Eric Holder
Didn't know?
Hat tip to Pajams Media
It appears most mainstream news media outlets are not giving much attention to the ATF scandal (Fast and Furious). At least Fox News and Pajamas Media are doing their job. In the below article, Bob Owens in Pajamas Media discloses that high-level heads of several federal law enforcement agencies participated in a meeting over the operation.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/email-confirms-gunwalker-known-throughout-justice-department/
Let me say this as a retired DEA agent. If you have the heads of several federal law enforcement agencies meeting to plan, discuss, and organize an inter-agency enforcement operation and a high-level DOJ official was present, I think it's pretty fair to assume that the Attorney General was fully aware of the operation.
Yet, Holder has denied authorizing it as well as even knowing about it.
http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-atlanta/attorney-general-holder-denies-knoweldge-of-fast-and-furious-operation-3
"Holder claims he did not authorize the operation and never knew about "Fast and Furious"."
If that is so, then Eric Holder should be fired for gross negligence and incompetence or he is lying.
Not only that, but Obama claims ignorance as well as Janet Napolitano (who we all know is ignorant.) Keep in mind this operation was based in Phoenix, Arizona, where she was governor.
And what was the purpose of this operation? Obviously to gather intelligence for the sake of intelligence. Intelligence as to what? As to how many US guns were crossing into Mexico to be used by Mexican cartels and to support the administration's highly questionable claim that 80% of the guns used in Mexico's murders originated in the US. And to what purpose would that lead?
To set the table for a crackdown on gun ownership in general in the US? Could be.
So what we have is a wacko operation that no street agent would ever undertake on his/her own initiative, and nobody in power knew anything about it. It is time for Congress to take the reins of this investigation rather than let the politically-charged DOJ investigate itself. All the heads of the concerned agencies including those that attended the meeting in question must be put under oath and asked to testify.
Also from Pajamas Media is this report by Hans von Spakovsky dated July 6, which has a copy of a letter dated July 5 from Congressman Darrell Issa and Senator Charles Grassley to Eric Holder regarding acting-ATF director Ken Melson and what he told congressional investigators. It alleges that DOJ is stonewalling in this matter.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/gunwalker-the-atf%e2%80%99s-kenneth-melson-blows-the-whistle-on-the-justice-department/
This is turning into a massive scandal that may tar all of federal law enforcement and the Justice Department. It is also time for the Democrats in Congress and the media to get involved. This is a serious issue and should not be decided by partisanship. It affects all of us.
7 comments:
Gary, I recall during a period in the Bush administration, when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, a team of pundits was sitting on TV collecting fabulous sums for spouting their opinion, and one remarked that "the left" was out of power in every branch of government. Another, of similar sympathies, objected "The left is not out of power, they are in power in the great bureaucracies."
Whether you sympathize with "the left" or "the right" or simply join me in a contemptuous "a pox on both your houses," it is a valid point that government bureaucracies, by and large, do what they do, making all kinds of policy-laden decisions, because someone thought they were supposed to, or thought it was a good idea, or whatever. Likewise, every bureaucrat a citizen has to deal with will make up on the spot their personal notion of what the law is, or of what is allowed or not allowed, all of which may be total hogwash, in all kinds of matters, great and small.
Anyway, the main differences between this operation and all kinds of operations you have, accurately, described the DEA engaging in are:
1) This one involved guns, rather than drugs,
2) The guns were actually used to kill someone, rather than merely to blow their mind and rob their children, (as if the same murder couldn't have been committed with other guns not under immediate surveillance,
3) If there is a scandal here, it lands on the desk of people you don't like, never did, and would love to see embarrassed.
It all sounds like a tempest in a tea pot to me.
If an atom bomb landed on New York City, you would call it a tempest in a teapot.
It an atom bomb landed in Compton, YOU would call it good riddance.
No, I wouldn't call dropping an atom bomb on New York a tempest in a teapot. Given that atom bombs are not routinely smuggled across national borders every day, if ONE was in play, I would expect the team tracking it to never take their eyes off it, and make sure to retrieve it BEFORE it could be imploded.
But given that gun dealers in the USA, under the protection of the National Rifle Association, are supplying every gang in Mexico with a good part of their arsenal, I could understand that people charged with intervening might want to see how things flow before evaluating where and how to intervene.
One atom bomb in NY would be a marked change in the status quo. A few more guns smuggled into Mexico is a drop in a vast ocean.
Funny how you try to dodge a mountain of factual observations with a crude one-liner. Are you a little worried in the back of your mind that you might be wrong about something you dearly wish to be right about? Maybe your prejudices are getting the better of your judgement?
"It an atom bomb landed in Compton, YOU would call it good riddance."
What a statement.
BTW-One of those few guns killed a border patrol agent.
"BTW-One of those few guns killed a border patrol agent."
Wait, I thought guns don't kill people???
Anonymous,
To whom are you directing that statement to? I never use that phrase as an argument. Of course guns kill people when people pull the trigger.
So what is your point? It is clear that I think ATF screwed up by conducting this operation. That doesn't mean I am against gun owenership by folks who want to protect themselves, their homes and their families from times when people like the Manson family invote themselves in.
Gary, I'm sure you know perfectly well that Anonymous is putting together some of Miggie's observations with some of yours, and finding a disconnect. You and Miggie can't be assumed to think alike on everything, but since he's part of your fan club, its a reasonable set of observations to put together.
I've reminded you three or four times that if that particular gun wasn't there, some other gun would have been handy to kill that border patrol agent. We are talking about a massive flow of guns, not THE ONE OR TWO GUNS that, if intercepted, would have left the Mexican drug gangs disarmed.
Post a Comment