Saturday, July 21, 2012

Katherine Eban's Theory, I Gather

TWELVE whistle-blowers (conspiring, no less) ultimately put their reputations, livelihood, and freedom (she's essentially accusing them of perjury here) on the line - all simply because they were angry at a supervisor who was trying to get them to work weekends (and, yes, she took this supervisor's email out of context in order to prove this "theory")....Hm, I wonder if any of these fellow are football fans.

38 comments:

w-dervish said...

You gather wrong. These "whistleblowers" are simply mistaken regarding what happened. They thought that since no arrests were being made gunwalking was taking place... like under the bush administration program. They weren't privy to the discussions between the ATF and the prosecutors... who said no arrests could be made.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Uh, no, you gather wrong. Mr. Voth's own emails and department memos incriminate him and Katherine Eban's article is a total hit piece. The fact is that the ATF, under Mr. Voth, allowed these illegal gun purchases to take place (even going as far as to videotape them ) and didn't even attempt to stop the program until 6 weeks after Brian Terry was murdered. They even got the fucking IRS involved to help the gun dealers with their taxes, for Christ.

dmarks said...

WD's defense of the indefensible here proves once more that he is blindly partisan, and without sense and principle

Will, do you have any doubt that WD's arguments would do a 180 here if it were Bush as President during this?

Obama could bite the head off a live puppy on prime-time TV and WD would say (1) Obama never did what everyone saw him do and (2) It was all Bush-the-war-criminal's fault.

Anyway, thanks for sticking with the facts on Holder's gun-running scandal in a clear principled non-partisan fashion and being the adult in the room here, while WD brings the equivalent of crayons and a half-eaten jar of school paste.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And you know what, dmarks, I don't even know if this Voth character is a Democrat or a Republican. And should it even matter?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And here it is again, wd; David Voth April 13, 2010 - "I understand that the frequency with which some individuals under investigation by our office have been purchasing firearms from your business has caused concerns for you. … However, if it helps put you at ease we (ATF) are continually monitoring these suspects using a variety of investigative techniques which I cannot go into (in) detail."

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And then this on April 2 of the same year - "Our subjects purchased 359 firearms during the month of March alone, to include numerous Barrett .50 caliber rifles. I believe we are righteous in our plan to dismantle this entire organization and to rush in to arrest any one person without taking in to account the entire scope of the conspiracy would be ill advices to the overall good of the mission."

dmarks said...

No it doesn't, Will. Not to all but one of us.

w-dervish said...

dmarks' hypocrisy is astounding. [1] He claims that people's votes cannot be questioned except by arrogant people... but if anyone speaks of what informs their voting then it's perfectly fine to dmarks to rip into them if their opinions aren't in line with his.

[2] He says I defend the indefensible, which is something he does on a regular basis! And the indefensible crimes he defends are far worse. Far more people died as a result of bush's invasion of Iraq than were killed by F&F guns.

Not that I'm defending the indefensible... I'm not, because what dmarks finds indefensible never happened. As revealed by Katherine Eban's article, there was no gunwalking.

dmarks: Anyway, thanks for sticking with the facts on Holder's gun-running scandal in a clear principled non-partisan fashion and being the adult in the room here, while WD brings the equivalent of crayons and a half-eaten jar of school paste.

Non-partisan = an opinion dmarks agrees with.

being the adult in the room = expressing an opinion dmarks agrees with.

the equivalent of crayons and a half-eaten jar of school paste = an opinion dmarks disagrees with.

I don't even know if this Voth character is a Democrat or a Republican = It doesn't matter because Holder is a Democrat and he's the guy I'm attacking.

For the record I have never in my life eaten paste. My guess is that this is more projection. dmarks probably eats school paste all the time.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

No gun-walking!!! He admits to it multiple times in his emails. He even threatens to demote certain agents who weren't agreeing with him on it (saying that they could work for $30,000 a year serving lunches in prison).............As for Mr. Holder (and I believe that I've been far, FAR, harder on Voth), I'm actually willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt. The only problem here is that the benefit of the doubt in this case is him being out to lunch. That, and he's quite palpably hurting the President as well.

dmarks said...

WD said: "For the record I have never in my life eaten paste"

At last, after such a long wait, a denial of something, coming from WD, that isn't a lie or some sort of poorly thought out knee-jerk response.

w-dervish said...

For the record I've never lied or posted a "poorly thought out knee-jerk response". dmarks is clearly referring to himself. Or he should be. That is the only way his comment would make sense.

No denial of my guess about him eating paste... I'll assume I guessed right. dmarks probably started eating it as a kid and liked the taste so much he still eats it today.

Will: No gun-walking!!! He admits to it multiple times in his emails.

What emails? The ones you posted? I don't see in either of them where allowing guns to cross the border into Mexico is discussed. Is this discussed in some other emails?

(I'm assuming these emails are all genunie and not fabricated... not having independently verified their status either way... would be helpful if Will provided a link).

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Yes, wd, the emails that I just provided; the first one in which he reassures the gun dealers about these ILLEGAL gun purchases and the second one in which he admits to 359 illegal gun sales and cautions on moving in too fast to stop the program. Those emails.......Fabricated LOL

w-dervish said...

Those emails don't mention the ATF allowing guns to walk into Mexico... because there never was such a plan. Like Katherine Eban said.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And here it is AGAIN, wd; David Voth April 13, 2010 - "I understand that the frequency with which some individuals under investigation by our office have been purchasing firearms from your business has caused concerns for you. … However, if it helps put you at ease we (ATF) are continually monitoring these suspects using a variety of investigative techniques which I cannot go into (in) detail."......How fucking stupid are you? The dude is acknowledging the concerns of the gun dealers but is telling them not to worry about it. DUH!!!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And in this one he's practically bragging about the number of guns that they let walk and advising AGAINST arresting them until they had an even bigger stash - "Our subjects purchased 359 firearms during the month of March alone, to include numerous Barrett .50 caliber rifles. I believe we are righteous in our plan to dismantle this entire organization and to rush in to arrest any one person without taking in to account the entire scope of the conspiracy would be ill advices to the overall good of the mission." Come on, man!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

You're like one of those kids on the school-yard who gets tagged out and then tries to say that he wasn't, despite the fact that everybody saw it. How frigging pathetic.

w-dervish said...

*YOU* are like one of those kids on the school-yard who gets tagged out and then tries to say that he wasn't, despite the fact that everybody saw it. NONE of the emails say the plan is to allow guns to walk to Mexico! How frigging pathetic indeed.

w-dervish said...

You think it's a *bad* idea to go after the higher ups? Why? Because you think it's a good idea to arrest only low level flunkies who can be easily replaced and ignore the people who are really responsible? Come on man!

dmarks said...

Will: Careful on the playground, or WD will flick more boogers at you. He's a bit surly: a plutocrat stole his lunch money, and he has already been pantsed twice.

w-dervish said...

I guess dmarks liked the idea of "playground insults" so much (when he falsly accused me of them) that he decided to start using them more frequently himself. Obviously it's dmarks who is flicking his boogers, metaphorically speaking... though no doubt he did it for real and frequently as a child. He probably still does it, given how often he employs this gross metaphor. How sad is that... An adult flicking boogers at those he disagrees with? I think it's a sign of someone who never intellectually matured.

dmarks said...

Keep it up, WD. Will has making comments and posts with a huge proponderance of facts on the "Fast and Furious" scandal, and you have come up completely short. You might as well indeed reminisce about grade school.

w-dervish said...

dmarks probably eats his boogers. In addition to all the school paste. And we all know about your hatred for Eric Holder, which is why you agree with Will's "facts".

And we know dmarks hates Holder due to his false accusations of him being racist against Whites... which is the only kind of racism that concerns dmarks (black on white).

dmarks said...

"which is the only kind of racism that concerns dmarks (black on white)."

... a slanderous and false accusation against me, with absolutely no evidence at all. Grow up and stop lying.

w-dervish said...

It isn't slanderous at all. It is a truthful observation based on your previous comments. And there is a LOT of evidence, not "none at all".

For example, on 4/1/2012 you said, "...I am a racist..."

You can't get any more direct than that... you even bolded the words. Clearly you wanted everyone to know of your racism, so I don't know why you're denying it now.

There is loads more evidence, but I'd say this is the most damning.

dmarks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dmarks said...

WD said: "It isn't slanderous at all. It is a truthful observation based on your previous comments. And there is a LOT of evidence, not "none at all"."

There's absolutely none. I oppose all racism. The reason we don't argue about anti-black racism is that we strongly agree it is bad. No controversy, so no discussion. This lack of controversy over it is mistaken by you as support for anti-black racism. That's totally illogical.

What ends up being controversial is discriminating against whites for their skin color. As I oppose all racism, I oppose this too. Yet, you favor such racism. Hence, controversy. Discussion. Argument.

As for the quotation, you are proving what a grammar and typo nazi you are. Here is what I said:

" don't think it. I know it. Check into the quotation. As for the skin color of the racist, since I am a racist it does not matter to me."

It's clear from the context that the word 'not' is missing, and you know very well i intended to type it.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

"I understand that the frequency with which some individuals under investigation by our office have been purchasing firearms from your business has caused concerns for you (HELLO!!! Acknowledging the illegal sales and reassuring the gun dealers to continue them). … However, if it helps put you at ease we (ATF) are continually monitoring these suspects using a variety of investigative techniques which I cannot go into (in) detail."............Only an idiot would try to say that this isn't an admission of the gun-walking enterprise. What, because the fellow doesn't use the precise words, gun-walking, that's your fucking excuse? You are a sick man, dude.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

And, yeah, I think that it's a very bad idea to continue to allow these guns to walk when the carnage was so bad that the ATF agents in Mexico tried to tell these assholes to stop it.............Hey, dmarks, doesn't this kind of remind you of the FDR quote, when FDR PLAINLY said that he was against collective bargaining for municipal workers and wd kept on trying to deny it. He's frigging mental!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Any sane person who reads Mr. Voth's emails would find them to be highly incriminating. But because wd is so psychologically ill-equipped to even entertain a scandal happening during a Democratic President's tenure (even if there hasn't been anything specifically directed at the President), he has to go through all of these mental gymnastics. Absolutely unbelievable.

w-dervish said...

Will: FDR PLAINLY said that he was against collective bargaining for municipal workers and wd kept on trying to deny it. He's frigging mental!

FDR was NOT opposed to collective bargaining rights for public sector unions. You're lying and frigging mental. He only opposed strikes by public sector unions.

FDR believed "organizations of government employees have a logical place in government affairs", and that "organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical". This is according to a letter FDR wrote to Luther Steward, the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees.

Will: ...he has to go through all of these mental gymnastics. Absolutely unbelievable.

I read Katherine Eban's article and got the truth. Until then I was becoming a little convinced that there was some kind of a scandal.

Mr. Voth's email's concerned his agency doing their job... collecting evidence and building cases against suspected straw purhasers (cases the prosecutors rejected do to the guns laws the NRA paid off the Repubilcans to not write).

Will: What, because the fellow doesn't use the precise words, gun-walking, that's your fucking excuse? You are a sick man, dude.

No, because he says nothing about allowing the guns to cross the border into Mexico. I presume the plan was to make arrests before that happened. You assuming you know precisely what happened is you talking out of your ass.

dmarks said...

WD: You presented a quote of FDR supporting the rights of organizations to present their views. It said nothing about collective bargaining. Try again.

w-dervish said...

"presenting their views" is collective bargaining. You need to try again.

dmarks said...

Not at all... you have no idea what you are saying, as you are equating two entirely different activities.

In this comment, of course, I am "presenting my view". According to you, I am "collectively bargaining".

You had better tell the government union members in Wisconsin your amazing redefinition of the terms. Since they can present their view as always, it means that Governor Walker hasn't curtailed any collective bargaining rights at all.

w-dervish said...

What a load of BS. The activities aren't "entirely different", they are one in the same. And we're talking about views being presented by a group of employees to an employer. That has absolutely nothing to do with you presenting your inane views on a Conservative blog or Wanker's union busting.

dmarks said...

1) Walker did not bust unions. But he did stop unions from busting workers.

2) Presenting views, again, is very different from bargaining. If your BS were true, then every one of the comments in this post would be an example of collective bargaining.

3) This is not a Conservative blog.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

FDR WAS opposed to collective bargaining for municipal employees and he said it quite plainly (IN THAT LETTER). My God, you are dull, wd............."I understand that the frequency with which some individuals under investigation by our office have been purchasing firearms from your business has caused concerns for you (HELLO!!! Acknowledging the illegal sales and reassuring the gun dealers to continue them). … However, if it helps put you at ease we (ATF) are continually monitoring these suspects using a variety of investigative techniques which I cannot go into (in) detail."......HE IS ACKNOWLEDGING THE ILLEGAL GUN SALES AND TELLING THESE CONCERNED GUN DEALERS NOT TO WORRY!!!!!!!!! HOW FRIGGING STUPID ARE YOU? And how do you explain the fact that some IRS agent was one of the people who Eban supposedly interviewed? I'll tell you why, wd. It's because they were a part of the operation; helping the gun dealers with the fucking taxes on these illegal gun sales. DUH!!!!!!!!!!

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Katherine Eban's major source for information? Try the individual who's most deeply implicated. LOL

dmarks said...

Will: Ever hear of Percival Lowell? He looked Mars and didn't see what was there, and saw things that weren't there.

WD's bizarre claims about these documents remind me a lot of Lowell.