Senate U.S. Presidential Election Thread

Ok. Let's agree to disagree. My opinion is that this is a nakedly political move that is completely in opposition to his stated opinion on the extent of Executive powers in the past and the role of the Executive. You do not see it. Got it.

Let me see if I have this right based only on the headlines of the day via radio, tv, and general internet browsing.

Bush/GOP started a program to run guns across the Mexican border, the program blew up in our face because said guns have been used by the bad guys to kill good guys, and the GOP blames Obama.

But it's been demonstrated that your understanding of his opinion is incorrect.

If people wanted to investigate Fast & Furious, that would be fine. This, though, is blatnatly political. The contempt citation was over failure to turn over documents from several months after the death of ATF agent and the permanent closure of the program. As such, they can't really be investigating the actual failures of flaws of the program. They are looking for a way to attack Eric Holder, and by extension President Obama.

F&F won't affect this election. The only people who get worked up over it are those who are strongly anti-Obama anyway. That said I don't like the use of EP on this. I also don't like the blatant political witch hunt so I'm disappointed with both sides.

Before this came up I was more interested in how Obama seems to be systematically shoring up his base (income equality for women, supporting gay marriage, immigration/Latino). I don't see anything as organized from Romney. His campaign seems content to just hope the economy is bad enough to win it for them.

That's probably because Romney doesn't have any principled positions to espouse; he's just sitting back as long as he can, tracking the whims and desires of the electorate for as long as he can before he stakes out an ostensible position.

They've been investigating for over a year--it wouldn't even be an issue now had Holder simply cooperated instead of stonewalling for over 12 months.

Hasn't Eric Holder already gone to Congress like half a dozen times this year, and has only refused to appear at the most recent hearing?

No. It has not. He said that my opinion was not valid and then stated his. I know that no matter what, his opinion will paint Obama's decision in the best possible light. What's the point of arguing further?

You see. This is what annoys me. Yes, this is political. So is the President's recent decisions to support gay marriage and redefine his responsibility to enforce the laws of the land. But somehow this is bad and the President's actions are ok? Please.

Eric Holder is the chief law enforcement officer of the land. His department oversaw a blatantly irresponsible program. He accepts no responsibility for the program even though his office was briefed on it well before it made headlines. Congress can ask for whatever documents they want to, being the oversight arm of the government but Holder gets to just say no? That's the very definition of contempt.

It may be political, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.

From CNN:

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2012/04/27/jk-issa-holder-fast-and-furious-contempt.cnn

On February 4, 2011, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich wrote a letter to Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which mischaracterized the operation. He incorrectly denied that ATF "knowingly allowed the sale of assault weapons to a straw purchaser who then transported them into Mexico."

As a result, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Issa, has been investigating not only the original operation but also the circumstances that led to the erroneous February 4, 2011, letter.

For his part, Holder directed the Justice Department's inspector general to investigate Fast and Furious and publicly denounced the operation in October 2011 as "fundamentally flawed." The Justice Department has released to Congress more than 7,600 pages of documents revealing how Fast and Furious was initiated and carried out.

What the Issa committee is now demanding, and what the White House and Justice Department are withholding, are documents generated after February 4, 2011, relating to how the Justice Department handled its responses to Congress regarding Congress' oversight of Fast and Furious, following the erroneous Weich letter.

EDIT: questions like, "who authorized Fast and Furious" have not been answered....it's kind of astounding that even simple questions like that have been avoided. President Obama invoking executive privilege is also questionable--unless he's invoking it for the sake of national security, I'm a bit fuzzy on whether or not it's ok to use for the purpose of concealing documents for seemingly...no reason.

The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case."(418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief JusticeBurger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns.

You seem to imply I'm being hypocritical here. Let's examine that. My criticism wasn't solely (or even primarily) political here, just as my support for the new announcement about immigration was not. What I in fact said in that discussion was that while that decision was political A)the policy was sensible and B)it doesn't really make sense to call it "unprincipled" because it is consistent with the principles Obama has laid out and operated with up until now in his Presidency.

In looking at Fast & Furious, I agreed an investigation could be both justified and sensible. But I then detailed why, in terms of substance, this particular investigation led by Issa was not. I was not criticizing this investigation for having a political element, but because it seemed to me to be solely about politics. That's a meaningful difference between the two situations.

I know that certainly in the past, and I'd imagine now as well, you would get quite offended if someone suggested that you blindly and reflexively support Republican policies. If you so dislike having your thoughts written off in this manner, perhaps you ought to consider extending the same courtesy to other posters that you demand for yourself.

I think Rep. Issa is an ass, but "Executive Privilege" is usually a crock of **** and I absolutely think Holder should resign over Fast and Furious (well, and his authorization of the President killing U.S. citizens with drone strikes, but not enough people are throwing a fit about that).

I agree with Darth Guy. I am very disappointed by the use of executive privilege, even if some are defending its use as a method to maintain the executive branch's power vs the legislative branch. Regardless, it gives off the general impression that Holder has something to hide. It doesn't feel right, and when there is smoke, there is usually fire. I would be OK with Holder resigning over it.

That said.. Darrel Issa is SUCH a douchebag. Really can't stand the guy.

Darth_Guy, apparently you missed the memo that you can't be objected to F&F without being an Evil Republican Who Thinks That Obama And Holder Are Racist Socialist Muslims.

Apropos drone strikes, I'm in the incredibly awkward position of supporting them(in principle, anyway. The "signature strikes" seem way too broad to me) but also being disgusted at the oozing intellectual dishonesty of the liberals who would be flooding the streets and crying "HITLERZZZZZZ!" were it Bush/McCain. Ultimately though, I don't begrudge Obama for responding to the reality check he undoubtedly got once he was privy to Presidential intel.

They wouldn't, though. They cast everything Obama does as wrong.

But what must be emphasized is that that doesn't mean that everything the Republicans attack him on is inherently misguided. F&F is a veritable scandal, regardless of how impure the right's intentions are. .