The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

VIDEO: Rep. Allen West Serves Up The Red Meat Clip Of The Year

Posted on | November 16, 2011 | 29 Comments

by Smitty

Rep. Allen West summarizes “Bag” Holder’s ignoble career, and politely suggests that even #OccupyResoluteDesk may be complicit in Fast & Furious.

Wow. To be a fly on the wall when Barack saw that one. . .

via Nice Deb, who has a whole lot more.

Update: Daily Pundit is less impressed. In response to Quick’s objections, my gut is to trust West. The details of the maneuvers may not all be public, not that I have any insight into GOP strategy, if any exists.


29 Responses to “VIDEO: Rep. Allen West Serves Up The Red Meat Clip Of The Year”

  1. Joe
    November 16th, 2011 @ 10:33 am

    Allen West is a great leader.   He summed it up well. 

  2. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 10:46 am

    Well, I guess I’m going to have to go out today to get a new irony meter.

  3. GOP Press Conference: Rep. West Calls On Holder To Resign – Hints Obama May Be Complicit (Video) + The Latest Fast and Furious News « Nice Deb
    November 16th, 2011 @ 10:46 am

    […] Sipsey Street Irregulars: McCain finally finds something useful to do in the Gunwalker Scandal.  Former Holder Chief of Staff Nomination to Court Imperiled Over ‘Fast and Furious’. The confirmation of a former aide to Attorney General Eric Holder to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces may be in peril over his response to questions posed by Arizona Sen. John McCain about his knowledge of Operation Fast and Furious. Kevin Ohlson, who worked as Holder’s chief of staff from January 2009 to January 2011, faces a confirmation hearing on Thursday for the post. If Holder’s still the Atty General after Christmas, I’d be surprised. Linked by The Other McCain, thanks! […]

  4. smitty
    November 16th, 2011 @ 10:48 am

    The Irony Law is brutal and unforgiving.

  5. Joe
    November 16th, 2011 @ 11:19 am

    Where is the irony here? 

  6. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 11:24 am

    Obviously, Rep. West is a racist.


  7. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 11:27 am

    The irony lies in a convicted war criminal who sleazed his way to full retirement by copping an Article 15 instead of insisting on a court martial, then sought promotion to the US House of Representatives instead of fading away into well-deserved obscurity, having the goddamn gall and temerity to lecture anyone on integrity, responsibility or accountability.

  8. Bob
    November 16th, 2011 @ 11:59 am

    In my opinion, knowing full well what he did in Iraq, he’s a war hero, not a criminal. He’s only a criminal to you because you disagree with his politics. I can tell you this: Absolutely no one in the Army, conservative or liberal, disagrees with what West did. 

  9. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 12:07 pm

    Took me a minute.

  10. Joe
    November 16th, 2011 @ 12:08 pm

    He is not a “convicted war criminal.”  What is criminal is making a field commander stand for a court martial on those sort of charges.  Threatening a insurgent on the battlefield, in order to protect the lives of his troops, should not be a crime.  This was not some interrogation off the battlefield with a mock execution being staged, it was in the heat of battle. 

    He could have done a full courtmartial.  Instead his lawyers negotiated a deal with administrative admission that the rules were broken and he retired honorably.  But that does not make him a convicted war criminal.  Even Andrew Sullivan acknowledged that what West did was not a war crime. 

  11. Joe
    November 16th, 2011 @ 12:10 pm  Jeff Goldstein thinks Allen West is giving the press too much credit and should be calling out their bias.  He has a point.  I am not sure West does not recognize that.  But I still think this is a good start. 

  12. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 12:12 pm


    There are two ways to appraise whether or not someone is a “criminal.”

    In an objective, factual sense, West most certainly is a criminal. He was accused of something that is illegal per the Uniform Code of Military Justice; he admitted to having committed that action; he was found guilty of committing that action in a formal military proceeding.

    Yes, there is a higher sense in which one might argue that his actions were moral, that he is therefore not a criminal, and that the law, in this case, is an ass.

    As far as “absolutely no one in the army … disagrees with what West did,” you’re completely wrong on that. He was accused of it by someone in the army, he was tried for it by someone in the army, he was convicted of it and fined for it by someone in the army, and I have personally talked with soldiers on active duty who thought he should have had the book thrown at him.

  13. Ccoffer
    November 16th, 2011 @ 12:14 pm

    Yeah. West shot a gun…in a war…near a terrorist. He’s a bad guy. Holder must therefore be a good guy. Or something.

  14. Joe
    November 16th, 2011 @ 12:17 pm

    Actually you are objectively wrong.  West’s case was changed an Article 15 proceeding.  Criminal charges were dismissed.  So West is absolutely not a “convicted war criminal.” 

  15. Not Fear: Love | Daily Pundit
    November 16th, 2011 @ 12:31 pm

    […] Some folks are experiencing thigh-tingles over West’s recent assault on Obama, but I’m not. It’s one thing to cheer the […]

  16. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 12:42 pm


    I guess you’re correct that he’s not a convicted war criminal, since Congress never bothered to declare war on Iraq. That makes him just a garden variety kidnapper, extortionist and assailant. There, do you feel better now?

    If, on the other hand, you believe that the US was at war in Iraq and that West was a member of the US armed forces, then he was subject to the third Geneva Convention, which is quite clear:

    No physical or mental torture, nor any other  form of coercion, may be inflicted on  prisoners of war to secure from them 
    information of any kind whatever. Prisoners  of war who refuse to answer may not be  threatened, insulted, or exposed to  unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of  any kind.

    Or perhaps you think that the prisoner was an “unlawful combatant?” Since the prisoner had not yet been brought before a “competent tribunal” to be designated as such, the convention is clear that he was entitled to the protections accorded POWs at the time of the incident.

  17. Joe
    November 16th, 2011 @ 1:02 pm

    Keep arguing that knappster.  Why not just admit you were wrong about saying West was a convicted war criminal.  He wasn’t.  And I think you know that.  And he was not a convicted kidnapper, extortionist, or assailant either (garden variety or any other variety). 

    I think waterboarding is torture and should be prohibited.  I am against violating the Geneva conventions in regards to detainee prisoners.  But I am not going to second guess men in the field (on the battlefield) over what happened in this case.  This was not a war crime and never should have been prosecuted.  And in fact, it was down graded to an Article 15 proceeding. 

  18. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 1:11 pm

    You know, Joe, you are right. “Convicted” war criminal is incorrect, insofar as an Article 15 proceeding does not map to the civilian world as a criminal conviction (a court martial does).

    I apologize. I should have said “admitted” war criminal.

    I’m one of those myself, btw.

  19. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 1:12 pm

    Joe, don’t confuse nappy with facts.

    Besides, I thought committing crimes in support of a nobler cause (like keeping the troops entrusted to your command alive) was justification for anything. Oh, right, West isn’t a Copperhead.

  20. ThePaganTemple
    November 16th, 2011 @ 1:21 pm

    I wouldn’t be too sure about the “liberals” not disagreeing with him if I were you. Any more, make no damn mistake about it, the military is becoming infested with leftist vermin just like every other branch of government. No, they’re not as bad as State, or Justice, yet, but there’s more than enough leftists in the civilian branch of the military known as the Defense Department to make sure all good soldiers are properly indoctrinated over time.

  21. ThePaganTemple
    November 16th, 2011 @ 1:27 pm

    West has his faults. Well, he has one that I know of. He voted for the shameful Pigford settlement, along with the half-assed Darryl Issa. But threatening the life of a combatant, illegal or otherwise, in order to save the lives of the men under his command, while I don’t say I would award him the Bronze Star, certainly doesn’t merit the type of denouncement Napster just dished out. The entire Geneva Conventions should be thrown out, by the way. They are nothing more than a European artifice meant to save the lives of spies and prevent them from being forced to reveal what they know. Almost nobody goes by them, and whether we go by them or not has no bearing whatsoever on whether anybody else will or will not.

  22. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 2:26 pm

    Joe is correct in that if there is no conviction one is not a criminal in the legal sense of that term. I’m gonna go with the law being an ass on this one.

  23. Joe
    November 16th, 2011 @ 2:31 pm

    Knappster, I genuinely like you, so stop digging! 

  24. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 2:37 pm

    I really like West’s can do attitude.

  25. CalMark
    November 16th, 2011 @ 4:14 pm

    Words fail me.  Your pompous, self-righteous arrogance is contemptible.

    How dare you.  West is not my favorite politician.  But what he did in Iraq took guts and creativity.

    He saved American lives in a fight with people who acknowledge no laws, no rules, no standards of decency.  And he did it without even hurting anyone.

    You’re not good enough to untie the laces on Allen West’s boots after an all-day desert patrol.

  26. CalMark
    November 16th, 2011 @ 4:16 pm

    Actually, a whole lot of Active Duty officers are becoming increasingly “left.”

    Conservatives somehow don’t get promotions.  Probably because they’re effective and only give lip service to the leftist political brainwashing the various Zampolit entities mandate.

  27. CalMark
    November 16th, 2011 @ 4:17 pm

    You are a scumbag.


  28. Anonymous
    November 16th, 2011 @ 5:51 pm

    Why would I want to untie West’s bootlaces after an all-day desert patrol? I’ve slept with my own boots on after all-day desert patrols, while on night desert ambushes, asshat.

  29. DaveO
    November 16th, 2011 @ 7:44 pm

    He paid $5000 for an NJP Article 15. Big f*cking deal.

    The main point in West’s favour, that is usually forgotten:

    The man he scared into answering did give away a true plot to kill West’s men. As a direct result, zero US soldiers died under West’s command. For using a non-deadly but totally mind-f*cking questioning (firing a pistol into a barrel) West was relieved, crucified, and then… not much of anything.

    Shortly thereafter, the US began accumulating over 2,000 casualties due to IED. Odierno had to do what he had to do, and regretted every US citizen slaughtered because of pansy interrogation techniques insisted upon by Progressives. I don’t blame Ray Odierno.

    Bravo to West for saving his men while fulfilling his mission. And bravo for not weaseling out of the punishment.

    A bullet in a barrel is cheap compared to boys in body bags.