Your everything-you-need-to-know-complete guide to Fast & Furious...

Lordy, this is gonna be a long one.

I’m getting a little tired of supposedly smart people like Jon Stewart screwing up the Fast and Furious story, so I decided to do a little research on my own. My starting point was the rather well-laid out timeline Randi Rhodes started with on her June 20, 2012 Broadcast. She used the Wikipedia listing for ATF Gun Walking which itself used a Washington Post Story from July 25, 2011 about Fast and Furious to get its facts. But even she missed some things that need to be highlighted. Lord knows, Stewart screwed this thing up in his last two appearances with an appalling Fox News level of accuracy.

So, after the jump, I’m going to open with the Wikipedia page before some NRA doucebag steps in and makes bullshit changes to it. It also happens to be the piece Randi Rhodes read pretty much word for word opening up her June 20, 2012 Broadcast.

Click here to see the whole thing.

How Jon Stewart and the fine folks at @TheDailyShow @#$%ed up Fast and Furious (VIDEO)

It started on June 20th:

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Again, Jon's version of events demands you being stupid enough to believe Darrell Issa's version of events. Up until now, I never thought Jon was that stupid, but stranger things have happened.

Here's the thing, to believe Issa's version of events, you have to believe that the Acting Head of the ATF, by his own admission, knew nothing about what the ATF Phoenix Field Office was doing, but somehow the U.S. Attorney General did.

Oh, and did I mention that the Acting Head of the ATF is Issa's Star Witness, and thought he was going to get fired by the Administration, which is why he went running to Issa in the first place? Purely a coincidence, I'm sure.

And then, Jon doubled-down the next day, June 21st:

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

First off, it actually began with an Operation called Wide Receiver in the Bush Administration before being killed and record as Fast and Furious, and the stated purpose actually made some sense. The ATF wanted to allow these purchases to track the firearms as they were transferred to higher-level traffickers and key figures in Mexican cartels, in theory leading to their arrests and the dismantling of the cartels.

Problem was, ATF let the purchases happen, they tracked the guns to the people who were using them, who were hired thugs, not the major players in the Cartel.  Since the purchases didn't go high enough up the chain of command, ATF let the purchases keep happening, hoping they'd get someone better so they could make an arrest. In fact, indictments didn't start happening until Obama became President.

And, to be clear, we lost 1400 guns, still an appalling figure, but...c'mon, Jon, that's the kind of Bullshit Fox News engages in.

Then there's the letter. That was my major problem with the bit. Jon kinda left out the part where the Head of the Phoenix Field Office, may have...you know...lied to the Justice Department about the existence of the program.  That could be because Justice told him in 2009 not to engage in Gunwalking (but didn't do it clearly enough), and he went ahead and engaged in it anyway.

I know, details, details.

I would like to know why the hell did Stephen Colbert have a better grip on the damn story than Stewart did?

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

A complete, unadulterated guide to my problems with what Jon Stewart said will be published in about 30 minutes.

Issa gets his information from a break-your-windows paranoid blogger. (VIDEO)

Darrell Issa, once a liar, always a liar.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

To be sure, Congress has a legitimate interest in investigating Operation Fast and Furious, but Chairman Issa and Republican majority on the Committee appear to be more interested in scoring political points than in getting to the bottom of what happened," argued Keegan, who added that, “The hoops the Committee is demanding the Attorney General jump through illustrate that these contempt hearings are as partisan as they are extreme. Over the course of this ‘investigation,’ the Committee has ordered the A.G. to produce documents whose confidentiality is protected by federal law, has refused to subpoena Bush Administration officials to testify about their knowledge of the operation during their time in office, has refused to allow public testimony from officials whose testimony counters Issa’s partisan narrative, and has repeatedly rejected the A.G.’s efforts to accommodate the committee, making compliance all but impossible.

People for the American Way president Michael Keegan.

The NBC News Extended Interview with Attorney General Eric Holder (VIDEO)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

There was a time when James Carville was considered smart, right?

More from the same, epic Bob Shrum piece (shudder!).

I never thought I'd live to see the day when I thought James Carville was a useless sack of crap, but here we are:

My friend James Carville [argues] in a pyrotechnic CNN piece that yes, the White House should "panic." There is no more time for "explanations" — although it usually helps to think things through before making what Carville calls "a complete change [in] direction." And what does that change consist of? "Fire a lot of people" — which Obama won't and shouldn't do. So thus, the "geniuses" of 2008 become the scapegoats of 2011. Playing a hasty game of musical chairs would turn Obama's ship of state into the Titanic. It's a reflex, a gimmick — and it's ahistorical. As Bill Clinton's campaign chief in 1992, Carville didn't panic — he certainly didn't fire himself — in the early summer of that year, when Clinton was in last place, at 22 percent, in a three-way race with Ross Perot and the first George Bush.

Carville also wants Attorney General Eric Holder fired — boy, that will set off a popular pro-Obama groundswell. And the Ragin' Cajun recommends that the Justice Department "indict people," presumably a host of people and presumably on Wall Street — a white hot populist gesture that could cripple or crash financial markets. In any case, Obama wouldn't debase the law to score political points; we had enough of that in the last administration. In this one, indictments have been made and will be — but on the merits.

Carville is on target about one thing: Obama has to "make a case like a Democrat." But that's what this president is doing now. Day after day, he is drawing the dividing lines. He does have to keep at it — and show as well as say that he's the one fighting for ordinary, hard-working, and out-of-work Americans. That's been the right course for some time — and with Obama on course, he doesn't need to be told, "Fire. Indict. Fight." It's a catchy aphorism, but it's only one-third right.

If you don't mention Congress in your pushback of the President, @Maddow, then you are lying to us

Per yesterday:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

If you have piece about Obama's retreat on GITMO, you are of course free to blast the President.  That is your right.

However, if you don't mention Congress's responsibility in this, you are lying to us, and wasting our time.

A little perspective on GITMO always helps...as Democrats allow us to cower in fear in the face of Terrorism

Well, we got the announcement that shocked absolutely no one:

Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four co-defendants accused of planning the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks will be prosecuted in a military commission, a decision that reverses the Obama administration’s long-held goal of bringing the men to trial in federal court as part of its overall strategy of closing the military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced the decision during an afternoon news conference. He blamed barriers thrown up by Congress for the administration’s abandonment of one of its signature goals.

Holder called Congress’s intervention “unwise and unwarranted” and said he continues to believe that the case could have been tried in federal court in Manhattan or, as an alternative he proposed, in upstate New York. He said the Obama administration would continue to work for repeal of the restrictions Congress imposed and would prosecute other terrorism cases in federal courts.

But he said he decided that prosecution should go ahead in a military tribunal because the restrictions were unlikely to be repealed any time soon and because the families of the nearly 3,000 people killed in the Sept. 11 attacks have already waited too long for justice, which he said is “long overdue.”

You thought I was talking something else, weren't you?

Reverses. Really?

The Post makes it sound like the Administration up and changed its mind. Steve Benen speaks about what really happened:

The Attorney General "changed his mind" after Congress "imposed a series of restrictions"? That's a bit like saying I changed my mind about getting up after I was tied to my chair.

Holder told reporters this afternoon that his original decision was still the right one, but blamed Congress for "tying our hands."

He happens to be right. Even today, Holder wants to do the right thing, and so does President Obama. And yet, Gitmo is open today, and KSM will be subjected to a military commission in the near future, not because of an administration that backed down in the face of far-right whining, but because congressional Republicans orchestrated a massive, choreographed freak-out, and scared the bejesus out of congressional Democrats. Together, they limited the White House's options to, in effect, not having any choice at all.

There's plenty of room for criticism of the administration, but those slamming Obama for "breaking his word" on this are blaming the wrong end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

And Andrew Sullivan (gasp!):

The decision to try KSM in a military tribunal is as sad as keeping Gitmo open. He has, of course, been hemmed in by an irrational, panicked Congress. Maybe a civil trial would be impossible because of the torture inflicted on KSM by the last administration.

Of course, Chuck Schumer disappointed the hell out of me:

Chuck Schumer, New York’s senior Democratic senator, expressed relief that the trial would not take place in his home state. He said the move to put the 9/11 plotter through a military commission at Guantanamo Bay will allow him to get the “ultimate penalty,” and he said the decision is the “final nail in the coffin” of the “wrong-headed idea” to try Mohammed in New York.

“I have always said that the perpetrators of this horrible crime should get the ultimate penalty, and I believe this proposal by the administration can make that happen,” Schumer said in a statement.

Granted, Chuck is just out there representing his State, but I'll never call him a statesman. He's pandering to the baseless fears of New Yorkers. We have prosecuted Terrorists in this country, and jailed them int his country. 9/11 is no different.

Let me say that again: 9/11 is no different.

We could handle it then, we can handle it now.

Instead of standing up to Terrorism, like we imagine we do, we've caved to it, and a lot of Senators (like Charles Schumer) have enabled that cave.

Dangerous hypocrisy of being against the "Ground-Zero" Mosque

Today:

Federal indictments unsealed Thursday in Minnesota, Alabama and California charge 14 people with terrorism offenses for allegedly aiding the radical Islamist al-Shabab organization in Somalia.

In announcing the indictments, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said the charges reflect a disturbing trend in which al-Shabab, which has links to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network, has appealed to U.S. citizens of Somali descent to join the group's battle against a weak U.S.-backed transitional government and African Union peacekeeping forces in Somalia.

But...

[Holder] praised the American Muslim community for being "strong partners in fighting this emerging threat," saying its members "have provided critical assistance to law enforcement in helping to disrupt terrorist plots and combat radicalization."

Yeah, but screw whether or not the Muslims want to open a community center four blocks from Ground Zero, right Sarah? That's the real danger.

After all, why should we help Muslim Americans who want to help us catch terrorists by showing respect to their religion in an allegedly open society.

Keith with James Risen: Busy Night Part 3 (VIDEO)

Still more work to do on Warantless Wiretapping.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Did Holder just leave himself some Wiggle Room?

I got this from reading Andrew Sullivan (who was reading Marc Ambinder), so this is hardly a thought I can take credit for, but listen to what Ambinder has to say about Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement on the late and lamented Torture Prosecutions:

Here's what Attorney General Holder said today in his statement: "Holder also stressed that intelligence community officials who acted reasonably and relied in good faith on authoritative legal advice from the Justice Department that their conduct was lawful, and conformed their conduct to that advice, would not face federal prosecutions for that conduct."

The emphasis is Ambinder's.

Now, I work around Lawyers. I work around them every day. My Dad’s new wife is, in fact, a Lawyer herself.

I’m just saying, I know how these guys sound, and I know when they leave themselves wiggle room.

Folks, that ain’t wiggle room, that’s more like a tunnel in which large eighteen wheels can pass.

Sullivan puts it better than I can:

If evidence emerges of bad faith in torture sessions, then those staffers may well face legal consequences. Ditto if the legal advice was given in bad faith, along Nuremberg lines, Yoo and Bybee should start sweating. That's why the internal OPR report on the legal professionalism of the torture lawyers is so crucial and why it is being fought over so fiercely. If Yoo and Bybee's memos were so below legal standards that they can be objectively shown to be a means to get away with torture rather than good faith effort to apply the law to proposed torture techniques, then they too acted in bad faith. And they too are war criminals.

Now, all that said “wiggle room” isn’t a substitute for action (which I think we, the ACLU, Senator Russ Feingold, and civil libertarians would prefer). But it is something, especially when you couple this with action from the Congress. Either Chamber will do.

I think, in the wake of our most recent NSA Spying Story, the Congress might find itself a little more willing to act.

Granted, it has an air of “It’s one thing to have the mob get wiretapped, but now that it’s one of us…” but again, it'll do.

Oh, and in case your fingers were crossed, uncross 'em. Spain isn't going to help:

Despite recent reports to the contrary, Spain’s attorney general has now reportedly decided not to prosecute the Bush Six — the top legal officials in the Bush administration who allegedly approved the torture of terror suspects. Attorney General Candido Conde-Pumpio said that the United States would be the proper forum for such a case.

We can only hope.

TPM: Well, there's your problem right there...

It began with a 17-2 vote. The Senate Judiciary committee voted "controversial" Attorney General Appointee, Eric Holder, out of said committee and onto the full Senate where he's expected to be confirmed. My bet is that, despite the hemming and hawing of the Senate Republicans, no one wanted to be on the wrong side of history and vote against the first black Attorney General in U.S. History.

And for the record, the two Senators who were more than comfortable being on the wrong side of history (and being labeled as racists by me, personally) were: John Cornyn of Texas and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.

To my Father, who is planning on moving to Texas (voluntarily), all I can say is way to go. Your Senator at work!

Then one local paper stepped up with this tasty nugget of news:

President Obama's choice to run the Justice Department has assured senior Republican senators that he won't prosecute intelligence officers or political appointees who were involved in the Bush administration's policy of "enhanced interrogations."

Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, Missouri Republican and vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said in an interview with The Washington Times that he will support Eric H. Holder Jr.'s nomination for attorney general because Mr. Holder assured him privately that Mr. Obama's Justice Department will not prosecute former Bush officials involved in the interrogations program.

Kit Bond...one of the original, and greatest of the Reagan Airheads.

All of the sudden, everyone is running with that quote: TPM, Huffington Post (well, HuffPo did cover the story at some point, and fortunately changed it)…

…finally, Holder's aides called bull!@$%.

"Eric Holder has not made any commitments about who would or would not be prosecuted," the aide said via e-mail. "He explained his position to Senator Bond as he did in the public hearing and in his responses to written questions."

Even Judicary Chairman Pat Leahy of Vertmont cracked back on the supposition that the Nation's Top Cop would fail to prosecute crimes where he saw them.

"It would be completely wrong if a senator said, 'I'll vote for you if you promise to withhold prosecution of a crime'," Leahy told me. "No senator would make a request like that. It'd be improper."

In fact, in a written response to a question by Torture defender John Kyl of Arizona, Holder said:

Prosecutorial and investigative judgments must depend on the facts, and no one is above the law. But where it is clear that a government agent has acted in "reasonable and good-faith reliance on Justice Department legal opinions" authoritatively permitting his conduct, I would find it difficult to justify commencing a full-blown criminal investigation, let alone a prosecution.

Not comforting, but acceptable...provided no one gets in the way of Congress investigating this mess.

So where did this story come from?

Well, all one has to do is look at the original source of the Kit Bond quote.

The Washington Times, the Fox News of Newspapers.

There's your problem right there.

WaPo: Spare me the sanctimony...

I love hearing such moral certainty out of blank Newspaper Editorial pages: "The attorney general nominee must explain his role," the Washington Post demands.

Must, explain his role.

So...people should be held accountable for the crap they've committed in the past?

People like...the Washington Post Editorial Board who cheerleaded us into the Iraq War.

Courtesy Think Progress:

After Secretary of State Colin L. Powell’s presentation to the United Nations Security Council yesterday, it is hard to imagine how anyone could doubt that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction. [2/6/03]

The Perils of Passivity [2/13/03]

But the United States cannot again join the Security Council in backing down from a confrontation with the Iraqi dictator, as it did repeatedly during the 1990s, also under pressure from France and Russia. [2/16/03]

In the case of Iraq, the functioning of American democracy has been pretty straightforward. President Bush has been respectful of opponents, at least at home, as he should be on such a momentous issue. [2/23/03]

Leahy to Specter: Get off your @#$!!!

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) just sent Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) a letter, which in Senate speak roughly translates to get off your ass!

Leahy this week proposed holding hearings to confirm Eric Holder as Attorney General. Initially, Specter seemed warm to the idea, noting that the Marc Rich pardon would come up, but would not be a serious impediment to his confirmation.

As I have said repeatedly from the time reports of his likely designation began appearing in the press in mid-November, I thought we should move promptly. It hardly came as a surprise when the President-elect announced that Eric would be a key part of his national security team at the designation announcement on December 1. My recollection is that your initial reaction on November 18 was that you were at that time already reviewing his record. Of course, Eric is someone you and I both know well and have known and worked with for years.

Now, all of the sudden, Specter needs more time to review Holder's materials (even though by his own admission, Specter's been review his materials since November).

Now, all of the sudden, Specter's extending his travel plans to Europe, delaying the Hearings.

Now, all of the sudden, Specter wants to attend a Senate Republican retreat before the Hearings.

Leahy (again in Senate speak) calls bullshit.

Think Progress: U.S. Attorney refuses to quit...

According to Think Progress, Mary Beth Buchanan, U.S. Attorney in Pittsburgh is refusing to vacate her post.

“It doesn’t serve justice for all the U.S. attorneys to submit their resignations all at one time,” she said yesterday.

More than that, she said she would consider working in the Obama administration. She would not discuss what her future might hold beyond the U.S. attorney’s office.

“I am open to considering further service to the United States,” Ms. Buchanan said.

I got an idea. On January 20th, 2008, Fire her.

UPDATE (10:58am Pacific) Let me also emphasize that I don't think this woman would have the temerity to do this if Barack Obama were white.