October 06, 2011
A Hilariously Unscientific Poll
Consider this scenario: You have been told, at least five weeks in a row, by memo—memos it is your job to read and act upon—that something very wrong is happening. You do nothing, and things blow up in everyone's face. The boss asks you about it, and you tell him that you have no idea what's going on; you only found out about it when things blew up. He says: "Oh, OK then."
Right. How about if you say: "Oh, I didn't understand your question." Or "I was responding to another question about some other context." How about: "Memos? What memos? I never saw any memos." Or better yet: "Memos? I don't read memos!"
Q: What is the chance of keeping your job:
C) Less than nothing
D) Hahahahahahahahaha—gasp---hahahahaha! Keep your job?! Hahahahaha…
Comes now Tina Korbe at Hot Air who writes:
"It was never a comforting thought to think the Attorney General just can’t be bothered to read his weekly briefings, but it was at least plausible to think Eric Holder overlooked one or two memos about the pernicious and fatal Fast and Furious program. But make that five memos and the AG’s incompetence and negligence appear especially gross:
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.
The Attorney General told Issa during a House Judiciary Committee in May 2011 that he had just learned of Fast and Furious a few weeks before. Yet, on January 31, in a previously scheduled meeting, Grassley personally handed him two letters about Fast and Furious. Grassley and Issa said they find it very troubling that Holder actually knew of Operation Fast and Furious much earlier, and in greater detail than he ever let on.
The memos specifically said that the straw buyers were 'responsible for the purchase of 1500 firearms that were then supplied to Mexican drug trafficking cartels.'”
Mr. Obama also weighed in at a press conference on Thursday:
"I think both Holder and I would have been very unhappy if someone had suggested that guns were allowed to pass through that could have been prevented by the United States of America."
So we now know:
1) Senator Chuck Grassley, on January 31, gave AG Holder specific information about Fast and furious.
2) Holder received at least five weekly briefings, very specific briefings, about the case beginning in July 2010.
3) In May of 2011, Holder told Rep. Daryl Issa in a congressional hearing, under oath, that he heard of the case only a few weeks earlier.
I'll give Ms. Korbe the benefit of the doubt and literary license for understatement. Is it plausible that Mr. Holder missed a memo or two? It's plausible. However, let's consider that Mr. Holder is a man intimately involved in an Administration famous of power mongering, ignoring the law, and micromanagement. Let's further consider his absolutely mind-blowing, bald-faced lying regarding his role in securing a pardon for Marc Rich. Incompetence? Negligence? Certainly, but that doesn't account for what now appears to be absolute proof that Mr. Holder was lying under oath.
I caught Lanny Davis, former Clinton lawyer and Democrat apologist on the O'Reilly Factor last night. He suggested—and this with a straight face—that Holder has no reason to lie. Well, apart from the fact that he may be implicated in multiple federal crimes including conspiracy, murder, treason, terrorism, etc., I'd have to agree with Mr. Davis. Yup. No reason to lie at all.
Gentle readers, let's hear from you. What do you say about these three questions:
1) Is AG Holder lying?
2) Is Mr. Obama involved (and lying)?
3) Did they push Gunwalker to build support for anti-gun policies they couldn't obtain through the Congress?