CBS journalist: White House, DOJ officials yelled at me over Fast & Furious reporting

posted at 3:25 pm on October 4, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Laura Ingraham’s producer Matt Wolking, vivid proof that it’s not true that “the media” is ignoring Fast & Furious. Most of the media is, but Sharyl Attkisson at CBS has been filing scoops damned near every day, including last night’s bombshell that briefings were sent to Holder as early as July 2010. Ingraham asked her about that in the clip you’re about to hear. Attkisson’s reply:

I’m certainly not the one to make the case for DOJ and White House about what I’m doing wrong. They 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.

Thousands of guns sold with U.S. government help to degenerates known for decapitating people and leaving their heads in the street as a warning to others, and yet Attkisson’s the one who’s “not reasonable” for finding it newsworthy. Skip ahead to 6:05 to hear her describe being yelled at not only by the DOJ but by White House spokesman Eric Schultz, who allegedly screamed and cursed at her over her reporting. But if you do skip ahead, you’ll be missing out: For my money, the best part of the clip is hearing Attkisson describe the progression of revelations about F&F from whistleblower John Dodson to the Phoenix ATF office to ATF headquarters to DOJ higher-ups. Even now, she says, the Justice Department won’t put anything in writing for her because they don’t want to be pinned down to any admissions. That’s how shady this is.

My one quibble with her: Early in the clip, she notes that the briefings Holder received never explicitly stated “we let guns walk.” That’s true, but they did say that the guns obtained by straw purchasers “were then supplied to Mexican drug trafficking cartels.” That’s not supposed to happen; in a normal sting involving straw purchasers, the purchaser is immediately arrested and the weapon confiscated. How come the alarm bells didn’t ring for Holder (or for whichever underling read that memo for him) when they saw that part?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The meltdown continues.

Popcorn. Stat.

fossten on October 4, 2011 at 3:27 PM

Thank God the adults are in charge.

Mike Honcho on October 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM

They say the Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, the New York Times is reasonable

And why shouldn’t they be “reasonable”? All they do is carry water for the current administration as a matter of policy.

And their readership numbers show it!

GarandFan on October 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM

The Walkergate Scandal is coming on Fast and Furious now.

Chip on October 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM

to hear her describe being yelled at not only by the DOJ but by White House spokesman Eric Schultz, who allegedly screamed and cursed at her over her reporting.

She obviously has her airplane directly over the target….she is taking incoming rounds.

She probably deserves a Pulitzer

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:29 PM

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.

define “reasonable”…..

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:30 PM

The difference between this and Watergate: Dead bodies. Call them inconvenient facts, if you are liberally inclined.

txmomof6 on October 4, 2011 at 3:31 PM

she notes that the briefings Holder received never explicitly stated “we let guns walk.”

never explicitly stated that they prevented them from walking either.

Ambulation.

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:32 PM

What is implied by “reasonable”? Better yet, what does “reasonable” mean in this context?

Have they agreed to not report the story?

Accomplices after the fact, aiding and abetting the commission of a felony, and if they (the MSM) criticize those who do report it, they risk a full co-conspirator charge.

These asshats are playing with the big boys now.

BobMbx on October 4, 2011 at 3:33 PM

Isn’t “be reasonable” often used in fiction as part of a maffia-esk intimidation routine?

Count to 10 on October 4, 2011 at 3:33 PM

to hear her describe being yelled at not only by the DOJ but by White House spokesman Eric Schultz, who allegedly screamed and cursed at her over her reporting.

She obviously has her airplane directly over the target….she is taking incoming rounds.

She probably deserves a Pulitzer

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:29 PM

She does, but some of the fist heroes on this story are:

http://cleanupatf.org/forums/

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-national/atf-source-confirms-walking-guns-to-mexico-to-pad-statistics

Chip on October 4, 2011 at 3:34 PM

Attention AttackWatch.com: Sharyl Attkisson at CBS

pseudonominus on October 4, 2011 at 3:34 PM

Lordy, this fake scandal has a really cool name!

lorien1973 on October 4, 2011 at 3:34 PM

How come the alarm bells didn’t ring for Holder (or for whichever underling read that memo for him) when they saw that part?

We all know the answer to that — the purpose was to get the guns into the hands of the drug cartels.

rbj on October 4, 2011 at 3:34 PM

She does, but some of the first heroes on this story are:

Chip on October 4, 2011 at 3:34 PM

Thousands of guns sold with U.S. government help to degenerates known for decapitating people and leaving their heads in the street as a warning to others, and yet Attkisson’s the one who’s “not reasonable” for finding it newsworthy

Unreasonable translates to telling the truth about this administration.

Southernblogger on October 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM

Funny how the WH uses the word “biased” when it doesn’t go their way.

the_souse on October 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM

The meltdown continues.

Popcorn. Stat.

fossten on October 4, 2011 at 3:27 PM

Give the story its full due.

Time to break out the Caramel Corn. We’ve earned it.

BobMbx on October 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM

It’s almost like CBS wants to open a news department.

malclave on October 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM

When they start to scream , it’s breaking apart.

the_nile on October 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM

I have no idea, but I do know that you guys come up with really cool names for your fake scandals.

crr6 on July 10, 2011 at 1:24 PM

fossten on October 4, 2011 at 3:37 PM

The difference between this and Watergate: Dead bodies. Call them inconvenient facts, if you are liberally inclined.

txmomof6 on October 4, 2011 at 3:31 PM

Or maybe they are just Collateral Damage. Afterall, when you make an omelette a few eggs will get broken.

And what omelette would be complete without a sprinkling of Lies in the service of a larger Truth?

It’s the liberal way.

Lily on October 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM

She probably deserves a Pulitzer

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:29 PM

That, or we’ll see a story about her being found along the GW Parkway with a suicide note.

BobMbx on October 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM

I think Issa had the goods on Holder before he asked the question. Good cross examination.

txmomof6 on October 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM

I have no idea, but I do know that you guys come up with really cool names for your fake scandals.

crr6 on July 10, 2011 at 1:24 PM

I disagree. Fast and Furious is so 2009.

Doughboy on October 4, 2011 at 3:40 PM

what? she didn’t get sent a dead fish yet?

how long until we have bags of heads being left about to stress our Dear Leader’s need for us to Just Love Him and to stop complaining and submit? if we don’t take these fools out we’re going to be blanking Mexico del Norte.

mittens on October 4, 2011 at 3:40 PM

“Hey! That RAID you’re spraying on us is unreasonable!”

-roaches

Bishop on October 4, 2011 at 3:41 PM

Guns for Druglords?

faraway on October 4, 2011 at 3:42 PM

the lid is now officially…..OFF!

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:42 PM

Just keep the pressure up press, those who actually care, about this. It seems the heat is getting hot around all involved at the wh?
L

letget on October 4, 2011 at 3:42 PM

“Hey! That RAID you’re spraying on us is unreasonable!”

-roaches

Bishop on October 4, 2011 at 3:41 PM

Another gem from the beloved Bishop.

fossten on October 4, 2011 at 3:43 PM

The LAT is reasonable, WaPo is reasonable, the NYT is reasonable, and from what I understand the North Korean People’s Daily is also considered by Kim Jong Il to be very reasonable.

Bishop on October 4, 2011 at 3:43 PM

They will tell you that I’m the only reporter–as they told me–that is not reasonable.

And it’s like TOTALLY reasonable to push a story about a rock painted over 30 years ago.

Paul-Cincy on October 4, 2011 at 3:44 PM

they think I’m unfair and biased by pursuing it.
define “reasonable”…..

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Reasonable = downplaying the story and repeating WH talking points on it verbatim in the first paragraph of every article.

AZCoyote on October 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM

when the government lives in fear of the people, there is liberty.

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM

One thing is for certain.

Their original plan to come for our guns has come to an end.

Thats called a backfire.

BobMbx on October 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM

I’d like to file my request now for Humpbot if Holder gets thrown under the bus.

greggriffith on October 4, 2011 at 3:46 PM

Reasonable = carrying the WH’s water

I guess.

Damn it all. It’s going to take more than one lone CBS reporter to break this open. Keep at it Ms. Attkisson.

And it would probably help if we gave her stories on this lots of clicks, likes, shares etc.

Missy on October 4, 2011 at 3:46 PM

How come the alarm bells didn’t ring for Holder (or for whichever underling read that memo for him) when they saw that part?

Um, because what was happening was a feature not a bug?

Midas on October 4, 2011 at 3:47 PM

During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.

“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/guns/2011/05/25/obama-were-working-gun-control-under-radar#ixzz1ZqOntCIC

fossten on October 4, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Reasonable = downplaying the story and repeating WH talking points on it verbatim in the first paragraph of every article.

AZCoyote on October 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM

why thank you, young stenographer. A new batch of pencils and a head pat after you submit tomorrow’s story for party review and approval.

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Here’s a story I wanted to get in my article today on Christian Adams, but it interrupted the flow too much, so I’ll put it in this blog post. Sometime more than a month into my covering the dismissal of the New Black Panther case, I decided to take the bull by the horns and call Adams directly at the Justice Department to see if he would talk on the record. As soon as I identified myself, he said, “You’ll have to go to Schmaler for that.”

Schmaler? Huh?

It turns out that the chief spokesman for the Justice Department is Tracy Schmaler (I had spoken to an assistant press person before), and Adams was adamant that he couldn’t talk to the press and that I must talk to Ms. Schmaler. So I called and asked for her by name.

What a trip. I don’t think I was on with her for more than about 20 seconds, still well within my typical, almost overly polite introduction of self and topic which I’m known for using upon first introduction, when she began absolutely berating me for the WashTimes coverage of the case and for daring to ask any more questions. Within another minute, probably less, “berating” had turned into “yelling.” And I hadn’t even asked a tough question yet!

Obviously, “go[ing] to Schmaler” would never be worth a thing. The only couple of other times I even tried, the experience was only slightly less unpleasant. And when I tried calling Adams back another time (still to no avail), I opened the conversation by telling him that him sending me to Schmaler had been such a waste of time that he shouldn’t try to pawn me off on her again. He laughed heartily, before again politely declining my request for him to talk about the case.

So, a year later, when Christian Adams finally went public with his testimony to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, I paid attention when he left the room and followed him as he and his lawyer left the building by a back exit. Indeed, I walked along beside him for blocks, all the way to a garage where he had his car parked, before he would say much of anything.

“Look,” I said, “you’re public now. Now there’s no reason not to go into some more details.” Adams smiled. It was a sort of mischievous smile, a very quick one, before adopting a poker face and saying:

“I’m sorry, but you’ll have to go to Schmaler for that.” Then he burst out laughing. And then, finally, he answered a few questions…..

Quin Hillyer at Amspec blog.

Wethal on October 4, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Thats called a backfire.

BobMbx on October 4, 2011 at 3:45 PM

I’d call it a chamber explosion…..

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:48 PM

Meanwhile, our side is arguing over paint, stones, illegals, and who boo’d what.

SouthernGent on October 4, 2011 at 3:48 PM

Maybe Obama and Holder can’t actually read? I know affirmative-action undermines the educational opportunities of those it ostensibly helps, but this is ridiculous.

Jaibones on October 4, 2011 at 3:48 PM

It is fascinating to see the hysteria inside the White House when the Obamamedia cannot be counted on to be 100% campaigning for Obama. They’re getting a small taste of what it’s like to run for national office as a Republican. Still, I do think that CBS reporter is in for a world of hurt for straying so far off the leftwing reservation. No one in her world will defend her. She has committed high liberal treason. She’ll be unemployed by December, and she and everyone in her family can expect to be audited by the IRS this year. It will only get worse from there. Someone will be dropping the typical Soviet story soon that she has had “mental problems” in the past. Poor girl. She has no idea what’s coming for her.

Rational Thought on October 4, 2011 at 3:49 PM

They 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.

God, this is too much. This is straight out of Serpico or The Untouchables — i.e., what the crooked cops or the mob say to the one cop who won’t roll over or take the protection money.

Could there be a more telling statement about the corruption of the media? This is the ONLY reporter, the “only one”, who thinks this is a “story”?! How could you call yourself a journalist, nevermind simply a semi-educated, semi-sentient adult in this world, and not see the “story” here?!

rrpjr on October 4, 2011 at 3:51 PM

“That’s how shady this is.”

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

… Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on October 4, 2011 at 3:51 PM

The difference between this and Watergate: Dead bodies. Call them inconvenient facts, if you are liberally inclined.

txmomof6 on October 4, 2011 at 3:31 PM

I read a story several days back where the dead were called “collateral damage”…Yep, dead Mexican citizens and Mexican public officials — as well as a US Border Patrol Agent — are just collateral damage to this (mis)administration…

Gohawgs on October 4, 2011 at 3:54 PM

“were then supplied to Mexican drug trafficking cartels.”

Yeah, but just before Holder read that part, he was interrupted by his spokeswoman seeking attagirl’s for successfully yelling at the reporter who was “target of the day”. Then it was off to a press conference to, um, denounce SB1070, which he hadn’t read either, so anyway, it was the Republicans’ fault he didn’t know about it.

Dusty on October 4, 2011 at 3:55 PM

They say the Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, the New York Times is reasonable,

The Washington Post is busy with Perry’s racist pet Rock.

Daemonocracy on October 4, 2011 at 3:55 PM

I’d like to file my request now for Humpbot if Holder gets thrown under the bus.

greggriffith on October 4, 2011 at 3:46 PM

Lets up the ante.

How about a video of Allahpundit humping various inanimate objects?

If this scandal reaches out and touches Obama, AP should reveal himself.

BobMbx on October 4, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Sharyl be careful. You may end up in a closet.

antisocial on October 4, 2011 at 3:58 PM

If this scandal reaches out and touches Obama, AP should reveal himself.

BobMbx on October 4, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Oh please, NO.

This AP fangirl would rather not have her illusions of the estimable Allahpundit surrounded by his kittehs shattered by cold hard reality.

Lily on October 4, 2011 at 4:02 PM

That Vince Foster sure was a curious fellow, too, Sharyl.

lorien1973 on October 4, 2011 at 4:03 PM

I think we can be certain that the NY Times , Washington Post, NBC and CNN are now going to be doing many revealing stories and intense investigation…..of Sharyl Attkisson.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on October 4, 2011 at 4:03 PM

I hope this entire administrations suffers a meltdown and suffers for the rest of their putrid lives for their abuses of power.

Paraphrasing Obama to Sarah Brady: we are aggressively fighting for gun control “under the radar”.

Guess what, Skinny, Purple-Lipped, Jug-eared bas-tard?
Now showing up, like Christmas tree lights, on the radar.

carbon_footprint on October 4, 2011 at 4:04 PM

An illegal scheme to sell guns to Mexican terrorists is shady, but a Domestic Kinetic Security Operation Against Foreign Man-Caused Disaster Causers….now that is something to be proud of.

Bishop on October 4, 2011 at 4:04 PM

I guess her singing career is over at ESPN

faraway on October 4, 2011 at 4:05 PM

I’ve been riposting this story on FB (with some success on turning some obamabots). I’m looking for the definitive link to F&F and an attack on the 2nd amendment. Any suggestions, anyone?

kurtzz3 on October 4, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Maybe Obama and Holder can’t actually read? I know affirmative-action undermines the educational opportunities of those it ostensibly helps, but this is ridiculous.

Jaibones on October 4, 2011 at 3:48 PM

Seems to me like this isn’t the first time.

pain train on October 4, 2011 at 4:06 PM

How come the alarm bells didn’t ring for Holder (or for whichever underling read that memo for him) when they saw that part?

Does he not care about a weapons fire-sale to murderers/felons/beheaders/drug dealers who go on to kill Mexicans??

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 4:06 PM

The meltdown continues.

Popcorn. Stat.

fossten on October 4, 2011 at 3:27 PM

Gonna go load up on Amaretto & Coors light 4 the eventual trial of Eric Holder….Popcorn & Dr Pepper Bombs are in order 4 this one!!!

huskerdiva on October 4, 2011 at 4:07 PM

I’ve been riposting this story on FB (with some success on turning some obamabots). I’m looking for the definitive link to F&F and an attack on the 2nd amendment. Any suggestions, anyone?

kurtzz3 on October 4, 2011 at 4:06 PM

definitive link? There is going to be no clean link, but lots of dirty broken ones littered with quotes, speeches, previous legislation–yada yada. Start with Hillary’s visit to Mexico c. 2009, Obama’s state dinner for Mexican el presidente, stories about Mexican drug violence and gun origins in the US. Draw up a pretty map with a lot of arrows….with the final arrow ending on a big red X on the 2nd amendment.

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 4:09 PM

I hope this makes Obama and Holder lose sleep here on out until the hammer drops on their melons – ala Gallagher.

But that would mean having a conscience, which I don’t believe Obama has.

carbon_footprint on October 4, 2011 at 4:09 PM

kurtzz3 on October 4, 2011 at 4:06 PM

My suggestion is not to look for the conspiracy as it will lead you astray. Sharyl says she had no idea where this story would take her, she just started asking questions and it progressed from there. Just follow the trail, follow the cover up, and if there is a greater conspiracy that goes beyond gross incompetence, it will reveal itself.

What she is doing is classic investigative journalism. She’s not asking sensational questions yet the DOJ and the White House can’t giver her any straight, or written, answers.

Daemonocracy on October 4, 2011 at 4:11 PM

define “reasonable”…..

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:30 PM

.
I think Ms. Ingraham defined it: (paraphrasing) “As a reporter, wait until you get an invitation to show up at a particular place and then tell the story we have laid our for you. No bonus points for assertiveness or individual inquiry.” She mentioned the Target shopping trip as an example.
.
I wonder if Attkisson “has something” on someone over at CBS News which allowed her to start investigating this story. Someone upthread mentioned that the goal of this reporter now may be Pulitzer Prize. Something sure lit a fire under her because the whole lot of them have been in the ØBlama camp for the last three years and it has not been pretty or admirable.

ExpressoBold on October 4, 2011 at 4:12 PM

This isn’t Watergate, it’s Iran/Contra without the complexity.

Barnestormer on October 4, 2011 at 4:12 PM

OT … seriously ? ….

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/nearly-half-million-send-michelle-africa

‘Senior Staff?’

Don’t suppose Issa can touch her, tho .. hmmm.

pambi on October 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Lordy, this fake scandal has a really cool name!

lorien1973 on October 4, 2011 at 3:34 PM

That’s the name the gov’t gave the operation. Are you just uninformed or did I miss something?

Strike Twice on October 4, 2011 at 4:17 PM

This isn’t Watergate, it’s Iran/Contra without the complexity.

Barnestormer on October 4, 2011 at 4:12 PM

Guns for CopKillers

faraway on October 4, 2011 at 4:17 PM

SECURITY, Sharyl, SECURITY !!
Big time !!

pambi on October 4, 2011 at 4:17 PM

When you’ve lost CBS…

pain train on October 4, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Who cares what Obama Holder said?

crr6 on May 24, 2011 at 12:13 PM

Del Dolemonte on October 4, 2011 at 4:20 PM

ExpressoBold on October 4, 2011 at 4:12 PM

CBS News’ ratings are in the dumps.

CBS News executives probably figured there was nothing to the story since Obama is a messianic figure to them.

CBS News executives can’t tell her to back off now, they have something their competitors don’t and Sharyl most likely is getting a whiff of a Pulitzer right about now so there is no stopping her.

Normally when people get yelled at and ridiculed, it provokes a defensive response. I doubt Sharyl appreciates being “screamed” at and now has a bone to pick.

I love the media’s handling of this administration with kid gloves may have been its undoing. The Obama administration felt sufficiently insulated from a probing media that they left themselves wide open. If the whole media were to pile on, this story would break wide open and take the DOJ down very quickly.

Daemonocracy on October 4, 2011 at 4:22 PM

The LAT is reasonable, WaPo is reasonable, the NYT is reasonable, and from what I understand the North Korean People’s Daily is also considered by Kim Jong Il to be very reasonable.

Bishop on October 4, 2011 at 3:43 PM

When conditions are just right, I can still get Radio Pyongyang on the shortwave wireless in English. It’s like literally traveling back in time.

Del Dolemonte on October 4, 2011 at 4:24 PM

is the rest of the media going to allow another reporter to get treated like this without doing some investigating of their own?

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Guns for CopKillers

faraway on October 4, 2011 at 4:17 PM

That pretty much covers it.

A couple simple questions:
1. What was the intended “governmental purpose” in arming Mexican drug cartels with military weapons through the use of straw purchasers?
2. Who was the most senior official to authorize the program?

Barnestormer on October 4, 2011 at 4:25 PM

She obviously has her airplane directly over the target….she is taking incoming rounds.

She probably deserves a Pulitzer

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 3:29 PM

If Holder goes down for his lying and crimes, and this story gets mainstream coverage because of her reporting, she definitely deserves something. Better late than never. At the least, some increased personal security.

conservative pilgrim on October 4, 2011 at 4:26 PM

why were these guns fully operational? I mean, you can sell guns that are slightly altered to malfunction and you’d never know it until you fired it, or attempted to do so. Why didn’t we do that in this instance, particularly considering that we had no mechanism for tracking and retrieving the weapons once they crossed the border?

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 4:28 PM

That’s the name the gov’t gave the operation. Are you just uninformed or did I miss something?

Strike Twice on October 4, 2011 at 4:17 PM

The latter.

lorien1973 on October 4, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Sharyl Attkisson, I LOVE YOU!!

(But watch your back.)

fred5678 on October 4, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Sharyl: I wouldn’t volunteer to cover any stories in areas where we have drones flying around…

I’m just saying… watch your back and STAY LOCAL!!

Khun Joe on October 4, 2011 at 4:30 PM

That Palin, man she really likes to shoot coyotes from a helicopter doesn’t she?

lorien1973 on October 4, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Thousands of guns sold with U.S. government help to degenerates known for decapitating people and leaving their heads in the street as a warning to others, and yet Attkisson’s the one who’s “not reasonable” for finding it newsworthy

that is just too rich….

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 4:31 PM

That pretty much covers it.

A couple simple questions:
1. What was the intended “governmental purpose” in arming Mexican drug cartels with military weapons through the use of straw purchasers?
2. Who was the most senior official to authorize the program?

Barnestormer on October 4, 2011 at 4:25 PM

This answers both questions:

During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.

“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/guns/2011/05/25/obama-were-working-gun-control-under-radar#ixzz1ZqOntCIC

fossten on October 4, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Mark Twain gave us a good bit of advice about this.

He said, “Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel.”

dogsoldier on October 4, 2011 at 4:36 PM

Remember the saying, it’s not the act that brings them down, it’s the lies, the stonewalling, the coverups, and maybe the yelling and screaming too!

scalleywag on October 4, 2011 at 4:37 PM

fossten on October 4, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Connect that to the WH briefings and all the dem talking points regarding guns and Mexico…

How many knew? Did Hillary and Bill? Did Panetta? Incompetano?

dogsoldier on October 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM

They need to come out with a remotely plausible explanation for the objectives of this operations. Negligence and general stupidity do not seem to be an adequate explanation for what happened. That only leaves the radical conspiracy to undermine citizens constitutional rights by sacrificing the lives of innocent victims to unnecessary gun violence. I do not want to believe. Give me something. Any rational alternative…

tommylotto on October 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM

Strike Twice,
they are making fun of a troll who called it a fake scandal and then joked we on the right gave it a cool name.

rob verdi on October 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM

He said, “Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel.”

dogsoldier on October 4, 2011 at 4:36 PM

but did he also say, “if you do happen to pick that fight, please make sure to yell and scream at them about how unreasonable they are?”/

quotes.

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 4:41 PM

Strike Twice,
they are making fun of a troll who called it a fake scandal and then joked we on the right gave it a cool name.

rob verdi on October 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM

Better I am late to the party than a no show. Thanks.

Strike Twice on October 4, 2011 at 4:43 PM

dogsoldier on October 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM

I think Panetta let the cat out of the bag. He’s a smart guy, and knows Fast and Furious is deadly to more than just a few liberal careers.

BobMbx on October 4, 2011 at 4:43 PM

He said, “Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel.”

dogsoldier on October 4, 2011 at 4:36 PM

And certainly not with someone who gets pixels for free.

amerpundit on October 4, 2011 at 4:45 PM

That’d be the “Furious” part.

hawksruleva on October 4, 2011 at 4:45 PM

That only leaves the radical conspiracy to undermine citizens constitutional rights by sacrificing the lives of innocent victims to unnecessary gun violence. I do not want to believe. Give me something. Any rational alternative…

tommylotto on October 4, 2011 at 4:39 PM

The “arming of the cartels” theory doesn’t hold water. Some have theorized that there was a movement to supply one cartel with weapons in order for it to battle on more equal terms, the other cartel (sinaloas?). If that theory were to be viable, why use the low-rent, low-yield method of walking a relatively small (compared to what the CIA could fly/ship in there) number of guns across a treacherous border? There is something important here surrounding the gun origin, the sale, the border, the border transit, and the final outcome. If the case can be made that weapons sold in the US traversed the border and killed Mexicans via drug cartels, then the factual case can also be made to restrict weapons sales to reduce these crimes. If this was already happening anyway, why in the heck did they feel the need to ADD to it?

ted c on October 4, 2011 at 4:46 PM

Most of the media is, but Sharyl Attkisson at CBS has been filing scoops damned near every day, including last night’s bombshell that briefings were sent to Holder as early as July 2010.

Meet the new Bernstein/Woodward. Passing strange that it is from the “fake but accurate” network. “Fake but accurate”? Hmmm.

AH_C on October 4, 2011 at 4:48 PM

When conditions are just right, I can still get Radio Pyongyang on the shortwave wireless in English. It’s like literally traveling back in time.

Del Dolemonte on October 4, 2011 at 4:24 PM

I just finished Barbara Demick’s book on DPRK, Nothing to Envy. I literally can’t cook a meal or feed the dog (especially feed the dog) without thinking about it. I wish I could hand out copies at OccupyDC.

Quisp on October 4, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Comment pages: 1 2