• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

ATF Hearing

dantiff2

Every last one in this administration is totally clueless in the field in which they are in charge of- surprise surprise. Guessing since this guy looks like the average anglo, he got the job after checking the box " graduate from the Prof. Irwin Corey School of double speak."
 
LHSmith said:
Every last one in this administration is totally clueless in the field in which they are in charge of- surprise surprise. Guessing since this guy looks like the average anglo, he got the job after checking the box " graduate from the Prof. Irwin Corey School of double speak."
Click to expand...
A bunch of partisan attack dogs, yes men, democrat operatives and radical activists without any real skills.
 
Can the panel doing the questions (the senators) hold the responder in contempt of court for refusing to answer the question? A judge in most every other court can do so, is this not allowed in congress?
 
Always enjoy seeing a grilling of ATF. Always have liked barbecue.

Of course, I'd like to the see the SOB's cut off at the neck, so to speak: erased, as an agency. Have the essential law-enforcement aspect folded into, well, law enforcement. And completely erase Congress's authorization for this alphabet agency to fiddle around with "definitions" (read: laws). Congress won't do that, of course, for two reasons: they, themselves, don't have the skill necessary to get it right; and they want the citizens to be hopping from one foot to the other, uncertain if they're felons or not based on the latest rule-fiddling.

Strange, how Dettelbach can't seem to answer a simple, straight question. When asked how many they lost in the affair, his reply centers on "I don't see the context" and "we didn't lose them / some non-ATF person stole them." Evasion, pure and simple. The question was asking how many fewer items existed post-theft, and he wouldn't answer. Only one reason for that: a desire to keep the people's reps hopping from one foot to the other. IOW, a hack like others have pointed out, out for his own self-aggrandizing power mongering. He's surely not in it for the betterment of the rule of law, not behaving like that.
 
He is not dumb , he is refusing to tell the senators what they are trying to do cause if he comes right out and says it honestly and truthfully they will not allow it to be come law. He is like a 3 year old trying to get his way when he knows if the truth comes out he will not in fact get his way. This is a lie by omission just as sure as I am a Tennessee Hill Billy. New agencies do this all the time and lie to the public, if proven they should be barred from broadcasting by the FCC, or should give a disclaimer that they are, an opinion show not based on the truth.
 
Why is he allowed to continually refuse to answer the question? If asked the question in a court he would be in contempt, and most likely be behind bars. The ATF has done so many things that should have been the end of their existence, I just don't see how they are still considered law enforcement, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Fast and Furious, and the OV10 Bronco thing should have ended their days long ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Classified Ads

Forum statistics

Threads
165,781
Messages
2,203,291
Members
79,110
Latest member
miles813

Share This Page

Back
Top