View Full Version : AG Holder is not going to last
The AG has inserted his foot in his mouth twice these past two weeks. First calling white Americans and America a "Nation of Cowards" and then with his AWB. He was quickly rebuffed by the Speaker of the House. Lets see the third strike and hes out.
where can we read/see what the Speaker said to rebuff holders statements?
where can we read/see what the Speaker said to rebuff holders statements?
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/pelosi-tosses-cold-water-on-reviving-assault-weapon-ban-2009-02-26.html
Littlelebowski
02-26-09, 22:16
I doubt he's going anywhere and I doubt he's in the slightest bit of trouble.
It might be less troubling if he is weakened by this foolishness than if he is replaced.
Boy old Nancy sure is butt hurt by his proclamations. Kinda funny to watch! Hope they keep fighting, it may slow them down on their agendas.
Buckaroo
Listen to the question and her answer here (http://files.me.com/bgav/ub03qi.mp3) (MP3 link).
John_Wayne777
02-27-09, 07:08
The AG has inserted his foot in his mouth twice these past two weeks. First calling white Americans and America a "Nation of Cowards" and then with his AWB. He was quickly rebuffed by the Speaker of the House. Lets see the third strike and hes out.
If his involvement with Waco and his involvement with a failure to deal with international terrorism (along with other prominent DOJ officials like Jamie Gorelick...nicknamed Dr. No by the FBI) weren't enough to keep him from getting the job, then I doubt his bone-headed comments since being nominated are sufficient to take him out of the job.
John_Wayne777
02-27-09, 07:08
It might be less troubling if he is weakened by this foolishness than if he is replaced.
Boy old Nancy sure is butt hurt by his proclamations. Kinda funny to watch! Hope they keep fighting, it may slow them down on their agendas.
Buckaroo
Nancy is most likely just upset that he's letting the cat out of the bag too early.
Robb Jensen
02-27-09, 07:13
Nancy is most likely just upset that he's letting the cat out of the bag too early.
I agree.
Their strategy is likely to do something (or nothing) two years or later from now. BHO wants to be certain that the Republicans won't take over the House and Senate again two years from now and I'm sure he is also considering whether or not he can be re-elected again in 2012.
Please don't tell me that there are members here who think that Nancy Pelosi is suddenly the 2nd Amendments knight in shining armor. She could give two shits less about the rights of citizens to have firearms. I agree with John Wayne. She is probably pissed that he spilled the beans.
All I can say is we have now heard the drum beats in the distance from our nanny state friends and we now know what's in store. I love how she says that the Bush Administration hasn't been enforcing the laws on the books. How much longer will they continue to blame him for everything that goes wrong. IIRC when Bill Clinton was in office they didn't prosecute criminals that used or possessed firearms.
The first step is blaming the troubles of that shithole south of the border on guns from the U.S. The next will probably be a string of shootings that get replayed on the news for days on end. Then they will unleash a gun control bill of epic proportions upon us.
Maybe Mexico wouldn't have a such a problem with drug cartels if the government and police weren't so corrupt.
IIRC when Bill Clinton was in office they didn't prosecute criminals that used or possessed firearms.
Without getting dragged into the "New AWB or not?" stuff ...
I worked at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, DC during the Clinton era. In fact Eric Holder was the U.S. Attorney running our office at the time. We certainly did prosecute folks for firearms offenses, both "state" (DC) and federal, every single day. My section (Violent Crimes Unit) even had an ATF agent assigned to us full time to help with various gun crime issues.
While I cannot speak to the rest of the office's handling of gun issues, if someone was indicted for committing a violent felony and a firearm was involved, those firearm offenses were definitely charged and prosecuted.
Not to say that they never did. But, I was fairly certain that I saw a segment on the news or elsewhere that stated a large number of cases that had been referred to various federal prosecutors around the country for things like felons attempting to purchase firearms and in many of those cases they declined to do so because it wasn't "big enough".
That could certainly be true; I didn't deal with that level stuff. However, as another example, our Narcotics Unit frequently no-papered (chose not to charge) marijuana cases when it was anything below a very significant weight. It's been more than a decade but I think the magic number was one ton; less than a ton and you didn't get prosecuted unless it was ancillary to other crimes.
It's a resources issue, simple as that. There are only so many prosecutors and so many courtrooms. Believe me, Eric Holder wasn't ordering his people to avoid prosecuting gun cases. :eek:
Business_Casual
02-27-09, 08:15
Maybe Mexico wouldn't have a such a problem with drug cartels if the government and police weren't so corrupt.
Or perhaps we should have learned our lesson about prohibition when it led to crime and street violence and tax evasion the last time we tried it.
M_P
Nancy is most likely just upset that he's letting the cat out of the bag too early.
Bingo! Tipping their hand, allowing us time to ramp up. Also, straying into "her" territory, and - cardinal sin - not consulting / involving her.
and - cardinal sin - not consulting / involving her.
This is the major reason right there I think. That and a fear of 1994 replaying when it comes to elections.
So we need to apply pressure to everyone in Congress (house and senate) right now and keep it up. Remind them of 1994. Remind them that the last AWB did nothing against crime. That it is against the Constitution. Remind them of 1994. And especially let the Republicans know that if they allow this to go through they will be in the opposition for a long time.
While I cannot speak to the rest of the office's handling of gun issues, if someone was indicted for committing a violent felony and a firearm was involved, those firearm offenses were definitely charged and prosecuted.
And gun violations are still being prosecuted. Just ask Roger Barnett.
Maybe Mexico wouldn't have a such a problem with drug cartels if the government and police weren't so corrupt.
Maybe Mexico wouldn't have such a problem with drug cartels if US citizens didn't provide the demand side of the market.
Littlelebowski
02-27-09, 13:03
You know, even if Pelosi turned into a supporter of the Constitution (which would make her a supporter of our right to keep and bear arms), she'd still scare me with that face. That's a face that says "I eat children!"
Maybe Mexico wouldn't have such a problem with drug cartels if US citizens didn't provide the demand side of the market.
I agree completely. Like I told the judge one time, if pawn shops didn't exist I wouldn't have stolen all those tools and pawned them. So it should be obvious that the real problem is the pawn shop, not thieving behavior.
JW777,
What was Holder's involvement in Waco?
I cannot cite any sources but I do clearly remember something about how federal prosecution of gun crimes during the Clinton administration fell dramatically from Bush I.
By dramatically was meant far faster than crime rates were falling.
Maybe not in DC but countrywide.
Simple speculation #1 was that prosecuting them was akin to publicly admitting that gun control laws don't prevent crime; don't draw attention to your failure by having to admit it in court where it will be recorded for all time.
Simple speculation #2 was the flip side that fewer prosecutions could be touted as proof that gun control laws do work; "bad guys obey gun control laws so we don't need to prosecute them".
As I recall, when W took office, prosecutions rose.
Or perhaps we should have learned our lesson about prohibition when it led to crime and street violence and tax evasion the last time we tried it.
M_P
The winning answer! :D
JW777,
What was Holder's involvement in Waco?
I thought Janet Reno was AG during that time... I was pretty young back then.
Regardless, we must be ever vigilant on any 2nd amendment issues every day with this crew in power. Constantly being on the defensive is really growing tiresome.
1859sharps
02-27-09, 20:10
Nancy has not seen the light...she is as anti gun as ever.
The other possibility is she simply does not want the distraction right now. gun control or lack there of is the least of a long list of concerns to most Americans right now. Gun control bill signed into law combined with the large deficit they just voted into law could cost them their jobs and she knows it. keep the pro gun crowd happy for now, keep job.
she is from California and knows what happens to politicians that support both gun control and tax increases. they don't last in office very long.
the author of our first AWB in California was recalled because of his support for taxes and gun control. the pro gun and anti-tax groups got together and accomplished the first successful recall in years...
But sooner or later Nancy and company will turn their eyes back to gun control. most likly after the mid term elections, particularly if the economy has turned around.
He was Reno's #2
Not during Waco he wasn't.
edited to add: Let me be more specific. Eric Holder was not in any way involved in the chain of command at Waco. I don't recall the timing, but he was either a judge or the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia when Waco happened.
Not during Waco he wasn't.
edited to add: Let me be more specific. Eric Holder was not in any way involved in the chain of command at Waco. I don't recall the timing, but he was either a judge or the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia when Waco happened.
Todd, thanks for the clarity. I figured you'd chime in at some point :D
Okay, so I just watched the whole press conference on C-SPAN, and if I understood him correctly: weapons are flowing INTO Mexico from the USA? Is this actually happening in like.......reality? <G> If so, what kinds of 'weapons' are we talking about?
Todd, he was acting AG during the Danforth inquiry into Waco, no?
Todd, he was acting AG during the Danforth inquiry into Waco, no?
JLM -- Don't know, I was out of DOJ by then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Holder
CarlosDJackal
02-27-09, 22:25
I don't think that he's going anywhere because he's the type of AG the dumboKrats want: The Quintessential Yes Man.
You know, even if Pelosi turned into a supporter of the Constitution (which would make her a supporter of our right to keep and bear arms), she'd still scare me with that face. That's a face that says "I eat children!"
Well, she'll never support the 2A and in essence, the Constitution, which means she (and about 95% of all of Congress) violated the oath she swore along with the AG. IMO, they should be removed from office for that violation.
John_Wayne777
02-28-09, 18:28
While we're on the topic of Eric Holder's idiocy....
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y16/jwayne_777/gunshow.jpg
diving dave
02-28-09, 18:45
I still think that the AWB agenda is just waiting for someone to go postal...Their good friends in the media will run with it, and the libs will feel they have to do something. I dont think their smart enough to remember what happened in 94.
I think I have been to a fair share of gun shows throughout the U.S. Yes, you can buy an SBR as well as an M203 at a gunshow FROM A LICENSED DEALER, but we all know that it is not going anywhere until the approval comes back from BATFE. I have never seen live hand grenades or 40MM HEDP rounds at a gun show or anywhere else for sale to individuals.
I would really like to know more about those M16/M203's. Something tells me that those weapons probably belonged to Mexican army personnel and they were either stolen or sold away.
While we're on the topic of Eric Holder's idiocy....
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y16/jwayne_777/gunshow.jpg
I think I have been to a fair share of gun shows throughout the U.S. Yes, you can buy an SBR as well as an M203 at a gunshow FROM A LICENSED DEALER, but we all know that it is not going anywhere until the approval comes back from BATFE. I have never seen live hand grenades or 40MM HEDP rounds at a gun show or anywhere else for sale to individuals.
I would really like to know more about those M16/M203's. Something tells me that those weapons probably belonged to Mexican army personnel and they were either stolen or sold away.
I'd guess Mexican Army as well.
That's why I was curious (see above) about how many weapons REALLY travel from here to Mexico. Because, well, that doesn't make a lot of damn sense....
John_Wayne777
03-01-09, 08:56
I think I have been to a fair share of gun shows throughout the U.S. Yes, you can buy an SBR as well as an M203 at a gunshow FROM A LICENSED DEALER, but we all know that it is not going anywhere until the approval comes back from BATFE.
Precisely. You know that, and I know that...but the press doesn't bother to cover that little aspect of things. When you see pictures of these weapons caches in damn near every one of them you see things like these M4's with M203's mounted, AK's with a third pin hole and 3 selector positions, grenades, RPGs, etc.
Mexican cartels ain't buying that stuff from "unlicensed dealers" at gunshows in Arizona.
Knowing the law we are forced to wonder where, then, international criminals could possibly find arms and munitions in central and south America, regions long known for domestic tranquility and incorruptible public officials.
I have never seen live hand grenades or 40MM HEDP rounds at a gun show or anywhere else for sale to individuals.
I would really like to know more about those M16/M203's. Something tells me that those weapons probably belonged to Mexican army personnel and they were either stolen or sold away.
There have been documented incidents of Mexican military units actually running protection for gun runners. A while back there was a story (which went nowhere in the national media) about border patrol agents actually being fired upon by the Mexican military on OUR side of the border.
I doubt they were just lost.
John_Wayne777
03-01-09, 09:02
I'd guess Mexican Army as well.
That's why I was curious (see above) about how many weapons REALLY travel from here to Mexico. Because, well, that doesn't make a lot of damn sense....
Undoubtedly there are some guns from the US that find their way to Mexico....usually because they are carried by the scum-sucking jerks that the Mexican government and the US government won't stop.
Notice that you didn't hear about these stories until:
1. The Clinton AWB expired
2. Public anger about the illegal immigration problem hit a fever pitch.
The whole "Our guns are fueling the mexican drug cartel violence!!" is nothing but a PR stunt by the Mexican government that our government is going along with for some reason.
The Mexican government is doing what every other tinhorn dictator and failed regime in the world does...blaming their problems on the US. Our government officials may be going along with it because they don't want to have a public rift with the notoriously sensitive Mexican governmental officials, but any of us with an IQ above room temperature understand that this is a load of fertilizer.
threefeathers
03-01-09, 09:14
After much thought the past few days I agree that Holder will be gone. He is bringing problems up that are devisive and will add to other problems Obamamama has. Holder will be castigated by both Peolso and The Nevada Dem Frack in the Senate.
For some reason I can't figure out, CNN seems to be picking up the 2nd amendment rights flag and airing pro-2nd amendment segments.
I saw a clip Wayne LaPierre's response to Holder yesterday. Lou Dobbs is doing a good job on 2nd amendment issues as well, thought the best I've seen in the MSM is John Stossel.
In one of the segments, it was mentioned that the Mexican government has refused to supply the serial numbers of all the American guns they are supposedly finding in drug cartels' hands. How convenient.
The weapons in the picture posted earlier could easily have the serial numbers tracked back to the manufacturer and see which foreign government originally purchase them. Is anyone bothering to do that?
Robb Jensen
03-01-09, 09:22
Taking political advice from Mexico is like getting medical advise from Bob Dylan.
John_Wayne777
03-01-09, 09:27
Taking political advice from Mexico is like getting medical advise from Bob Dylan.
I'm sure he knows a lot about the medicinal benefits of weed.
Robb Jensen
03-01-09, 09:30
I'm sure he knows a lot about the medicinal benefits of weed.
That's my point exactly.
Mexico is living in a glass house and throwing stones.
John_Wayne777
03-01-09, 09:34
In one of the segments, it was mentioned that the Mexican government has refused to supply the serial numbers of all the American guns they are supposedly finding in drug cartels' hands. How convenient.
The weapons in the picture posted earlier could easily have the serial numbers tracked back to the manufacturer and see which foreign government originally purchase them. Is anyone bothering to do that?
An excellent question!
Probably not...or if they are then they aren't being allowed to share the information because of politics. If Mexican authorities were requesting the information it would have undoubtedly gone through BATFE here, and stories that claim serial numbers aren't being released wouldn't happen.
I hadn't heard the serial number thing before...that's plenty of evidence that the Mexican government is full of manure....as is anyone in the US who laments our 2nd amendment causing violence down there. If they aren't handing over serial numbers then it's absolutely clear that this is nothing but a PR move on Mexico's part.
The logic of it doesn't work either. I mean, we have hundreds of millions of guns both legal and illegal in circulation here in the United States and yet we don't have drug cartels taking over our government and slaughtering people wholesale here. More guns, less violence.....
Hmm...
Makes you wonder if perhaps the availability of inanimate objects isn't the real problem, doesn't it?
Nathan_Bell
03-01-09, 09:36
Taking political advice from Mexico is like getting medical advise from Bob Dylan.
I was thinking more along the lines of Kevorkian
Mexico is living in a grass house and throwing stones.
Fixed it for you.
Precisely. You know that, and I know that...but the press doesn't bother to cover that little aspect of things. When you see pictures of these weapons caches in damn near every one of them you see things like these M4's with M203's mounted, AK's with a third pin hole and 3 selector positions, grenades, RPGs, etc.
Mexican cartels ain't buying that stuff from "unlicensed dealers" at gunshows in Arizona.
Knowing the law we are forced to wonder where, then, international criminals could possibly find arms and munitions in central and south America, regions long known for domestic tranquility and incorruptible public officials.
There have been documented incidents of Mexican military units actually running protection for gun runners. A while back there was a story (which went nowhere in the national media) about border patrol agents actually being fired upon by the Mexican military on OUR side of the border.
I doubt they were just lost.
JW, I remember reading that story about the Border Patrol. Actually I think that has happened more than once.
If I had to guess where they are getting their guns it would be from south of THEIR border.
Just my opinion but, Nancy and Harry are not necessarily on the same side in this.
Nancy figures she only has to answer to the people of San Fran to get re-elected, however, she doesn't have the votes in the house (maybe close). If she does, some of the Blue Dogs will lose their jobs.
Harry has to answer to the entire state of Nevada in 2010. There's a no brainer.
I think Holder just jumped the gun, and let the cat out of the bag before its time.
Bob
Maybe Mexico wouldn't have such a problem with drug cartels if US citizens didn't provide the demand side of the market.
There you go, making sense again. No matter how tall a wall you build, starving addicts will find a way and those willing to take the risk to make big money, will find a way to get the stuff to those addicts.
Business_Casual
03-02-09, 15:35
There you go, making sense again. No matter how tall a wall you build, starving addicts will find a way and those willing to take the risk to make big money, will find a way to get the stuff to those addicts.
From what I understand, you can buy any drug you want inside US prisons. What does that tell you about the effectiveness of prohibition?
M_P
Just my opinion but, Nancy and Harry are not necessarily on the same side in this.
Nancy figures she only has to answer to the people of San Fran to get re-elected, however, she doesn't have the votes in the house (maybe close). If she does, some of the Blue Dogs will lose their jobs.
Harry has to answer to the entire state of Nevada in 2010. There's a no brainer.
I think Holder just jumped the gun, and let the cat out of the bag before its time.
Bob
Precisely. Gun control isn't and never has been about crime. I love my country, but I fear my government. To anyone who thinks gun grabbing will ever go away I've got some property I'd like to sell you.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.