By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT — I have no delusions about the 2016 presidential election.  We, as a nation, are in serious, serious trouble.  This trouble is the result of myriad reasons however complicit in this downward spiral we now find ourselves in is without a doubt the mainstream, legacy media.

That, and the uniformed voter.

Consider the review in the New York Times of Hillary Clinton’s book, Hard Choices.

I’m not the least bit interested in reading this book, however the review sucked me in with the comment that the book “provides a portrait of the former secretary of state and former first lady as a heavy-duty policy wonk.”

What, what?!

“A heavy-duty policy wonk”?

That never crossed my mind.  Ever.

The review goes on to laud Mrs. Clinton and to praise the book as a “statesmanlike document intended to attest Mrs. Clinton’s wide-ranging experience on national security and foreign policy.”

Oh, please.  It’s too much.

Can we talk about Benghazi?

Can we talk about Fast and Furious?

Statesmanlike?

I don’t think so.  Not one bit.

Okay, so the review goes on in this vein and you can read it yourself if you must, but trust me, it’s all the same whitewash driveling sap that we got about Obama.  And we all know that the legacy media is going to continue to prop up these incompetent fools while our country spins around the bowl, but surely, surely people are smarter than that now, right?  Haven’t we learned something over the past tenure of Obama?

I am reassured to see that most of the comments attached to this article question Mrs. Clinton’s ability to lead the country and question her leadership on issues like Benghazi and Fast and Furious.

There are, of course, a few Hillary supporters who commented:

One woman says she will certainly vote for Clinton because “we are contemporaries (I am exactly the same age as Clinton)…”.  Well, that’s a good reason to vote for a president, eh?  To be fair, this woman goes on to say that she admires Mrs. Clinton’s “tenacity and ability to accept challenges”  which is a good quality however I don’t think that it actually applies to Mrs. Clinton.  How did she accept the challenge of Benghazi, again?

Have we caught those who murdered Chris Stevens yet?

What about Fast and Furious?  How did she accept that challenge?

Let’s just hit the reset button on all that, shall we?  No.  She must answer for all of that.

Clearly there will be those voters who will just vote for Hillary because she’s a woman, because she’s a contemporary, or for whatever nonsense, but by the tone of the comments maybe, just maybe, people are not going to be snowed by The New York Times this time.  Maybe people are ready for a true leader who will put the country back on the track to prosperity.

One can dream.

Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport.

Chip Jones has asked the $64,000 question concerning Benghazi:

Therefore, the question that is simply asked and objectively answered, without placing any of the SF or CIA operatives at mortal risk is a simple one. You see, the Kalashnikov rifle chambers a 7.62 mm round. The US M-4 rifle chambers a 5.56 mm round. What is widely reported and accepted is that at least two of the TDY Green Berets who were assigned by the CIA as ARSO’s (assistant regional safety officers) were badly wounded and were treated for multiple gunshot wounds after they rescued over 20 civilian CIA workers from the compound.

The single question that needs to be asked is: “Were the rounds taken out of the wounded ARSO’s 7.62 mm or 5.56 mm?” And when the answer comes back “5.56 mm”, it opens the door to the proof that the cover up was meant to hide the fact that the Obama administration had been caught once again arming offshore groups that did not have the interests of our country at heart. It would open the door to proof that Benghazi was “Fast and Furious on Steroids.”

Rest assured if it turns out that Benghazi was “fast and furious on steroids” we can be sure that the MSM be all over it sometime around the end of the 2nd Biden Term.

Saturday we have a pair of gets dealing with two big issues

In the first hour our guest is Rosa Korie who will talk about UN Agenda 21

In the Second hour Barbara Espinosa joins us and talks Fast and Furious and a little Arizona inside baseball

You can join us live on WCRN AM 830 at 10 AM EST, you can listen live to the show at wcrnradio.com or via TuneIn

You can tweet us with the hastag #wcrn

And you can call and comment at 508-438-0965 or 888-9-FEDORA.

Or just hit this button during the show

enter your phone number and your phone will ring and if there is an open line you will be connected.

See you Saturday

Throw out that last, take this. This is the most titanic battle of modern times. A David without even a slingshot rises to do battle against the mighty Goliath, the Taylor machine, allegedly crooked inside and out.

Thomas Mitchell Mr. Smith goes to Washington 1939

Yesterday at the daily press briefing White House spokesman Jay Carney forgot the name of Border Agent Brian Terry who was slain in the process of the fast and furious scandal.

I’d like to think that this was a slip of the lip, I really would, just like I’d like to pretend that the Media ignoring the story for a year was just an oversight but it’s reaching the point where that just isn’t possible.

Last night on Twitter Dana Loesch brought up fast and Furious she received the following reply

 

Nobody cares about? Let’s remind everyone not only was the whistle-blower at the ATF that exposed this scandal fired, not only Brian Terry slain:

But for the family of Brian Terry, it’s the story of their son — murdered with guns given to killers by his own government. Yet many mainstream news consumers never heard of it until this week. According to Media Research Center, the first time NBC mentioned the story was last week.

But the same media that insists this is all about politics, those same caring people of the left forget that hundreds of Mexican citizens were also killed.

Now if you subscribe to the media template that the left is the crew that cares about the average person, (particularly people of color) this might come as quite a shock. You might ask How can this be that the caring left isn’t concerned about hundreds of Mexicans slain by an US program?

If you, however, have been paying attention, if you are involved in the daily tug of war in this country I’m afraid that like me you will rapidly reach the conclusion that the professional left, the left that makes it case on our airwaves, on the net is desperately trying to retain power in Washington doesn’t actually care about the basic fundamental right of Americans but is just another political machine, and like the fictional Taylor Machine, allegedly crooked inside and out…

Update: Fox reports Nancy Pelsoi says fast and furious is all about voter suppression and big money. Brian Terry remains unavailable for comment.

Back in April at Blogcon I filmed this interview with Kaite Pavlich author of Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and the Shameless Cover-Up

Katie had been writing about this for a while.

Obama took credit for confiscating 64 percent more weapons than ever before. Well, that’s what happens when the federal government sends thousands of guns into Mexico in the first place through Operation Fast and Furious under the Obama Justice Department and ATF, of course it becomes easier to confiscate more guns when you put more into an area to begin with.

that entry was from May 11th 2011.

Meanwhile today the viewers of Morning Joe found themselves learning about the president’s use of Executive privilege to shield Eric Holder which necessitated talking about Fast and Furious.

This entire conversation and the death of an ATF agent must have come as a shock to their viewers who were wondering why the administration is invoking executive privilege.

Ironically, like MSNBC I was late to this story as well, my first post on it was June 28th of 2011 in a post titled “Is it Watergate yet? which starts with the line:

I’m likely the only blogger on the right who hasn’t written on project gunrunner…

The post linked to a story at Fox News (you know that company the media urges all right thinking people to ignore)

‘Project Gunrunner’ Whistleblower Says ATF Sent Him Termination Notice

By Maxim Lott

Published June 27, 2011

Here is the video I didn’t embed at the time.

 

That weekend I had Barbara Espinosa on my WCRN’s DaTechGuy on DaRAdio to talk about this issue. (BTW she will be on my show this week in the 2nd hour WCRN during my 11 AM hour listen live at wcrnradio.com).

A little over a month later the ATF chief resigned My post on the subject was titled:

ATF chief resigns and nobody knows why

…at least nobody who follows the MSM

If you search for the words “fast and furious” on my blog you will only find 14 posts after this one and remember I was not only late to this, but I didn’t give this story much attention.

If however you do a search for “fast and furious” or “ATF GUNRUNNING SCANDAL” at Instapundit ( a former MSNBC contributor no less) you will find dozens of entries dating back to Feb 13th 2011: NRA weighs in on ATF gunrunning scandal.

Over and over I’ve seen the Morning Joe crowd scoff at “just bloggers” and tweeters who comment, yet even a “blogger and tweeter” like myself who has given this story short shift has been on this story for a year while the Morning Joe viewers are only now getting anything resembling coverage of this story and they dare to paint it as an “election year stunt”.

They could have covered this story, with their vast resources they could have done the work that a 23-year-old blogger Katie Pavlich did, or they could have interviewed her and talked about her book. They deliberately choose not to do so.

After today I don’t want to hear a single person on MSNBC or anywhere else talk about “bloggers in their pajamas” vs “real reporters”, because speaking as a blogger typing cross-legged in his bed, I find the comparison insulting to me.

Exit question: I’m listening right to my show from a year ago as I type this and one section is jumping out at me:

DaTechGuy “…This is serious stuff because Watergate nobody ever, For all that Nixon did with Watergate no one died from Watergate and we already have, we have two deaths directly connected with this…”

Barbara Espinosa: “…but you don’t just have two deaths”

DaTechGuy: “…and that’s not counting the deaths in Mexico.”

Barbara Espinosa: “Well there’s been hundreds of Mexican citizens who have been killed with these guns…”

When I reflect on how the MSM has covered for this administration for a full year I challenge my readers to consider this question:

Are we seeing today, what Watergate would have been if the president had been a Democrat beloved by the MSM?

I say yes!

Update: Let the record show that Barbara Espinosa has been writing about this forever and has written about this today as well

Update 2: Powerline talks to a Justice Department vet who says:

Even with his fawning press, [Presdient Obama] will pay a price for this one. He knows this, meaning that the documents now to be withheld must be dynamite. They have to show either that Holder knew what was going on with Fast and Furious and approved it, or that he directly committed perjury in his Congressional testimony, or both. I just can’t see any other explanation for such a risky move.

Wasn’t the Washington Post just covering big time the 40th anniversary of Watergate? I wonder how much coverage this one will get.

Like I said, we are seeing what Watergate would look like if the MSM were all behind Nixon

Update 3: Missed a link, fixed.

Cross-posted at Haemet.

10 AM EDT: deadline set by the Congress for production of Fast and Furious documents from Eric Holder.  Failure to produce said documents could result in Holder being cited for contempt.

10:15 AM EDT: Barack Obama exerted “executive privilege” over those documents.

Okay, Constitutional Law Professor, let’s get down and do some real constitutional law.  The separation of powers does enable a President to exert executive privilege over documents when they are going to a branch of government that has no use for them.  (As but one example, George Washington invoked executive privilege over documents relating to a treaty, when subpoenaed by the House, because the Senate, not the House, is the sole legislative body responsible for the ratification of treaties.)

Nevertheless, “I’m the President so what I say, goes” is not a permissible means to block Congressional investigation.  In U.S. v. Nixon, the Supreme Court denied then-President Nixon’s invocation of executive privilege.  It held that absent particularised circumstances (involving national security, military, or diplomatic secrets), executive privilege does not bar the production of documents at a criminal trial.   While such material may not be made public (and should be subject to in camera inspections, where possible), a President cannot simply refuse to hand it over, citing generalised concerns.

So Obama, please let us know exactly how Fast and Furious will implicate national security (except to cause violence at the border).  Please.  Because it seems as if it’s not a diplomatic issue with another nation, not a military issue, and not tending to harm national security in a particularised manner.