Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) before Issa’s House Oversight Committee:

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.

Eric Holder, man in the crosshairs on Operation Fast and Furious

Eric Holder, Attorney General. Photo: US Department of Justice

Holder isn’t sure of much these days. But can “a few weeks” really stretch back from May to March?

Mike Vanderboegh of Sipsey Street Irregulars admits to no small embarrassment himself.

I’m ashamed I didn’t pick up on this before. Sheesh, it was hiding in plain sight.

David Codrea at examiner.com admits that he didn’t see the implications either. Or at least, he didn’t see them at first when he reported on Holder’s testimony on October 4. Codrea found RealClearPolitics’ original story on Obama’s lame story about assigning an IG to the Fast and Furious affair. (RCP does not publish an embedding code for its footage.)

See also Kurt Hoffman’s summary of the contradictory video clips.

The implications are these: Barack Obama gave an interview to an audience of a key constituency of his. That constituency had its own reasons for outrage. Here’s a administration that said that 90 percent of the guns in the drug gangs’ hands came from America. They promised to do something about it. If their own chief law-enforcement arm let some of this happen, that’s embarrassing enough. So Obama had to speak, if only to calm the nerves of President Felipe Calderón of Mexico.

But then, six weeks later, Eric Holder says that he first heard about the program “a few weeks ago.” When? On the same day that he assigned an Inspector General? And how long before Obama spoke to the Mexican’s concerns, did this happen?

It also shows how nimble at least some in the alternative media can be. Messrs. Vanderboegh and Codrea shouldn’t feel too bad about missing this scoop. Even Sharyl Attkisson at CBS didn’t spot this one. If she had, then maybe Eric Schultz would have been RANTING AND RAVING AND SCREAMING EVEN MORE LOUDLY, if one can imagine it.

The real Fast and Furious motive

Last night, the National Rifle Association finally spoke to the real motive behind Operation Fast and Furious. NRA chief Wayne La Pierre, in an interview with Newsmax.com, laid it on the line. Operation Fast and Furious, he says, is an intentional “plot” to circumvent, demonize, and ultimately invalidate the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

CNAV has said repeatedly that the government intended all along to plant “throw-down weapons” in Mexico. The Gun Rights Examiners have already implicated Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the scheme. Her motives are at least twofold:

  1. She said that 90 percent of the guns came from America. When Codrea and others proved her false, she decided to make that statistic real—by any means necessary.
  2. She also is a proponent of the United Nations Convention on Small Arms. Under that treaty, private ownership of certain classes of firearms would violate international law.

Where were the Mexican drug lords really getting their guns? La Pierre says:

Even the Wikileaks cables from our own State Department prove they are coming from Central America, they are not coming from the U.S. Every police officer will tell you that they’re coming from Russia, they’re coming from China, most of them are coming from Central America and a lot of them are coming from defections from the Mexican Army.

This might explain why the guns that killed Agent Brian Terry on December 15, 2010, proved very easy to spot.

What happens next?

Chairman Issa at House Oversight is still investigating. He is waiting for Holder to comply with, or disregard, the massive subpoena that Issa sent him last Wednesday. Andrew Martin, also at examiner.com, reports that Issa will concentrate on contacts between a National Security Council official and the man who once ran the ATF office in Phoenix, AZ. That’s as close to the White House as the investigation has come thus far.

This morning, guest commentators on Fox News Channel’s Fox and Friends predicted that Eric Holder will resign before Christmas. That might not be soon enough, if the Nevada Primary and/or the Iowa Caucuses take place this December.

Featured image: the Constitution of the United States. Photo: National Archives.

Related

ARVE Error: need id and provider

Editor-in-chief at | + posts

Terry A. Hurlbut has been a student of politics, philosophy, and science for more than 35 years. He is a graduate of Yale College and has served as a physician-level laboratory administrator in a 250-bed community hospital. He also is a serious student of the Bible, is conversant in its two primary original languages, and has followed the creation-science movement closely since 1993.

12 Responses to Fast and furious embarrassment

  1. […] further discussion, see this article on Conservative News and […]

  2. So lets have a timeline.

    March:
    *President hears on the news about bungled operation by the perennially incompetent BATF (which hasn’t worked right for the last 30 year).
    *President asks Eric Holder about it.
    *Eric holder says he knows nothing about it and assigns someone to look into it.
    A few weeks pass, we are in April:
    *Investigator reports back to Eric Holder telling him about F&F
    A few more weeks pass, we are in May:
    Eric Holder says he first heard about the program (not the scandal) over the last few weeks.

    At most you could say that is a discrepancy of a couple of weeks, which isn’t too damning given the upfront vagueness of his answers.

    There are real issues, this calendar discrepancy is not one of them.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      Except for one thing: why didn’t the AG say that TMNHOAPOTUS had asked him about it?

    • Russ says:

      I think the calendar discrepancy is an issue if still an open one. The President gave this interview to CNN Espanol on March 22nd. AG Holder’s claim to have just heard about Fast and Furious came on March 9th. That’s just one day short of 7 weeks. Seven weeks is seldom characterized as a “few weeks”, more like “a couple of months”.

      However, it’s important to remember that the President doesn’t claim in the interview that he had just talked to Holder about the subject that very morning. In fact, it’s open-ended as to how many weeks or months had already elapsed. Knowing the exact date of that conversation would add a significant milestone to the F & F timeline….

  3. Because he wasn’t asked when he first heard about the news story, or from whom he first heard about it, he was asked when he first heard about the operation that emerged as the cause of the story.

    When I ask a direct question and someone throws in useless detail I assume it’s because they are being dishonest. It would be hypocritical of me to assume that they are being dishonest for not throwing in useless detail.

    TMNHOA?

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      The Man ;Now Holding Office As President Of The United States. Obama does not qualify, because he was not, is not, and can never be a natural-born citizen. His alien parentage precludes that.

  4. Do you have a post about your Birther views, I’d hate to get off topic by responding to that comment here.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      Search the phrase “birth certificate” in the Search box across the top of the masthead.

  5. […] further discussion, see this article on Conservative News and […]

  6. […] Embarrassment […]

  7. […] Embarrassment […]

  8. […] Fast & Furious many times in this space, and I will assume you remember the basic story.  Talking about the program with CNN Espanol, Obama said, “I heard on the news about this story that—Fast & […]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.