DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: sirs on October 04, 2011, 04:23:21 PM
-
Let's see if the MSM does its supposed job, on this one
-------------------------------------------------------
The Fast and Furious scandal, in which the Justice Department knowingly gave Mexican criminal gangs thousands of guns, just keeps escalating. The latest development centers around whether or not Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress about having knowledge of the controversial gun trafficking operation. Recently released documents say Holder was briefed about the operation long before he told the Judiciary Committee he was first aware of what was going on. (Holder now claims he misunderstood the question was being asked.)
What's more, CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson -- who's been covering the scandal from the beginning -- says in an interview on the Laura Ingraham Show today that the White House and Justice Department have taken to screaming at her for reporting on the story. You can listen to the full interview below, but here are the key excerpts from Attkisson:
In between the yelling that I received from Justice Department yesterday, the spokeswoman--who would not put anything in writing, I was asking for her explanation so there would be clarity and no confusion later over what had been said, she wouldn't put anything in writing--so we talked on the phone and she said things such as the question Holder answered was different than the one he asked. But he phrased it, he said very explicitly, 'I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.'
Ingraham: So they were literally screaming at you?
Attkisson: Yes. Well the DOJ woman was just yelling at me. The guy from the White House on Friday night literally screamed at me and cussed at me.
[Laura: Who was the person? Who was the person at Justice screaming?]
Eric Schultz. Oh, the person screaming was [DOJ spokeswoman] Tracy Schmaler, she was yelling not screaming. And the person who screamed at me was Eric Schultz at the White House."
Finally, Attkisson notes that the White House is claiming that a thorough investigation of the scandal is unwarranted:
[The White House and Justice Department] will tell you that I'm the only reporter--as they told me--that is not reasonable. They say the Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, the New York Times is reasonable, I'm the only one who thinks this is a story, and they think I'm unfair and biased by pursuing it.
Shhhhhhhhh (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbs-news-reporter-says-white-house-screamed-swore-her-over-fast-and-furious_595011.html)
-
So....what was the "purpose/function" of the Fed program, Fast & Furious??
-
I'm confused. I thought CBS was part of the MSM.
-
Will someone please explain the concept to BT that bias in the MSM does not mean complete absence of any reporting by any agency of the MSM. If has to do with what is predominantly reported and its repetition vs what isn't. ::)
-
So when Jay Carney is peppered with questions about Fast and furious at a WH Briefer that doesn't constitute coverage?
ABC's Jake Tapper Presses White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Operation Fast & Furious (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0-b9E0K4U4#ws)
Hmmm. ABC i think is MSM too.
-
Did you miss the part where I never claimed absense of reporting was the bias? You must have, since you seem to keep hanging your hat on that flawed concept.
tsk tsk tsk
-
No but i have certainly missed the part where you have proven this bias and the methods in which it is practiced.
-
asked and answered numerous times already, which you yourself, IIRC, concluded a similar bias yourself, in a debate around a year ago, when you kept falsely pushing how my criticizing the bias was tantamount to advocating legislation like the Fairness Doctrine.
Now, back to the far more substantive question posed, vs the irrelevent effots to paint me as saying/claiming something I haven't.....what was the "purpose/function" of the Fed program, Fast & Furious??
-
You know it's funny, but i was just thinking you seem to be advocating some kind of reporting based on quotas, for the fairness.
But if you aren't, are you just advancing a complaint without recommending a solution?
-
I'm advocating for an answer to the question......what was the "purpose/function" of the Fed program, Fast & Furious??
-
To strip away second amendment rights.
What do you think it was for?
-
No clue, which is why I was asking. So, you're saying the program was some stealth effort by this administration to strip away the 2nd? Or merely by Holder and his Justice Dept?
-
I wouldn't be surprised if Obama knew about it.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if Obama knew about it.
So, the trick now is to determine at what layer this program to attempt to weaken the 2nd amendment originated from.
--------------------------------------------------------
White House: Holder Testimony "Consistent and Truthful"
Katie Pavlich
Yesterday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney adamantly defended Attorney General Eric Holder, saying his testimony given to Congress on May 3, 2011 in response to a question from House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa about when he first knew about Operation Fast and Furious was "consistent and truthful." Holder is under fire for possibly perjuring himself after memos released this week show he was briefed on Operation Fast and Furious as early as July 2010, yet Holder said he had only known about the program for a couple of weeks in May 2011. During his press conference today, President Obama said he has full confidence in his attorney general surrouding Fast and Furious and that Holder didn't know about the program.
"The bottom line is the Attorney General's testimony to both the House and the Senate was constistent and truthful. He said in both March and May of this year that he became aware of the questionable tactics deployed in the Fast and Furious Operation in early 2011 when ATF agents first raised them publically. He then asked the inspector general to investigate the matter, demonstrating how seriously they took them."
The problem? Jay Carney isn't telling the truth about what Holder actually said on May 3, 2011. Here is a refresher.
Issa: When did you first know about the program officially I believe known as Operation Fast and Furious? To the best of your knowledge what date?
Holder: "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."
At no point did Holder mention the word "tactics." Holder specifically refers to "Fast and Furious."
Now, new memos show Holder was consistently briefed at least five times about Fast and Furious since July 2010. Once again, the memos don't simply mention Eric Holder, they are addressed directly to him.
Senator Chuck Grassley and Congressman Darrell Issa today said that Attorney General Eric Holder received at least five weekly memos beginning in July 2010, including four weeks in a row, describing the ill-advised strategy known as Operation Fast and Furious. The memos were to Holder from Michael Walther, the director of the National Drug Intelligence Center.
July 5, 2011:
July 12, 2010
July 19, 2011:
July 26, 2011:
August 9, 2011
Article (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2011/10/06/white_house_holder_testimony_consistent_and_truthful)
Sooo....is the WH spinning to try to save face for Holder, or do they know far more, and need to defend Holder at all cost. Where did Fast & Furious originate? Who's "bright idea" was it, to begin with?
-
You might want to research operation wide receiver just for background info.
-
What did Scooter Libbey do that was worse than this?
-
What did Scooter Libbey do that was worse than this?
Nothing
-
You might want to research operation wide receiver just for background info.
You'll have to provide some background, I'm afraid
or not
-
google is your friend
-
And this is a debate forum. If you wish to present a position for consideration, please do
or not
-
I'm not presenting a position.
I was offering you the opportunity to widen your knowledge.
Your choice to remain ignorant or not.
-
Apparently the "background info" wasn't too necessary, if you're having that much trouble presenting it, even in a modified cliffsnotes version, or the reason why anyone else should bother looking it up
Whatever
-
Apparently the "background info" wasn't too necessary, if you're having that much trouble presenting it, even in a modified cliffsnotes version, or the reason why anyone else should bother looking it up
Whatever
Precisely. You can lead the horse to water...
Remain blissful
-
or not
-
You were the one asking whose bright idea fast and furious was. I simply pointed you in the right direction. What you do with that information is up to you.
-
You were the one asking whose bright idea fast and furious was. I simply pointed you in the right direction.
Yea, that it's apparently some stealth effort to degrade the 2nd amendment. I thank you for the insight. The follow-up was to try to identify its origins with what little info we're privvy to, and the lack of MSM zeal to find out themselves, lest they find out how far up the food chain it came from.
Your mileage may vary
-
You were the one asking whose bright idea fast and furious was. I simply pointed you in the right direction.
Yea, that it's apparently some stealth effort to degrade the 2nd amendment. I thank you for the insight. The follow-up was to try to identify its origins with what little info we're privvy to, and the lack of MSM zeal to find out themselves, lest they find out how far up the food chain it came from.
Your mileage may vary
Still suffering from reading comprehension problems i see.
Sooo....is the WH spinning to try to save face for Holder, or do they know far more, and need to defend Holder at all cost. Where did Fast & Furious originate? Who's "bright idea" was it, to begin
with? (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/index.php?topic=15892.msg130858#msg130858)
Again i pointed you in the right direction, per your question. I see no need to do you research for you as i don't think you have any entitlement to my labor.
Are you sure you aren't a liberal because this whole thing about MSM bias sounds like a call for a renewal of the fairness act and then you seem to want me to do your educational legwork when we are only talking about typing three little words into google.
-
No, you basically said go google it. And here I thought this was a debate forum
-
Are you saying googling and a debate forum do not mix?
-
Nope
Googling can facilitate a debate forum, when used to help highlight a point being made. Apparently, you have none to be made. And here I thought you did.....my bad
-
If you googled you would see the answer to your question.
Did you?
-
Thanks for continuing to remind me that this isn't a debate forum....at least from your end. Couldn't even provide a damn link, could ya. Well, at least folks like Ami, Plane, Cu4, RR, and others, will continue to uphold the original intent of the forum. I thank them as well
-
So you didn't google. Ok then
-
And as far as this place goes, it ceased being a debate forum long ago. It currently is no more than a place to park a domain name and a depository for cut and pasted articles from other sources.
That plus the snark and insults that pass for original thought these days.
-
So, I've noticed
-
Good
-
Yep (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/index.php?topic=15888.0), good (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/index.php?topic=15895.0) to (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/index.php?topic=15844.0) notice (http://debategate.com/new3dhs/index.php?topic=15880.0)
-
absolutely
-
You might want to research operation wide receiver just for background info.
You'll have to provide some background, I'm afraid
or not
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46714 (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46714)
http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2011/06/operation-wide-receiver.html (http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2011/06/operation-wide-receiver.html)
These articles make the BATF look like a fumble factory, not much direction lots of errors in logic and in tecnique.
-
Thank you Plane. Some good links to start from, in addressing my original inquires
-
Hmmm, so checking out the links that Plane pleasantly provided, which then generated additional links to look at and debate to be facilitated, it seems that there is still no "go to" guy that said, "Here's my plan, let's go with this", or "Here's my idea boss, can you give me the go-ahead?"
The only common denominator is that it was generated by the Fed, ATF principly in this scenario, with not just the backing, but full understanding of what was going on, at the Justice Dept, with the Wide Receiver program being launched under the prior administration
-
Were you previously aware of operation wide receiver beforehand?
-
No, which, to facilitate some debate, is why I had originally asked for some linkage/information on it, and was told to go google
-
Hmmm Guess the MSM is biased afterall
-
IIRC, you had already conceded that quite a while back. Something change where they weren't, and now they are again?
-
Just curious why they would not report a Bush Era ATF screw up as it was unfolding.
-
Apparently barely scratched the surface of anything. Perhaps they had already done a good enough job with Bush's ratings. They had Iraq & 5% unemployment that they were carpetbombing him with. I guess they were too busy with that
-
My guess is Obama's numbers are at the same place Bush's were yet the MSM seems to be keeping us up to date on Holder's problems.
-
My guess is that if this were Bush, it would be the lead story, on every network, every evening, with the WH press corp, led by dear Miss Doud, requesting, if not demanding, the AG's resignation. I'd expect a few news anchors to even help facilitate the act, with some lead memos, regardless if they're found to have been forged
-
My guess is that if this were Bush, it would be the lead story, on every network, every evening, with the WH press corp, led by dear Miss Doud, requesting, if not demanding, the AG's resignation. I'd expect a few news anchors to even help facilitate the act, with some lead memos, regardless if they're found to have been forged
Well it was Bush. The story was known in Congress which means the MSM knew about it, but nary a peep that i can recall, and i think i would have remembered it because i am always suspicious of sting operations and the larger goals behind them.
-
And the story was microscopic in comparision to what has happened with Fast and Furious. As I said, Bush was already getting slammed from every direction by the MSM. As i just referenced, if F&F happened under Bush's watch, it'd be 24/7 news, with anchors bringing up a whole host of newly found (forged) memos to paint him with, and the WH press corp demanding the AG's blood
-
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y273/ItsZep/Politics/1dbdbef2.jpg)
-
And the story was microscopic in comparision to what has happened with Fast and Furious.
How so? Guns walked. They ended up in Mexico. And put to ill use.
-
Far fewer walked, and no American Law Enforcement agent died as a direct result
-
I really think that the MSM likes the BATF more than they ought .
Fast and furious is so gross it can't be ignored , but the earlyer simular fiasco was smaller , escaped attention.
What kept the BATF from learning from the mistake? Did they think they were doing better by scaling up ?
There is a corporate culture in each federal agency, the BATF has a reason to exist in the eventual elimination of the second admendment, this leads to a culture of disrespect for the common citizen.