Naive?
 

Richie, if you really in your heart of hearts believe that this 'fast and furious' thing with Holder and Obama is anything more than a political response to Obama upstaging the GOP with his immigration order, then I would say you've brought naïveté to an Olympic championship level.

My argument is that Congress has a whole lot more important things to address than the death if a border agent. When are they going to address the 10% tax increase everyone is going to pay starting on New Year's Day? Or what will they do about the deep and damaging cuts to the defense budget, which start on the same day? And if their inaction leads to another credit downgrade as the result of our political inability to come up with any fiscal reforms...who will they blame then? Almost all economists say that if these things happen, it will have a disastrous effect on our economy.

Romney says wait until after the election. What the heck does that mean? Will the lame duck Congress do anything between the day after the election and when they leave for their three-week Christmas vacation? What do you think?

Then after the swearing in of the 113th Congress on January 3, will they wait around and do nothing until after the presidential inauguration on January 20? Then if Romney is elected, he'll be very busy repealing legislation for a couple weeks. Who knows what Congress will be doing. Waiting for his 'leadership' to kick in maybe?

In the meantime the Pentagon checks will be bouncing, they'll be well into cancelling military contracts and laying off people. And we'll all have a helluva lot less take home pay after the new, elevated tax rates kick in.

And you're telling me I'm naive because I expect and demand better from Congress? Like I said, neither you or Bucco or DKlassen will convince me that Congress holding hearings, launching an impeachment proceeding for the attorney general, and maneuvering to get heir pusses on then evening news rises to the importance of what they should be working on. But naive? No I'm not naive...I'm PO'd!

Fast and Furious just an attempt at removing "the right to bear arms" but probably backfired when one of our american Heros was killed.
this administration is a disgrace!! One thing after another. But right now, let's focus on the economy folks. Keep the focus on the economy, Sharia law, and Agenda 21 and it's goodbye Obama.

Attorney General Eric Holder has already turned over 7600 documents and testified nine times before congress. The ATF agent in charge and AG Mike Mukasey, who started the program under George W Bush when it was called operation "Wide Receiver", have never been called to testify. If congress really wants to get to the bottom of this, why hasn't everyone involved been called?

If the House of Representatives vote next week to sanction Holder, from what I understand, they could have him handcuffed and taken right to the jail in the capital. I can't think of a better photo-op to energize the progressive base.


Politics - David A. Graham - Eric Holder, Contempt of Congress, and Fast and Furious: What You Need to Know - The Atlantic

Where are the links to back up all these accusations?

"Budget policy experts, including former CBO Director Alice Rivlin and Robert Greenstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, strongly endorsed the idea of giving Congress the first half of next year to come up with a comprehensive package or framework of savings and tax revenues, with the threat of the major tax expirations hanging over them.

“The fiscal cliff is a real cliff,” Rivlin said. “ It would be very bad for the economy and very bad for a lot of things people care about if we let all of the tax cuts expire all at once and the Alternative Minimum Tax and all the things that are in the cliff as well as the sequester.”

“It’s called [by some] kicking the can down the road,” she said. “It shouldn’t be. It is moving the fiscal cliff for a few months. It’s still there.”

Don

I give you this because as you see it is not just Romney as you just keep on insisting over and over and over.

In addition you seem to imply folks sitting around just stalling things...BOTH parties are working although it may not be up to YOUR standards...

"House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., recently endorsed a strategy for linking an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts and other expiring tax breaks to “fast-track procedures” to compel Congress to enact comprehensive tax reform next year. Congress has embraced this approach 34 times over the years, according to Camp, including most recently as part of the Trade Promotion Authority.

“This is an idea House Republicans support, the Speaker [John Boehner] endorsed . . . and I urge the Senate and the president to get behind it as well,” Camp said in a May 17 speech. “Doing so will send a clear, strong message to the markets, to employers and families that Washington is serious about reforming our tax code and putting us on a path to sustained economic growth.”

PLUS

"Senate Democrats and some Republican House leaders may be “kicking the can down the road,” but talks are intensifying with special interest groups to keep $8 trillion in combined tax increases and spending cuts from automatically kicking in beginning the first week of January."

"Camp has outlined a House GOP approach that would collapse the six current individual tax rates to two rates of 10 percent and 25 percent, eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax and “move from an outdated worldwide system of taxation to a more competitive territorial system” with lower corporate tax rates."

Is the congress inept...YES but you harp on one thing and one thing only and I know that Romney is well aware of what is going on from his rep in the House. The two parties talk to each other, even though our wonderful media is only interested in interviewing those who will make some waves.

No need to reply to a post that is just a rant from Hulababy. Rants are sometimes just posted when there is nothing they can think of to make any sense so they just string words together.

Fine, you're right again. The government selling guns without a tracking system to drug cartels with terrorist links in Mexico is NO BIG DEAL.

The murder of a U.S. Border Agent by these same guns. HELL, he knew the risks of trying to protect our border..........RIGHT!!

Then the Executive Branch on full out coverup to hide all the blunders they made. Heck!!; this is Obama we're talking about. It's not like he's freakin' Dick Nixon or some other scuzzy f'd up Republican.

WHAT THE HELL; we need to check the stock market clicker.

No wonder this nation is going to hell.

That's my rant for the day.

And do not forget the actual impetus for the entire big deal. A memo written by the AG saying things that were totally untrue and then telling the committee, oh never mind (he did the same thing when he blamed Bush for the entire thing but had to take that back also with an oops)....that letter saying that nobody knew anything that was withdrawn, and then the committee just wanted to find out WHY that first memo was written.....hence this stalemate !

Wow...please accept a warm welcome from me to the Political Forum, Hulababy...

Some posters just beg to be ignored...they tend to string words together (or even just one word..."seriously") when there is nothing they can think of to make any sense in order to try to belittle and scare off a new poster.

Please stick around and don't let anyone scare you off....

Please Don't
 

Keep finding stuff like this to rant about every day--and ignore the important things Congress should be working on--and when the inevitable happens, you can blame it on Obama.

What the heck will you do if he's re-elected? I wouldn't want you to endanger your health, Richie. Seriously, I don't. All this politics baloney isn't worth it.

I hope you do not feel as though I came down too hard on you. Sorry about that but it pushed some buttons for me.

The economy definitely is one big thing to focus on. Sharia Law is not practiced in the USA. We have criminal and civil law and Sharia Law is NOT practiced in the USA. Agenda 21 from the United Nations is a great plan. What do you have against protecting the environment, combating poverty, and promoting health around the world?

How is the Obama Administration trying to take your guns away? They are not! Yes, it was a failed effort with Fast & Furious and a Border Patrol agent was killed with one of the guns. That was tragic - but not as tragic as George W. Bush lying to the US about weapons of mass destruction and ended up costing the US over 4,400 American lives, hundreds of thousands with physical and mental scars, and cost well into the TRILLIONS of dollars for NOTHING.

Welcome to the Political Chat. Hope you do stick around and learn.

CBS News Hit It On The Head
 

"....House Republicans are obsessed on this issue (the Holder contempt and WH executive privilege issues), at the expense of addressing issues like jobs, the economy, immigration and the deficit..."

And we should vote to send ANY of these people back to Congress?

You have just shown a good reason to vote Democrat.

i can't find a reason to vote JUST for democrats - but i SURE can find LOTS of good reasons to vote AGAINST EVERY INCUMBENT! ;)

What Is "Contempt of Congress"? (Long but informational)
 

Just so we all understand what the House is spending all its time on with the "Fast and Furious" contempt of Congress allegation, maybe a re-visit of the rules and precedents might be helpful...

Q: What is a contempt citation?

A: Congress can vote to hold a congressional witness in contempt of Congress if it considers the witness to be obstructing its ability to carry out its constitutional powers. For a person to be held in contempt, Congress must vote on a contempt citation in committee. This is different from finding a person in contempt, which only happens after the committee votes on a citation and then passes along the vote to the full House for a vote on Contempt of Congress.

The process involves a series of legal maneuvers including the president's ability to assert executive privilege, as he did in this case. Executive privilege is rarely accepted by Congress, but the Justice Department maintains that infringing on executive privilege erodes the balance of powers.

Q: What happens next?

A: A vote in favor of a contempt in committee sends the decision to the full House for another vote. If that vote finds Holder in contempt, then, according to almost all legal scholars, it is unlikely that Holder will be prosecuted for criminal contempt. Congress's remedy, if it choose not to proceed with a trial and criminal conviction of Holder, would be a civil lawsuit in federal court.

Q: When is the last time an executive branch official faced a contempt citation?

A: Although this is the first time an attorney general has faced a contempt citation, other executive branch officials have been held in contempt of Congress.

Most recently, George W. Bush White House Counsel Harriet Miers and Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten were held in contempt of Congress despite Bush asserting executive privilege in their case regarding the firing of U.S.attorneys in 2007. During the vote in early 2008, a large number of Republicans walked out in protest of what they saw as a partisan vote by the Democrat-controlled House.

Miers and Bolten were accused of failing to cooperate in a congressional investigation into the mass firings of U.S. attorneys and allegations that the White House was using the Justice Department for political aims. Their citations marked the first time White House officials had been found in contempt of Congress.

Following conviction of contempt of Congress, Cingress would have the option to conduct a criminal trial attempting to convict Holder and possibly Obama. The offense only carries a penalty of $1,000 and up to one year in prison. Neiher a criminal trial or the sentence would be likely.

Instead, it is more likely the House will pursue civil prosecution in federal court, as it did in the Miers and Bolten cases having to do with the firing of federal attorneys in the Bush administration in 2007. The House General Counsel's office prosecuted the pair to gain access to the information Congress sought by the Democrat-controlled House.

Q: What was the result of the Congress' civil lawsuit against Bush White House staff Harriett Miers and Josh Bolten?

A: First, the entire process of committee hearings and a contempt vote, followed by a vote of the full House had to be repeated. The plaintiff in the original law suit was the 110th Congress, which ceased to exist when the 111th Congress was sworn in. The result of having no plaintiff meant that the entire process had to be repeated by the 111th Congress.

After the House held Miers and Bolten in contempt the second time, the Judiciary Committee sued the two aides in federal district court.

In August 2008, a federal judge ordered Miers to testify and Bolten to turn over documents, overruling the administration’s claim of executive privilege. That ruling was appealed.

In March 2009, a year after the suit was filed, Miers and Karl Rove, who had also become ensnared in a separate contempt proceeding, agreed to testify behind closed doors to the House Judiciary Committee. The deal broke the stalemate. The results of the closed door settlement were never announced.
-------
What it boiled down to is that Congress wasted a whole lot of time and spent a huge amount of money prosecuting a contempt of Congress case, with no apparent decision. It turned out to be all about political posturing and bickering. And while it was going on, Congress was to busy to govern.

It looks like it's happening again.