Operations Fast & Furious

ATF Chief Admits Mistakes in 'Fast and Furious,' Accuses Holder Aides of Stonewalling Congress

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/0...us-accuses-holder-stonewalling/#ixzz1SVgZM47T



Melson's acknowledgement is the first by any senior ATF leader that confirms some of the criticism that Republicans on Capitol Hill have been leveling at Fast and Furious. The objections have resulted in congressional hearings and an inquiry by the Justice Department's inspector general.
 
The Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the US is involved in a cover up. Par for the course for the Obama regime.

The silence from the establishment media is deafening.
 
Yeah, and I'll bet that it's page 42, below the fold in all the "independent," fair and balanced news sources...




Did you see what Steve Wynn had to say about Don Obama?
 
That the mainstream media have a liberal bias is hardly a belief limited to those on the right. Indeed, many liberals and even media personalities themselves will readily agree. But is it possible to scientifically measure media bias? Can one statistically prove its existence and determine precisely how strong it is? In his new book, Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind, UCLA political-science professor Tim Groseclose attempts to do precisely that.

Groseclose first explored this idea in an article he co-authored with University of Missouri professor Jeff Milyo in 2005. The article, which concluded that there was an overall liberal bias in the media (no surprise), initially attracted harsh criticism from many on the left, including Media Matters. In an interview last week with National Review Online, Groseclose recalled the initial reaction to those 2005 findings: “You get hate mail. I have to say, media bias generates the worst in people.” In spite of that, he decided to expand the study into a book, and the result makes for a read that’s both enlightening and entertaining.

Though Groseclose’s exact method of measuring media bias is somewhat complex, he does his best to explain it in layman’s terms. “It all has to do with comparing media reports to congressional speeches. The thought experiment is to ask what would happen if I gave you a set of articles from a news outlet like, say, the New York Times, and instead of telling you they were from the New York Times, I said they were speeches by a politician. If you were to read them, what would be your best guess of the ideology of that politician? That’s the whole idea behind my method.” More specifically, he derives his measurements by taking a list of the think-tank citations that a given media outlet makes, and putting it into a computer program that treats the citations as if they had come from political speeches and tabulates the results.

Groseclose gauges how liberal or conservative an individual is by using what he calls a political quotient (PQ). Simply put, a person’s PQ is a number on a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being the most conservative and 100 being the most liberal. (For example, as Groseclose writes in his book, Michele Bachmann and Jim DeMint would have PQs of approximately 0, whereas Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank would score ones of approximately 100.) Groseclose opted to use issues chosen by Americans for Democratic Action, a liberal interest group, to determine the score. He also uses a scale of 0 to 100 to measure how liberal or conservative a given news outlet is, in this case calling the number a slant quotient (SQ). Since the two scores are directly comparable, Groseclose can accurately describe the extent to which a given news program or publication leans to the left or right of a given politician.

In Left Turn, as in the original article, Groseclose measures 20 major news outlets in the period 1995 to 2004. Which came out on top as the most liberal? The answer might surprise you. Although the New York Times, CBS Evening News, and the Washington Post all scored on the left, the highest slant quotient went to the news pages of the Wall Street Journal, which scored 85.1 (this was before Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. purchased the paper). “Dow Jones & Company gave a press release denouncing our study, but we stand by it,” he explains. “And since then we’ve had a number of people come up to us and say that that’s been the best-kept secret out there, that although the opinion pages are pretty conservative, the news pages are actually liberal.” In comparison, the New York Times scored 73.7, CBS Evening News also scored 73.7, and the Washington Post came in at 66.4. Which outlet was the most conservative? The Washington Times, which scored 35.4, measured farthest to the right (the next-lowest score was Fox’s Special Report with Brit Hume, which scored 39.7). These news-outlet scores aside, perhaps the most startling finding of Groseclose’s study is the statistic concerning the bias of the average Washington correspondent. “I think the most important fact to know about media bias is that Washington correspondents vote about 93–7 for the Democrat in the typical presidential election. That is not just high, that is statistically significantly higher than 80–20 or 70–30.”

Groseclose finds that media bias is rarely expressed through distortion of the facts, but rather through the omission of certain facts that would be inconvenient for the outlook of the person or group reporting. On the issue of the Bush tax cuts, for example, Groseclose finds a concrete example of when media bias shaped the debate. “All the liberals were saying that under this tax plan the very rich are going to get a highly disproportionate share of the benefits, and that was true — something like the top 1 percent would get 30 to 35 percent of the total tax cuts. But one fact a lot of media people didn’t mention is that the reason that was true is that the very rich pay most of the taxes. When Reagan did his tax cut, he just said, ‘We’re going to take whatever you pay in taxes, and we’re going to multiply it by 0.75, and everyone’s going to get 25 percent off what they usually pay.’ Bush didn’t do that. He said, ‘We’re actually going to have a bigger percentage cut for the poorest people.’ What that meant was that after taxes were cut, the rich would actually be paying a higher percentage of overall taxes than before. The Bush tax cut actually made the tax more progressive. So there are two facts that are equally true, but one was the fact that all the liberals were talking about, and the other was the fact all the conservatives were talking about.”

While the scores of each outlet are of interest, what’s really interesting (and frightening) about Groseclose’s book is his exploration of the effect this bias has had on the American voter. “I estimate that the average voter in the U.S. has a PQ of about 50, the views of Arlen Specter when he was a Republican,” he notes. He finds that media bias has a significant effect on this score, and concludes that “the slant of the media has moved the average voter about 20 or 25 PQ points to the left.”

So what would the average PQ of a voter look like if all media bias could be somehow magically removed? Groseclose’s answer: something close to Ben Stein. “To me, he’s about halfway between a Michele Bachmann and a Ben Nelson, the Democratic senator from Nebraska. If that’s true, Ben Stein has a PQ of about 25, and that’s what I estimate would be the average voter’s views if there were no media bias. It basically means that on controversial issues before Congress, Ben Stein would vote on the conservative side about 75 percent of the time, and 25 percent of the time on the liberal side.” That’s a long way from Arlen Specter, and Groseclose emphasizes the point. Without liberal media bias, “the average American voter would start thinking and voting about like the average Texan voter.”
Nat Brown
NRO

This is one of those "Facts" of omission. The MSM isn't lying about Fast and Furious, they just put it on iggy...
__________________
“I used to think the left wing was the home of tolerance, open-mindedness, respect for all viewpoints…
But, now I’ve learned the truth the hard way.

Juan Williams
 
In other events related to the BATFE and it's activities -----

Congress has defunded the announced program to force firearm dealers in border states (AZ., TX., NM., and CA.) to begin an 'enhanced' sales recording and reporting program. (Apparently the Canadian border isn't worthy of mention.) This was nothing more than a back-door registration program that if allowed to stand would have undoubtedly spread.

Ishmael
 
Hold on to your hats!



"Back to Chicago" Update…



Washington Insider said:
"They got Holder lookin’ in the weeds for anyone giving out information – especially information that might harm the president’s chances in 2012."

“this is what is coming down the pike and it would lead all the way to the White House”.

The Black Panther thing ... "It had potential to be big – not so much in the actual crime, but as is always the case – it’s the cover-up."

"The NBP situation was going to lead to further investigations into the Obama Justice Department."


"Watch the Blagojevich thing – the trial. The deal to be made."

"And what happened to Rezko? That’s part of the same deal.
A company called Companion Security…Blago, Rezko, the Feds."

The guy has been holed up in jail waiting for sentencing. Why? Why so long? Holder’s people are all over that thing – just like Blago.

"Not that there is just bank fraud, RICO laws that were broken, payoffs, intimidations, – that’s all basic Chicago business as usual, right? But now add the White House’s handling of all of that since Obama became President – now you got a presidential scandal. Now you got an investigation that leads to uncovering all of that mess.

"It’s Holder in the Justice Department that is the firewall for the administration. For EVERYTHING – and the stuff that could destroy the Obama White House…it starts at Justice, and then leads to Chicago."

"It’s the Justice Department’s complicity in protecting Obama during the ongoing investigations – talking current crimes here now… that is what can really sink them."

"Now you got an investigation that leads to uncovering all of that mess. Now you got grounds to legally go after Holder, Jarrett, and even the President of the United States. Hell, throw in the First Lady too"


Back in March: full details
http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=36991399&highlight=leads+Chicago#post36991399





It's starting to unravel now.


Initially ignored by the mainstream media, the Obama Department of Justice Fast and Furious scandal is now being covered, albeit still grudgingly, by even the most left-leaning establishments such as the Washington Post, New York Times, and CNN.

As the DOJ's Fast & Furious scandal continues to rock the Obama administration, critical events are also unfolding back in Chicago that could prove equally damaging to Barack Obama.

This past week, as reported in the Chicago Sun Times, former Tony Rezko partner Daniel T. Frawley’s Companion Security sentencing hearing was suddenly delayed – with no revised date having yet been given.

Frawley, like Rezko, has been awaiting sentencing for crimes they long ago were found guilty of. Speculation is now rampant over the cause of Frawley’s sentencing delay – most notably its possible relation to former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s own most recent conviction. Like Rezko and Frawley, Blagojevich too is awaiting his own sentencing.

All three figures have significant ties to both Barack Obama and the president’s most trusted senior adviser and fellow longtime Chicago resident, Valerie Jarrett.

In documents now available at the Sun Times it appears quite possible Daniel Frawley’s apparent cooperation with federal officials could have further linked the dubious relationship between Barack Obama and convicted felon and former Chicago political power broker Tony Rezko – a link that could include recordings of Rezko directly implicating Barack Obama in crimes going back nearly a decade ago.




Of particular note is this exchange found within the Frawley deposition:

Weaver’s lawyer, Daniel F. Konicek, asks Frawley about what specific information Weaver is supposed to have told Frawley to withhold from federal authorities.

“I’m assuming the information is about the payments made by Rezko to Obama, so we know we’re talking about the right conversation, right?” Konicek asks Frawley.
Frawley doesn’t answer. So Konicek presses him:
“Am I correct it was about Obama being paid by Rezko?”
Frawley replies:
“I’m not answering that question, based upon my attorney’s instructions.”


If Daniel Frawley has now turned state’s evidence against a sitting president of the United States, things are truly becoming difficult for Barack Obama and those now working double-overtime to protect and insulate this president from a political lifetime of seeming scandal and dubious dealings.


http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchd...ay-in-wake-of-sun-times-watchdogs-report.html
 
It is amazing how much time the press will spend proofing Michelle Backmann and hunting Robert Murdoch and at the same time have no resources to find the moment that Barack Obama repudiated Marxism or that Eric Holder authorized Fast and Furious and the killing of US agents and Mexican civilians...
 
And let's not even be interested in an obvious obstruction of justice by the AG involving the investigation of government actions that led to the deaths of U.S. agents.

That would be racism...

We're too cowardly to have a discussion about race with Mr. "Light Skin" Holder.



Reminds me of how Franklin Delano Raines was allowed to cook the books and skim $90 million because he was black.

Must be the revenge part of reparations...
 
Or, that Eric Holder's job security is protected by knowing where all the skeletons are hidden in Obama's, and friends, closets. You'd think that might peak the interest of some Watergate style reporter. But not in ObamaMedia.
 
Or, that Eric Holder's job security is protected by knowing where all the skeletons are hidden in Obama's, and friends, closets. You'd think that might peak the interest of some Watergate style reporter. But not in ObamaMedia.

Nobody touches The Bruce!
 
Let's face it, racism is important only when a dealer like Sheila Jackson Lee can lay that card on a Republican in defense of the cause. As far as the media is concerned, Holder like Obama, is simply too black to fail.

Well said; I concur, the elite white press thinks they cannot go it alone without affirmative action and excuses...
__________________
A_J's corollary #9a, “When a Republican does it, an explanation is making an excuse, when a Democrat does it, then an excuse is the rightful explanation.”
 
If they only had that much love for the unborn...






... even if it were just the black unborn. As Rev'rund Jesse would say, no just us!
 
It is amazing how much time the press will spend proofing Michelle Backmann and hunting Robert Murdoch and at the same time have no resources to find the moment that Barack Obama repudiated Marxism or that Eric Holder authorized Fast and Furious and the killing of US agents and Mexican civilians...

A few must be necessarily sacrificed for the cause. The end justifies the means
 
Maybe the triggermen should be banned too...




Of course the arms salesmen, they are not to blame, they were fulfilling the wishes of the administration...
 
Back
Top