Page 7 of 7
Re: ‘Fast and Furious’ Does Not Mean 'Fast and Furious'.....
Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:48 am
by sjfcontrol
chasfm11 wrote:sjfcontrol wrote:Dave2 wrote:Did anyone else see Geraldo Rivera on the O'Reilly Factor with Laura Ingraham tonight? Wow... I'm not even sure how I'd describe that...
In any case, my opinion of him is much lower now.
For those of us who didn't, what happened?
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/i ... t_id=86923
Geraldo said "gun walking is done all the time" among many stupid things. "This investigation is all political hackery"
Laura accused him of grandstanding. It is quite an exchange.
That WAS interesting...
Note to Geraldo: Just because YOUR vault was empty, doesn't mean everybody's is!

Re: ‘Fast and Furious’ Does Not Mean 'Fast and Furious'.....
Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:00 pm
by emcee rib
The misnamed DOJ refused to arrest Holder. They're traitors plain and simple.
Re: ‘Fast and Furious’ Does Not Mean 'Fast and Furious'.....
Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:56 pm
by Dave2
emcee rib wrote:The misnamed DOJ refused to arrest Holder. They're traitors plain and simple.
From what the talking heads are saying, nobody expected the DOJ to actually do anything about the contempt of congress charge. This is why they also held him in
civil contempt of congress, which authorizes them to prosecute him themselves.
Now, where did I put that video... oh yeah, here it is (there's a bit of NSFW language):
[youtube]
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UFIpoL3jrfo[/youtube]
Re: ‘Fast and Furious’ Does Not Mean 'Fast and Furious'.....
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:41 pm
by Dave2
Fox News is saying that Issa has put proof that Holder flat-out lied to congress about this in the congressional record, but there's nothing on foxnews.com yet.
Re: ‘Fast and Furious’ Does Not Mean 'Fast and Furious'.....
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2012 2:59 pm
by Heartland Patriot
Dave2 wrote:emcee rib wrote:The misnamed DOJ refused to arrest Holder. They're traitors plain and simple.
From what the talking heads are saying, nobody expected the DOJ to actually do anything about the contempt of congress charge. This is why they also held him in
civil contempt of congress, which authorizes them to prosecute him themselves.
Now, where did I put that video... oh yeah, here it is (there's a bit of NSFW language):
[youtube]
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UFIpoL3jrfo[/youtube]
He covered it pretty well, concise and to the point.
Re: ‘Fast and Furious’ Does Not Mean 'Fast and Furious'.....
Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2012 4:59 pm
by 74novaman
Just stumbled across John Lott's response to this article. I thought it was informative.
http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012/06/w ... -eban.html
Re: ‘Fast and Furious’ Does Not Mean 'Fast and Furious'.....
Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:57 am
by Rex B
Ann Coulter has a good article on F&F:
" "This isn't just another government program gone bad -- a $300 ashtray, stimulus money fraud, Solyndra or Van Jones. ... It would be as if the Bush administration had implemented a covert operation to dump a dangerous abortifacient in Planned Parenthood clinics, resulting in hundreds of women dying -- just to give pro-lifers an argument about how dangerous abortion clinics are. That's what Fast and Furious is about." --columnist Ann Coulter"