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

[BlindBoo]

You must not remember John Mitchell then.

Because in the alleged mind of a leftist, a two bit break in is far worse than supplying the Mexican drug cartel with high powered weapons used to murder two federal agents.

When party is the only factor, reason is jettisoned.

Hahahahaha. There's the rub.

Someone needs to thank your teachers for doing a wonderful job of dumbing you down. Or maybe you're in training for WH press secretary?

But what was Watergate? Some, including President Nixon's press secretary, said it was no more than a "third-rate burglary attempt." Certainly the opening act of the scandal was the arrest of the five White House "plumbers," caught breaking into the Democratic National Headquarters at the Watergate hotel.

But the term Watergate encompasses more than just a break-in and the cover-up activities which followed. The media and Congress took the lid off a whole range of illegal and improper campaign activities, from relatively harmless campaign "pranks" to White House abuses of the Executive agencies to reward friends and punish enemies, who were literally tracked on a "White House enemies list."

Watergate

 

[NoNukes]

You must not remember John Mitchell then.

Because in the alleged mind of a leftist, a two bit break in is far worse than supplying the Mexican drug cartel with high powered weapons used to murder two federal agents.

When party is the only factor, reason is jettisoned.

That two bit break in damaged America's faith in the Presidency and the electoral system. Is this two bit to you? Probably is.

 

[NoNukes]

'Hope & Change.' How ya like me now? Man, is there any promise this President hasn't broken? Now he's suddenly all about that Executive Privilege. Gawd, Obamabots are such silly dupes.

Not half as silly as you make yourself look almost every day on these boards. You are a robot of the right.

 

[Vidi]

Who wants to see a picture taken on Election Night 2012?

My infamous FutureCam2013 Model O snapped this image of things to come:

Since you have the intelligence required to be perusing THIS thread, YOU get to see it now.

He weeps for your future

 

[Dr.Drock]

You must not remember John Mitchell then.

Because in the alleged mind of a leftist, a two bit break in is far worse than supplying the Mexican drug cartel with high powered weapons used to murder two federal agents.

When party is the only factor, reason is jettisoned.

That two bit break in damaged America's faith in the Presidency and the electoral system. Is this two bit to you? Probably is.

Is a supposed lack of faith in some people more important than whether or not hundreds of people are dead to you? Probably is, at least with Obama in office.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Who wants to see a picture taken on Election Night 2012?

My infamous FutureCam2013 Model O snapped this image of things to come:

Since you have the intelligence required to be perusing THIS thread, YOU get to see it now.

He weeps for your future

Dude you're coming around

 

[The T]

Plot thickens?

1995 Video of Eric Holder: We Must ‘Brainwash’ People Against Guns

 

[Vidi]

Who wants to see a picture taken on Election Night 2012?

My infamous FutureCam2013 Model O snapped this image of things to come:

Since you have the intelligence required to be perusing THIS thread, YOU get to see it now.

He weeps for your future

Dude you're coming around

Lol I don't think I meant as you took it, but thanks.


Oh wait maybe YOU'RE coming around!

 

[Dr.Drock]

Plot thickens?

1995 Video of Eric Holder: We Must ‘Brainwash’ People Against Guns

I think he's taken a different strategy. His strategy now is to give automatic weapons to terrorists who in turn kill people, then he'll use that to fuel propaganda about how law abiding americans will become terrorists who kill people if given the chance to buy semi automatic weapons.

 

[BlindBoo]

Salon.com, one of the most dedicated leftist sites on the internet?

Or shall we go with CNN and Bob Woodward which relates the account that all valid historians know to be the accurate story:



Tenent has not denied he used the phrase, since that time, nor has he denied that he gave President Bush assurance that WMD existed based on CIA information, though he has since then accused VP Cheney of exaggerating the context. According to Woodward, Cheney was not consulted when the final decision was made.

When all else fails attack the source as not being credible.

On April 23, 2006, CBS’s “60 Minutes” interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam’s foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD.

“We checked on everything he told us.” French intelligence eavesdropped on his telephone conversations and shared them with the CIA. These taps “validated” Sabri’s claims, according to one of the CIA officers. The officers brought this material to the attention of the newly formed Iraqi Operations Group within the CIA. But those in charge of the IOG were on a mission to prove that Saddam did have WMD and would not give credit to anything that came from the French. “They kept saying the French were trying to undermine the war,” said one of the CIA officers.

The officers continued to insist on the significance of Sabri’s information, but one of Tenet’s deputies told them, “You haven’t figured this out yet. This isn’t about intelligence. It’s about regime change.”

It all depends on who is telling the story Boo. A commentator that frequents Salon.com or Daily Kos is going to have a much different perspective and is likely to believe much different things that will a commentator that frequents Townhall or World Net Daily. Those who want to promote the ideological perspective will go to such sites to get them. Those of us who want the truth rather than the propaganda check a lot of different sources rather than depend on one to give us the whole story.

I gave you a link at least as credible as yours to counter your link. That is a fundamental of real debate rather than just throwing stuff at the wall hoping something will stick.

If this F&F scandal gains legs and Holder is held accountable, there will be post mortems for years afterward trying to dig up exhoneration or more dirt on both the Attorney General's office and any culpability that can be attached to Obama. Obama lovers will deplore such digging expeditions; Obama critics will applaud them and post them on message boards.

And life goes on.
The fact is that President Bush, his entire cabinet and other advisors, essentially all of Congress, all of the U.N., and most heads of state and Arab nations believed Saddam had WMD whether or not they thought it imperative to invade to destroy them. Armchair quarter backing and attacking a hated President after the fact is politics, not objective reporting.

That claim is not entirely true because it attempts to make equal Bush and the U.N. and others, when in fact they were as different as night and day.

Yes, the U.N. and others believed that Iraq had WMD. The difference, however, is in degree.

The U.N. believed that Hussein may have had some weapons of mass destruction, in the form of limited stockpiles of chemical and perhaps some biological weapons. But they did not believe them to be an immediate threat, and did not believe they would leave the country; they believed, in short, that Hussein was contained and could continue to be contained. They did not beleive he was on the path to a nuclear weapon.

President Bush was telling a different tale. They claimed massive stockpiles of freshly produced weapons. He was six months away from completing a nuclear weapon, and they claimed Hussein had operational ties with al Qaeda. These facts were known well in advance of the invasion.

 

[The T]

Plot thickens?

1995 Video of Eric Holder: We Must ‘Brainwash’ People Against Guns

I think he's taken a different strategy. His strategy now is to give automatic weapons to terrorists who in turn kill people, then he'll use that to fuel propaganda about how law abiding americans will become terrorists who kill people if given the chance to buy semi automatic weapons.

Wow...I guess his little campaign back then in the District Of Criminals didn't work too well...so ratchet it up to an International scale...that has backfired.

 

[BlindBoo]

Plot thickens?

1995 Video of Eric Holder: We Must ‘Brainwash’ People Against Guns

I think he's taken a different strategy. His strategy now is to give automatic weapons to terrorists who in turn kill people, then he'll use that to fuel propaganda about how law abiding americans will become terrorists who kill people if given the chance to buy semi automatic weapons.

But the Drug Cartels would be and have been killing innocents before and after F&F. Couldn't they just use the already occuring violence to brainwash people? Why after sending about 1% of the weapon these cartel buy each year would it make any difference at all?

 

[Truthmatters]

they dont do logic

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Plot thickens?

1995 Video of Eric Holder: We Must ‘Brainwash’ People Against Guns

I think he's taken a different strategy. His strategy now is to give automatic weapons to terrorists who in turn kill people, then he'll use that to fuel propaganda about how law abiding americans will become terrorists who kill people if given the chance to buy semi automatic weapons.

But the Drug Cartels would be and have been killing innocents before and after F&F. Couldn't they just use the already occuring violence to brainwash people? Why after sending about 1% of the weapon these cartel buy each year would it make any difference at all?

You still think fast and the furious was all about drugs. we got that.

 

[Truthmatters]

Its just right wing propaganda to try and avoid where the logic in this discussion for their manufactured scandal will go.

they scream too much about this poor mans death and people may see through their smoke to the real issue

 

[bigrebnc1775]

He weeps for your future

Dude you're coming around

Lol I don't think I meant as you took it, but thanks.


Oh wait maybe YOU'RE coming around!

Nawh I'm not a supporter of Nobamushomney

 

[Foxfyre]

When all else fails attack the source as not being credible.

On April 23, 2006, CBS’s “60 Minutes” interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam’s foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD.

“We checked on everything he told us.” French intelligence eavesdropped on his telephone conversations and shared them with the CIA. These taps “validated” Sabri’s claims, according to one of the CIA officers. The officers brought this material to the attention of the newly formed Iraqi Operations Group within the CIA. But those in charge of the IOG were on a mission to prove that Saddam did have WMD and would not give credit to anything that came from the French. “They kept saying the French were trying to undermine the war,” said one of the CIA officers.

The officers continued to insist on the significance of Sabri’s information, but one of Tenet’s deputies told them, “You haven’t figured this out yet. This isn’t about intelligence. It’s about regime change.”

It all depends on who is telling the story Boo. A commentator that frequents Salon.com or Daily Kos is going to have a much different perspective and is likely to believe much different things that will a commentator that frequents Townhall or World Net Daily. Those who want to promote the ideological perspective will go to such sites to get them. Those of us who want the truth rather than the propaganda check a lot of different sources rather than depend on one to give us the whole story.

I gave you a link at least as credible as yours to counter your link. That is a fundamental of real debate rather than just throwing stuff at the wall hoping something will stick.

If this F&F scandal gains legs and Holder is held accountable, there will be post mortems for years afterward trying to dig up exhoneration or more dirt on both the Attorney General's office and any culpability that can be attached to Obama. Obama lovers will deplore such digging expeditions; Obama critics will applaud them and post them on message boards.

And life goes on.
The fact is that President Bush, his entire cabinet and other advisors, essentially all of Congress, all of the U.N., and most heads of state and Arab nations believed Saddam had WMD whether or not they thought it imperative to invade to destroy them. Armchair quarter backing and attacking a hated President after the fact is politics, not objective reporting.

That claim is not entirely true because it attempts to make equal Bush and the U.N. and others, when in fact they were as different as night and day.

Yes, the U.N. and others believed that Iraq had WMD. The difference, however, is in degree.

The U.N. believed that Hussein may have had some weapons of mass destruction, in the form of limited stockpiles of chemical and perhaps some biological weapons. But they did not believe them to be an immediate threat, and did not believe they would leave the country; they believed, in short, that Hussein was contained and could continue to be contained. They did not beleive he was on the path to a nuclear weapon.

President Bush was telling a different tale. They claimed massive stockpiles of freshly produced weapons. He was six months away from completing a nuclear weapon, and they claimed Hussein had operational ties with al Qaeda. These facts were known well in advance of the invasion.

Again it depends on who is telling the story. A fanatical leftist who hates President Bush will tell it one way. Objective historians who have no propaganda to promote and no ax to grind tell it entirely differently. I prefer to go with objective historians rather than fanatical ideologues who hate George Bush.

I will choose to do that with the Fast and Furious situation as well.

 

[The T]

Its just right wing propaganda to try and avoid where the logic in this discussion for their manufactured scandal will go.

they scream too much about this poor mans death and people may see through their smoke to the real issue

But LOGIC is the death of idiots as you TdM...Doesn't it bother you that you have Erich Holder ('Erich' as opposed to ERIC spelling obviously intentional)...goes before a group and tells them that they must mount a campaign to 'BRAINWASH PEOPLE' to turn their thinking on guns and the Second Amendment with propaganda doesn't bother you?

Are you able to connect the dots? See past statements and INTENT to present events?

I didn't think so.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Plot thickens?

1995 Video of Eric Holder: We Must ‘Brainwash’ People Against Guns

I think he's taken a different strategy. His strategy now is to give automatic weapons to terrorists who in turn kill people, then he'll use that to fuel propaganda about how law abiding americans will become terrorists who kill people if given the chance to buy semi automatic weapons.

But the Drug Cartels would be and have been killing innocents before and after F&F. Couldn't they just use the already occuring violence to brainwash people? Why after sending about 1% of the weapon these cartel buy each year would it make any difference at all?

Hey I'm trying to think of any possible explanation as to why an anti-gun nut would want to give automatic weapons to terrorists that have a motive to kill americans.

 

[BlindBoo]

I think he's taken a different strategy. His strategy now is to give automatic weapons to terrorists who in turn kill people, then he'll use that to fuel propaganda about how law abiding americans will become terrorists who kill people if given the chance to buy semi automatic weapons.

But the Drug Cartels would be and have been killing innocents before and after F&F. Couldn't they just use the already occuring violence to brainwash people? Why after sending about 1% of the weapon these cartel buy each year would it make any difference at all?

You still think fast and the furious was all about drugs. we got that.

No you are mistaken, it is violence that is fueled by the US Governements war on it's own people. F&F was a failed gun-walking sting that attempted to get to the higher ups in the Cartels that did very little to curb the violence. On the other hand the violence was already well established, so F&F did little to increase it either.